Sending aid to Ukraine isn't just a thing we do for fun. It's the tradeoff for them giving up their nuclear arsenal. We said we'd have their backs. Money is probably better than sending people's kids.

Perhaps. I'm just curious about the casualty projections. Casualties with weapons, and casualties without.

If sending more weapons results in lives saved, then this would be an excellent argument for arming Gaza with modern weapons. In terms of children saved the effect could be sizeable.

I don’t know how much this is bias on my part, but sending weapons to Gaza feels more equivalent to arming anti-russian partisans in the alternate reality where the march on Kyiv wasn’t a failure and the Ukrainian government collapsed.

It depends on do you want to send weapons to terrorists or not.

Sending long range weapons together with F-16 can help to destroy missiles and other long range weapons Russian terrorists use daily on Ukrainian cities.

By sending enough 155cm shells Russian advance could be stopped, which mean less cities will be grounded. Because that is the only way Russian occupational army could advance: by total destruction of everything.

This scenario seems similar to the Gaza situation. Perhaps if the Gazans had patriots lives could be saved.