I have never posted here under any other username, and although I was no part of this forum in its early years, much time has since passed and so I have still ended up being an active poster here for a very long time.
What I've been saying on this subject was just based on what everyone else was saying and linking to when this subject was first discussed, and I made that clear. Some of which you didnt see when it was first mentioned, causing some initial confusion between us. I assumed that the supplying of military equipment did not cross a classic MAD red line in the way a no-fly zone would, because it has not in the past in various other conflicts, and because of the number of countries that openly stated their intention to supply things to Ukraine that will very much be used to fight Russia this time around. This included the initial EU statement about the supply of planes. However I had until minutes ago missed the more recent article which makes clear that Russia has since let everyone know what stance it is going to take in regards that stuff, that they have indicated a new red line on this. And it seems the EU and individual countries have now back-peddled to various extents in response. It is currently unclear to me how far that back-peddling will go, and where exactly all the red lines will settle in practice in this conflict. I've got a pretty clear sense about the classic red lines, and thus some of the support that Ukraine was never going to get from the west. But it appears I made too many assumptions about other ones that are not so clear and rigid and well-defined, and it appears that EU etc rhetoric has blundered in some of these areas already. I suppose I should have known better because this sort of situation often involves countries testing their luck and seeing how far they can push things before they face a response that leaves them in little doubt that they need to back off.