You bring up a good example of why the situation is so complex/fraught/hard to untangle. To answer your question honestly, it would entirely depend on who launders it.

Of course, if the leader of a country in crisis is stealing foreign aid for themselves (see numerous examples referenced in nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu's Hidden Repression), I would have a lot less sympathy for that leader (but no less for the country’s citizens).

I haven’t seen anything that’s convinced me this is what’s happening here; doesn’t mean it’s not, but it doesn’t seem that way. Money going missing can disappear at any number of steps along the way, and when full-scale military operations are involved, it’s much more likely that the pockets being lines belong to those close to the bullet printer. Maybe that’s the US/international military industrial complex. Maybe it’s corrupt American politicians with corrupt Ukrainian counterparts.

If there is some good investigative journalism that has followed those missing funds, I’m always willing to be wrong. (Note I only said “I haven’t seen”). But in absence of that, listening to the little inner voice that feels what’s right (with pretty good accuracy if my mind can become quiet enough), it doesn’t feel like a black and white “war for the sake of money laundering” situation. Too many people are dying for that, and while you’re right that it’s a complex situation, it’s still a fact that one guy decided to blow up the other guy’s city. There has been conflict - territorial, cultural, etc. - for a long time, but Zelenskyy didn’t one day decide to send tanks and troops to kill a bunch of Russian civilians. On some level, when it comes to judging these kinds of things, it can sometimes help to limit contextual considerations (because it’s always used for propaganda on both sides) and just ask what happened.

Appreciate you asking harder questions 🫂