What if the only reason countries, like the U.S., agree to arm other countries when they are in conflict, is because international billionaires have placed bets on which country will win?
I mean, if the super wealthy are sitting back, in their mansions, when each of these conflicts erupts, and they start placing bets on which side wins, it might play a role in which side our government leaders choose to arm/support.
Sometimes it's due to strategic concerns in the region, sometimes it's due to military-industrial lobbying, usually it's both.
The money in war isn't in betting on it, it's in selling weapons, ideally to both sides if you can swing it. They don't want a winner, they want interminable war
If that was the case, I would think they should stick to calling prostitutes and betting on whether or not they agree to the weirdest shit they can come up with, like that scene in Rat Race.
markets access and hitherto investments play a huge role actually. Israel is the Silicon Valley of the Middle East. In Ukraine the worst scum of the earth, agricultural produce and energy speculators (and real estate/companies hiring swathes of cheap labor in countries with large refugee populations, like Poland) as well as the military industry are benefitting from dragging this conflict out as long as possible whilst not allowing Ukraine to lose completely as to not lose access to hers market on beneficial terms.