Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

[bisbis]

Where are those who say that when the Ukrainian counterattack begins, this war will end in March or April at the latest?

What, leopard 2 or challenger 2 will win the ukr-rus war. Hahaha.

 

[Gary]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631632523548557312

from last year.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608688469504823301

 

[Ecderha]

russian Su-34 was shot down today


https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631727222498238476

 

[bisbis]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631640216422195201

This is criminal.

 

[contricusc]

I'm not a fan of the likes of Libya, Iraq or such, but here's the thing, If past invasion is to be a justification in wars of conquest, then there should be an international coalition of force removing the likes of France after their atrocity in Algeria, or against Belgium in their atrocity in Congo.

But France and Belgium have different leaders than they had during the times of their atrocities, while Libya and Iraq had the same leaders.

By 2003, Iraq is no longer a threat, its armies has been degraded by years of sanctions. But one thing stands, that is its government is undemocratic. So that thing justified the West to go on with the invasion instead.

Actually, the reason for the Iraq invasion was the CIA lie about WMDs. So iraq was not invaded for being undemocratic. It was invaded because CIA “believed” they were building WMDs.

By the 2000s, Libya complied with demands to remove their nuclear program, their army and air force is no longer powerful enough to be classified as an aggressor state, nothing of danger could have come from the country against the so called international order really. yet as soon as the West finds a loopholes in the form of civil war, they instantly used that loopholes to do government removal.

The civil war was not a “loophole”. It was a civil war where the criminal government was killing its people, and the West (which included the likes of UAE) just helped with leveling the playing field by imposing a no-fly zone. There were no boots on the ground in Libya.

And oh don't forget Panama...

Oh yes, Panama, the country where the narco-dictator was outsted and is now the wealthiest country in Central America, and also democratic. And don’t forget the US handed the Panama Channel to the Panamanian government earlier than it was agreed in the contract just because of some student protests. The US relinquished its property rights just because of public presssure from local students. Imagine Russia doing that.

Look here, the justification of NATO expansion as dumb as it might sound actually sound quite rational when you see it from Moscow's perspective. Forced or voluntarily, for the Tsar in suits in the Kremlin, the blue map of NATO looks increasingly creeping on them.

They don’t seem too bothered by Finland’s request to join NATO, but they felt threatened by Ukraine’s independence, despite the fact that Ukraine was not even requesting to join NATO at the time. Of course, we know very well why they felt threatened by Ukraine, and it had nothing to do with NATO. What they hated about Ukraine was the risk of seeing Ukraine becoming another wealthy democratic country, like the former Warshaw Pact countries that are now in the EU.

There is nothing the Russians fear more than seeing their neighbors flourish under democratic regimes, because this is a direct challenge to their autocratic model.

Indonesia is better off course with the current global order to support its growth, but what if the likes of China win and the global order are re-written once again ?

The good thing is that China cannot win. Their best option is to accept the current world order that allowed them to prosper and get out of poverty. But they are free to challenge it and go back to the times when they didn’t have enough food to eat.

 

[Gary]

But France and Belgium have different leaders than they had during the times of their atrocities, while Libya and Iraq had the same leaders.

Oh I don't know that lol. The excuse just kept getting more ridiculous by the day .

Isn't Churchill the same leader when this happens ?

Bengal famine of 1943 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have yet to hear about Operation Anglo Freedom.

Actually, the reason for the Iraq invasion was the CIA lie about WMDs. So iraq was not invaded for being undemocratic. It was invaded because CIA “believed” they were building WMDs.

You know even the Russians need justifications for their wars of conquest, real or perceived. So does the West.

The civil war was not a “loophole”. It was a civil war where the criminal government was killing its people, and the West (which included the likes of UAE) just helped with leveling the playing field by imposing a no-fly zone.

Killing own citizen is a criminal act true, but what makes this funny is that as if only Libya kills its own citizens. Name every U.S aligned government in Asia and the Middle East and you'll find horrendous abuse set up by their U.S friendly government.

