My great uncle served in World War II aboard a Navy ship. I forget which kind. The ship he was on came under attack and there were a lot of people killed and horribly injured. My uncle survived and returned home. You would expect that for a person who had endured such horror and terror as being on a ship under attack at sea, little in mundane life would be of much consequence. One would think the ordinary problems of daily life would pale in comparison to what he had seen and experienced. This was, however not the case. My great uncle complained and had his irritations as much as anyone else, and about the same sorts of day-to-day challenges and struggles everyone faced.
While I am sickened by a great deal that is going on with this war, not only including some of the terrible things Russian soldiers are doing, but also by the fact young Russian men were sent into a war under trained, under equipped, and totally unprepared for what they were about to experience.
At the same time, I have to keep in mind that suffering is subjective. This is not to diminish in anyway the tragedy of this war. Suffering is subjective to both the sufferer and the observer.
Take for instance a sheltered and spoiled rich child. The child's problems are not like the rest of the worlds. His worst and most traumatic experience may stem from the fact he likes a certain type of candy, and in particular the banana flavored pieces of candy. At the same time, he likes the lime flavored candy the least, and often opts not to eat those. One day the child finds himself on a fight to some exotic destination, and finds there are only the lime flavored candies on board the plane. To this child this is a tragedy of epic proportions, and his suffering is no less real to him, than someone who loses a limb on a battlefield.
Again, I don't want to trivialize what is happening in Ukraine, nor do I want to diminish the degree to which people are suffering. I have a point to make, and I think an important one.
There are only two possibilities which are objective in regards to deciding how much suffering should be allowed. The first is that no suffering at all be allowed. The second is that all suffering be allowed. Who are we to say that the suffering of a girl raped by a soldier is any more or less important than the suffering of the boy with his lime candy? It isn't that we can't see the impact of one's suffering is much greater than the other, it is that any line we draw short of absolutely no suffering should be allowed is simply arbitrary, and quite individual. To the child deprived of his favorite banana candy, he might declare that God is unfair and that no child should be deprived of their favorite candy or forced to eat only their least favorite candy if they are to eat any candy at all. The child would be equally well within his rights to make that statement if we are allowed to say, X amount of suffering is permissible, but not Y amount. It does not matter how we measure either, whether we speak in terms of qualitative suffering or quantitative suffering. We have to go all or nothing.
If God were to omit all suffering there are a few problems with that. There could be no death, because that corruption which came to be in our biology with the introduction of sin in this world would have to be eliminated. There could be no cancer; not even to end Putin's miserable life. There could be no disease. There could be no death for people to dread. There could be no need, no hunger, no thirst, no hot or cold, but only perfect conditions, and with that we might start to think we were gods. This is exactly what God prevented when He told Adam "cursed is the ground because of you." Most importantly there could be no love. You see, love depends on us being able to make our own choices as we see fit. Love is not something which can be engineered, manipulated, contrived, or programmed. Love must come from someone because they want to love of their own will, for it to be real love. Anything else is artificial and a mockery of love.
God, in order to allow for love endures all suffering. Being all knowing and present everywhere he knows exactly what that civilian man shot in the street and left to die goes through. He feels it just as they do. He is there with the child being raped by that Russian soldier, and he endures it with her, that love might come into its full potential.
But what of the Bible, where God intervened? When Senecherib came and surrounded Jerusalem, he sent a letter in to King Hezekiah, saying "Your God cannot save you." Hezekiah then took the letter and spread it out in the temple before the Lord and said, "Lord, look what it is they are saying about you." The next morning all of Senecherib's army was blind, and the people Israel lead the soldiers out of their land before their eyesight returned. Was God preventing or diminishing suffering by stopping Senecherib's siege of Jerusalem? There were certainly people who suffered that day in the city, but they did not suffer at the hand of Senecherib nor his army. God did intervene in the Bible, but not to specifically diminish or alleviate suffering, but to accomplish one or more goals. God acted to demonstrate His power to those arrogant enough to try to take Him on. He demonstrated his power to encourage his people, and to deliver them from oppressive evil. God never arbitrarily drew a boundary around suffering saying this is enough suffering, and this is where it stops.
The reality of this situation is this war is a terrible thing. It is terrible what Russian soldiers are doing to civilians. It is also a terrible thing that Russian boys were sent into the Red Forest around Chernobyl to dig trenches without equipment to protect them from radiation. These boys will die young of radiation poisoning for obeying the orders given them and their lives will be wasted. It is tragic that Russian boys were sent in ill-prepared for a way; under equipped and under trained for what awaited them. It is terrible that the Ukrainians have found Russian boys who froze to death in the cold because they were left to die. It is horrific that so many people on both sides will be killed or permanently maimed, and their families will suffer with them.
The problem with attempting to judge how much suffering should be allowed is we aren't qualified to judge. We are in no position to tell God when He should put an end to the suffering. I appreciate that you, like me, are upset and horrified by this war, but we don't get to say when enough is enough.