Rereading my post I guess it was unnecessarily cryptic.
What I meant to suggest is that none of this makes any sense. The “conflict” doesn’t make any sense at all. I have no position on this “conflict” one way or the other.
Yet Sean Penn, a raging liberal and peace and harmony loving man feels so strongly about it that he wants to put his little liberal hands on a battle rifle and kill as many other people as he possibly can.
This makes no sense. He should want to be on a plane dropping rose petals on Ukraine.
And then I notice that insane amounts of arms are moving from all over the world into this region. And nobody finds this suspicious at all. It appears to be the HQ of the globalists. If there was no “conflict” the nations of the world could never send this quantity of arms over there. It would immediately be viewed with extreme skepticism.
Yet here we are.
You are very on and this is where the danger of extreme escalation occurs. I don’t take any of this Daily Mail too seriously. From work we see something different and are very concerned.
Compared to similar sized wars since 1945 the aid getting to Ukraine is rather small. Compare to, for instance, what the US sent to Israel in 1973. A few thousand ATGM amd Manpads, and 10,000-odd antitank rocket launchers, plus apparently a few thousand small arms.
Only just now are heavy weapons showing up - 200 Polish tanks, 50 German flakpanzers and @100 US/Canadian howitzers. Given what the Ukrainians already had thats nice but fairly minor, as the Ukes already had 1000+ tanks (active and reserve) etc, etc.
Its probable that the most important assistance anyone has yet provided the Ukes is information.
You need more historical depth in order to judge these things.