You know, the modern governmental system created and promoted by the West are certainly not a governmental system built on the foundation of charity and good faith. So if military action are necessitated towards a country, that is clearly not to help the weak, but advancement of own interest. But as I said earlier, you need loopholes. Because even mad dictators, the likes of Hitler needs justifications, real or perceived, actual or imaginary.

imposing a no-fly zone. There were no boots on the ground in Libya.

Ahhh, but your air assets coordinate and leaked intel on Gaddafi's troop movement, which makes you party to the war. In fact Its NATO airstrike that stopped his convoy before he gets killed. I never quite realize ground convoys can fly.

Oh yes, Panama, the country where the narco-dictator was outsted and is now the wealthiest country in Central America,

Narco-dictator or not they're doing that shit in their own country, in their own territory. Somehow the West forgets about "territorial integrity" and comes up with 1005 reasons on why we can and Russia cannot.

and also democratic.

I find it funny that u use the words democratic as if it has any importance at all. Like earlier you defend Ukraine can't be invaded because they're "democratic". being democratic as a choice of political system has nothing special really, especially if you look it from the lens of realpolitik. I could even replace the word "democratic" with

• Communistic
• Fascist
• Islamic
• Autocratic

or any other types of political system out there.
Just because you grow up learning democracy is good, doesn't make it standard if one gets invaded or not. In fact you could be the most democratic country out there, gets invaded, ravaged, destroyed and in the grand scheme of thing it would be of little difference from that of autocratic country getting invaded, ravaged and destroyed.

Human perception of good and evil doesn't count in geopolitics. only advancement of worldly interests matters in the end. I say worldly interest because there existed a time where otherworldly interest trumps worldly materialistic interest.

They don’t seem too bothered by Finland’s request to join NATO, but they felt threatened by Ukraine’s independence, despite the fact that Ukraine was not even requesting to join NATO at the time. Of course, we know very well why they felt threatened by Ukraine, and it had nothing to do with NATO. What they hated about Ukraine was the risk of seeing Ukraine becoming another wealthy democratic country, like the former Warshaw Pact countries that are now in the EU.

Because they're busy with Ukraine and they gt no power left to start a two front conflict with Finland. The underlying concern with regards to Finland and Ukraine is the same, but Ukraine is where Putin starts his campaign and he must finished it somehow.

The good thing is that China cannot win. Their best option is to accept the current world order that allowed them to prosper and get out of poverty. But they are free to challenge it and go back to the times when they didn’t have enough food to eat.

Win or not win nobody can tell. But me, who come from this particular part of the world with China has every reason to dismiss your claim. But this is for another thread.

 

[Angry Turk !!!]

Oh I don't know that lol. The excuse just kept getting more ridiculous by the day .

Isn't Churchill the same leader when this happens ?

Bengal famine of 1943 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I have yet to hear about Operation Anglo Freedom.

You know even the Russians need justifications for their wars of conquest, real or perceived. So does the West.


Killing own citizen is a criminal act true, but what makes this funny is that as if only Libya kills its own citizens. Name every U.S aligned government in Asia and the Middle East and you'll find horrendous abuse set up by their U.S friendly government.

You know, the modern governmental system created and promoted by the West are certainly not a governmental system built on the foundation of charity and good faith. So if military action are necessitated towards a country, that is clearly not to help the weak, but advancement of own interest. But as I said earlier, you need loopholes. Because even mad dictators, the likes of Hitler needs justifications, real or perceived, actual or imaginary.


Ahhh, but your air assets coordinate and leaked intel on Gaddafi's troop movement, which makes you party to the war. In fact Its NATO airstrike that stopped his convoy before he gets killed. I never quite realize ground convoys can fly.


Narco-dictator or not they're doing that shit in their own country, in their own territory. Somehow the West forgets about "territorial integrity" and comes up with 1005 reasons on why we can and Russia cannot.


I find it funny that u use the words democratic as if it has any importance at all. Like earlier you defend Ukraine can't be invaded because they're "democratic". being democratic as a choice of political system has nothing special really, especially if you look it from the lens of realpolitik. I could even replace the word "democratic" with

• Communistic
• Fascist
• Islamic
• Autocratic

or any other types of political system out there.
Just because you grow up learning democracy is good, doesn't make it standard if one gets invaded or not. In fact you could be the most democratic country out there, gets invaded, ravaged, destroyed and in the grand scheme of thing it would be of little difference from that of autocratic country getting invaded, ravaged and destroyed.

