Very few problems in life only have 1 solution.

I mean...maybe? Some problems are very hard, and don't have only one solution - and massive complicated geopolitical conflicts tend to have fewer feasible solutions than, say, how do I fix that noise my car is making. Though even that last one sometimes also only has one solution.

I don't think you can confer motive from the fact that a bunch of amateur folks like ourselves don't have a ready suggestion for how to end Russia's invasion of their neighbor. I think we're all perfectly happy if you (or anyone else) have suggestions on how to inflict materially more pain on Russia. Like I said, I can't think of any that are likely to work: all of the obvious and more significant mechanisms have already been put in place (which is why Russia's finances are a shambles) or involve direct military action by NATO forces (which isn't really a feasible choice).

We'd all love to make sure that Russia continues to feel pain. It would be great if they could be made to feel more pain, but that's not really on offer. Which means that the next best thing is for them to continue to have their military pounded by Ukraine's military, which means keeping Ukraine well-supplied with weapons, munitions, and money. You've repeatedly expressed your pessimism about doing that, though - which seems to be the biggest source of disagreement between you and other posters. IMHO, I personally thought you were criticizing our supplying Ukraine because that perpetuated the war - I never really took your comments to suggest that you wanted the West to do more to support Ukraine so they could stay in the fight even stronger. But I might have been misreading your position.

If there isn't a way to increase the pain on Russia beyond what's currently being done, would you support continuing to do what's being done?