You're personalizing and psychologizing a geopolitical question. Evidence-free diagnosis at a distance is therapeutic malpractice. But, don't worry. I won't sue you,

As a conversational level speaker of Russian married into a Russian-speaking family, it's absurd to think I want "revenge" against Russia. I get all the adrenaline I need from beachfront streetball and tennis in Porto until Latvia warms up next May.

The US and its allies can't decide a peace deal for Ukraine negotiating over its head, as Chamberlain did with the Czechoslovaks in 1938. I have no problem with negotiation between Ukraine and Russia if that's Ukraine's decision.

No Ukrainian government that gives away Crimea and the Donbass would last a week.

If Ukraine stops fighting it ceases to exist, the surrender outcome you've already deemed acceptable more than once in writing. If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. A ceasefire without Russian defeat and withdrawal merely creates a frozen conflict and gives Putin time to prepare the next round, as when the US and its allies passively accepted the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

You've also defined Ukraine "taking delivery of weapons"--elementary self-defense against a genocidal enemy--as "escalation". This is pure blame the victim for existing.

In the hierarchy of escalation, breaking the nuclear taboo is last, not first. First is attacking civilian infrastructure (already done), then chemical weapons, as in Syria. Russia hardly wants to irradiate land it claims to have annexed. There's no military purpose to using a low yield nuke on a 2000 km long front when Putin thinks he can stilll win by freezing Europe and dividing NATO. From the NYT:

"Is Russia trying to pressure Ukraine to negotiate?

It is incredibly unlikely that Russia would use a tactical nuclear weapon, said Frederick B. Hodges, a retired lieutenant general and former top U.S. Army commander in Europe. While the Soviet Red Army had war plans that involved using nuclear weapons on a battlefield and exploiting the results, Russia does not have trained troops who could take advantage of such a strike.

“Their nuclear weapons are most useful to them when they don’t use them,” General Hodges said. “There’s just no battlefield advantage at all to use any nuclear weapon.”

Instead, Russian leaders hope nuclear threats will be enough to force Ukraine into diplomatic talks and to make concessions that Russia has failed to win on the battlefield.

“They are trying to put pressure on Ukraine to negotiate and cave in to the Kremlin’s demands,” General Hodges said.

Russia wants Ukraine to concede large areas of the country that Mr. Putin illegally annexed after sham referendums this year and in 2014, when Russian forces moved into Crimea.

But General Hodges said Russia’s attempts to make Ukraine cede territory would fail. And Ukrainians, he added, simply do not believe Russia will use a nuclear weapon."