Whataboutism isn't a logical fallacy(and claiming it is was first used to defend British colonial violence) also if it was what I was doing wasn't whataboutism, it was questioning the motives of the person providing aid.

Your principle seems to be pointing fingers at the big boys while you let the small fries die in trenches, begging for help that will never come because “It’s just not right for the US to do things!”

Continuing the war so more people die isn't helping. War is a racket, it is always a racket.

Personally I don’t think there’s any case where we should be telling other peoples to just accept their annexation or colonization. I’d be interested to hear the argument otherwise.

Idk I'm pretty anti-nationalist. People's material conditions and also not being dead matter more than imaginary lines on a map.

Because it defends American hegemony and weakens an anti-American state. It’s not a hard question to answer. That doesn’t mean it’s not also the right thing to do regardless.

I mean that really should factor into it.

Unfortunately some seem to think the deaths of Ukrainians and pillaging of their land is a sacrifice worth making in order to geopolitically weaken America. I’m all for reducing America’s global power, but I’m not so cruel as to choose other people’s lives to trade for it against their will.

Fighting to the last Ukrainian kills more Ukrainians than allowing their government to sign a peace deal, or at least allowing their government to lose more quickly.

If Ukraine wants to defend itself, I think it’s a good thing to air them in that;

What do you mean by ukraine? Do you mean the government? The ukrainian population? Part of the ukrainian population?