Of course it's a "feel-good" project. You pick and choose who to help out of the 100 million that die every year on the basis of "feel-good"
Or are you myopic enough to think Ukraine is the only war going on right now?
I know there are other wars on. Maybe we should be doing things to help those as well.
But really, characterizing an attempt to save lives as a "feel-good project" is rather callous.
"Priority" does not mean "the only thing we can do,"
That's exactly what priority means. It says do this BEFORE this. Otherwise it isn't a priority.
"That's exactly what priority means," you say, and then immediately provide a definition contradicting that statement. Regardless, the whole "we can't work on this problem until we work on this problem" is absurdly reductive. Should we not work on policing crime because the debt is more important, or neglect the debt because of abortion, or ignore abortion because of corruption? Policy is not an either-or question. It is, in fact, possible to do more than one thing at a time. And if you refuse to help other countries until you've sorted out all your own problems, you'll never help anyone. If you're fine with that kind of isolationism, that's up to you, but some of us can't sit by and watch people die when we could be doing something to help.