It's complicated.

Do I see indefensible people fighting in the Ukrainian side? Yes.
Do I see that Zelensky, whether or not personally corrupt, depends on a corrupt domestic system? Yes.
Do I see that he failed to forecast Russia's ambitions and plan for them beforehand? Yes.
Do I see that common Ukrainians don't care about their own or Russian personal and material damages? Yes.

Do any of these factors mean that Ukrainian integrity is worth less? No. Though it is telling that the West (and the East too) value some integrities as more equal than others.
Do any of these factors mean that Ukraine must not join NATO? I again surmiss that NATO is obsolete and that after 1989 - 1992 became a tool for American meddling in countries it should never have meddled in, with open political support from others but negligible military support by any others but Turkey. But if Ukrainians want in, they should be allowed in. It is their decision. At most a joint decision between Kyiv and the existing members. Still not Moscow's decision.

On the other hand:

Do I see Putin as worryingly ambitious domestically and externally? Yes.
Do I see Putin as heavy handed in the pursuit of his goals, valid or not? Yes.
Do I see Putin as grossly miscalculating both Ukrainian willingness and capability to resist, and third party condemnations even if just in words with little biting backing? Yes.
Do I see that common Russians still want to obliterate the Ukraine and don't care about their own or Ukrainian personal and material damages? Yes.

Do any of these factors mean that the advocated bullet against Putin is a magic bullet to end this? Absolutely not. Whoever succeeds Putin will be more anti Western and anti Ukrainian than he is. The opposite goes for Zelensky: whoever succeeds him will be more anti Russian and pro NATO and EU.

And as for third parties:

I insist that Europe put itself in a weak position by depending on Russian gas, and that it was a conscious choice. Who isn't hooked on it is also interesting: France who buys fossils from Africa and is the most nuclearized country in Europe, and the UK and Norway which have their own fossils in the North Sea.
I insist that most sanctions are absurd or ineffective or both (banning Russian breeds from animal exhibitions, banning Russia from Eurovision, closing PornHub and Western social networks in Russia, closing McDonald's in Russia, banning Russia in sports both as national teams, local teams and as individuals, many of whom don't even live, train or compete in Russia, freezing sales of vodka brands with original Russian recipes but which are now manufactured elsewhere) and the few which are not are suspiciously selective (banning Russian banks from Swift -- oh but not Rosneft Bank, no no no).
I insist that words are empty. If the West means what it says, let it bite and not just bark.

Honestly at this point... I just facepalm. I see, not just here, no nuance. I see polarization. From here one or both sides will be very unhappy with the outcome; whatever the outcome.