MANY questions will require to be answered when the Ukrainian crisis passes and there is room once more for reasonable discussion about its causes and effects. For now, it seems, we must park them. To seek any nuance; any measure of detached reflection on what has led Europe to the brink of war is to risk being called a Putin apologist in this febrile atmosphere.

Only incoherent rage and burning torches are permitted as the search gets underway for those who haven’t expressed sufficient empathy on social media about Russia’s murderous assault on Ukraine. The emotional incontinence that governs some responses reminds you of adolescents getting tanked up on the Dragon Soop before lashing out tearfully during the High School Prom. It’s infantile stuff.

Nicola Sturgeon was perhaps unwise this week when she suggested that a no-fly zone be enforced by NATO over Ukraine. But it was no more than that. She expressed this as part of a much wider response under questioning by journalists and said that this option should remain on the table. It’s broadly in line with UK and NATO policy, for who knows what might unfold in the coming weeks.

READ MORE: Thatcher saw Ukraine coming years ago

The First Minister might have been better advised though, to concentrate solely on exerting pressure on the Boris Johnson regime to relax all visa requirements on Ukrainian refugees seeking a haven in the UK. To suggest that she has no right to express any kind of view on the situation simply because both matters are reserved to Westminster is also immature.

Her response, as with those of other leaders with no real clout in this crisis, was as much human as political. She must know the implications for the rest of Europe if NATO fighters were to start downing Russian jets. At the next SNP national conference, she might even be persuaded to re-visit the party’s absurd policy of supporting NATO yet also seeking the removal of nuclear submarines from Scottish waters.

Even so, the juvenile posturing that passes for debate on Twitter would probably result in the SNP’s non-NATO wing being branded Putin apologists. In Scotland we like to think we’re above kneejerk and reactionary responses when some part of the world is menaced by the psychotic deeds of a deluded strongman. We last witnessed it when Donald Trump practiced his evil clown act.

Reasonable attempts to look beyond the sanctimonious pearl-clutching and ask why so many working-class Americans voted for Mr Trump were met with hostility. Those doing so found themselves targeted in a similar frenzy of sanctimony as that being channelled currently by some of Scotland’s political classes from the safety of their salons.

Understanding the failure of western diplomacy as well as Vladimir Putin’s psychopathy is surely essential if the west is to formulate an achievable strategy for dealing with what happens next in this tinderbox region.

Some who fancy themselves as influencers, however still insist on a McCarthyite, House Unamerican approach to analysing geo-political eruptions. You’re either with us or against us.

Some others, having expressed so much emotion and practised so much finger-jabbing, may soon run out of road if the Ukraine situation continues for much longer. And then what? Will they start pressing for official guidance on how to spot if someone close to you is a secret apologist for the Putin regime?

Is The Hunt for Red October to be banned from our television screens because it features a magnificent rendition of the Russian National Anthem? Dr Zhivago? Don’t even think about it. And what about that furtive chap across the street? Why is he always listening to Tchaikovsky?

And maybe it’s not the Fifth Columnists we need to worry about; maybe it’s the Third and Fourth ones. If you’re a proper Fifth columnist you wouldn’t be jouking about with a big Number 5 on your back. Perhaps instructions will be issued later about the known behaviour patterns of fifth columnists masquerading as third and fourth ones.

Perhaps too, we could compile a list of straight-up “disgraceful” columnists who shame Scotland. I mean who knows: they could be using sophisticated code to send covert messages to the Kremlin. Like the first letter of each of the preceding 12 paragraphs in this column.

Police Scotland could learn a common Russian greeting to catch out any neighbourhood Putin sympathisers such as: “Udachi!” And if the miscreant replied “Spasibo!” they’d be marched down to the pokey.

And if your man asks you to dress up in something kinky like the Moscow Dynamo away kit under the guise of adding some spice in the bedroom then keep a close eye on him. The Russians have perfected the art of the ‘wee honey’ trap for amorous lefty Glaswegian types. And what about that nice, unassuming Rangers supporter across the road? Hasn’t he been acting a bit oddly since he returned from Manchester in 2008 after watching Rangers v Zenit St Petersburg in the UEFA Cup final?

We’re always urged to react in the moment during periods of global crisis and discouraged from looking into the past to reflect on how we got here and what we ought to have done differently. Nor is there much discussion about the future and how we can ensure not only that Putin’s wickedness stops here but that there aren’t any more like him waiting for the opportunity to exploit and manipulate.

Sadly, we’re saddled with a political class who compete to seize the moment and extract every tearful ounce from it to show how empathetic they are about the Ukraine crisis. It’s all about them and not really about the poor people of Ukraine.

Of all the unequal wars raging throughout the world concerned with amassing capital, power and land this is the one they have chosen to channel their confected, strategic outrage. And as it’s the first one to be multi-platformed everyone can take part – from a safe distance – and use it as a sort of perverse group therapy session.

God preserve Ukraine and God save the rest of us from the posturing of the permanently outraged.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.