For the record: Ukraine has no defense agreement with any of these western nations that are currently supporting them, and there is 0 chance that - if roles were reversed and another European nation had been attacked - that they'd have supported this theoretical victim.
The way you're phrasing that is honestly outrageous.
The UK and US provided "security assurances" to Ukraine in return for it giving up its nukes.
Why do you feel this is relevant?
> (...) and there is 0 chance that - if roles were reversed and another European nation had been attacked - that they'd have supported this theoretical victim.
I'm also not sure what leads you to believe this is relevant at all.
Ukraine is surrounded by NATO members. If NATO is not enough to counter a threat, things would be far bleaker for Ukraine as well.
What point do you think you're making?
Neighboring is not surrounding.
There would've been countless ways to mitigate the risks of the invasion, they choose not to and now even badmouth the nations literally gifting them money.
This is at a level of homeowners not insuring their homes and then complain that the state took a while to rebuild their homes free of charge.