I accept Putin is at fault. What I actually said was the EU must share some blame, due to lax borders and mass immigration policies (cf. Merkel's Germany).
1) The person who creates a problem is at fault, not the person who poorly mitigates the problem
2) Germany determines it's immigration policy. That's why it is "Germany's" immigration policy.
3) why the heck does every discussion about Putin converge to a discussion about Sweedish internal politics?!
The guy in the tent (EU) has opened the tent's door and invited Putin in - "piss where you like ..."
that makes no sense at all. EU did not create the refugee problem, EU (and in particular, the European countries who has a very, very high degree of autonomy in handling their immigration policy) tries to handle the stream of refugees created by the disaster in Syria, a disaster Putin is contributing to.
Once again let's return to your original statement: How do you propose, concretely, that the western world "works" with Putin in Syria?
I have seen this line pushed by pro-kremlin news outlets many times and it never comes with any real context. If you are not simply repeating the line I would like to know what that corporation should consist of? Russia, insofar as I can see, can easily continue to drop gravity-guided planes on Aleppos civilians without western help?
I just can't see this kind of faux tough talk and the policies that result from it dissuading Putin from his future plans.
Perhaps not, but many analysts who understand the situation better than either of us can. Russia has for the past 70 years been testing the west and always required pushback and clear limits; this is not my view but the view of American IC experts with experience with Russian diplomacy: "they push you until you push back".
This approach worked during the cold war when Russia was a military force to be reckoned with. Today Russian military is a strong regional force but it is a shadow of its former self, even Georgia wasn't a completely smooth ride.