Human perception of good and evil doesn't count in geopolitics. only advancement of worldly interests matters in the end. I say worldly interest because there existed a time where otherworldly interest trumps worldly materialistic interest.




Because they're busy with Ukraine and they gt no power left to start a two front conflict with Finland. The underlying concern with regards to Finland and Ukraine is the same, but Ukraine is where Putin starts his campaign and he must finished it somehow.

Win or not win nobody can tell. But me, who come from this particular part of the world with China has every reason to dismiss your claim. But this is for another thread.

The guy you talking to is brainwashed to oblivion and he doesn't even notice. Don't waste your time.

 

[blackjack]

1st post of today.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631754697374662657

I just dont know anymore, Ursula said 100k but August 22 they said 9,000 Ukrainians died in the war, it should be exactly 18,000 Ukrainians dead. https://english.nv.ua/amp/almost-9-000-ukrainian-soldiers-killed-in-war-with-russia-50264881.html

 

[blackjack]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631751382452633607

 

[blackjack]

last post today.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631638980705026049

 

[contricusc]

I find it funny that u use the words democratic as if it has any importance at all. Like earlier you defend Ukraine can't be invaded because they're "democratic". being democratic as a choice of political system has nothing special really, especially if you look it from the lens of realpolitik. I could even replace the word "democratic" with

• Communistic
• Fascist
• Islamic
• Autocratic

or any other types of political system out there.

I think it all boils down to this. You consider the system of government irrelevant because of “realpolitik”, while I consider the system of government to be extremely relevant because of legitimacy and morals.

The discussion started when I said Ukraine war is more important than others because Ukraine is democratic, and it is the duty of the civilized world to defend democratic nations from authoritarian ones. This duty should trump realpolitik interests.

Just because you grow up learning democracy is good, doesn't make it standard if one gets invaded or not. In fact you could be the most democratic country out there, gets invaded, ravaged, destroyed and in the grand scheme of thing it would be of little difference from that of autocratic country getting invaded, ravaged and destroyed.

In the grand scheme of things it would be of great difference if a democratic country gets invaded, ravaged or destroyed. The duty of the civilized world is to defend democratic countries in order to encourage democracy around the world and discourage autocracy. If smaller democratic countries are not defended against autocracies, than the current world order serves no purpose and it is totally de-legitimized .

Human perception of good and evil doesn't count in geopolitics. only advancement of worldly interests matters in the end. I say worldly interest because there existed a time where otherworldly interest trumps worldly materialistic interest.

When your coalition of countries is based on some human perception of good and evil, it also counts in geopolitics. The current Western-values coalition of countries is tied together by the ideas of democracy and freedom. If we allow national interests to trumple the “values”, our coalition will disintegrate. Look no further than Germany which had its pragmatic interests aligned with Russia, but because of the Western values it was forced to side with Ukraine. Values trumped realpolitik in this case.

 

[Gary]

The guy you talking to is brainwashed to oblivion and he doesn't even notice. Don't waste your time.

Its okay, if not him, then others I hope will notice his error.

I think it all boils down to this. You consider the system of government irrelevant because of “realpolitik”, while I consider the system of government to be extremely relevant because of legitimacy and morals.

There are no real standard of legitimacy and morals on modern geopolitics. When I use realpolitik wrt Ukraine, I use the same realpolitik that the West has been using for the last century or so when dealing with others. Hence my point is, while you're trying your best to differentiate things, I try my best to associate things up.

So if countries are becoming indecent to other people's suffering, that is because they learn the art of modern geopolitics also from indecent people. The idea and appearance of modern nation states where their only goals is advancements in self-interests doesn't come from Asia or Africa.

The discussion started when I said Ukraine war is more important than others because Ukraine is democratic, and it is the duty of the civilized world to defend democratic nations from authoritarian ones. This duty should trump realpolitik interests.

In the grand scheme of things it would be of great difference if a democratic country gets invaded, ravaged or destroyed. The duty of the civilized world is to defend democratic countries in order to encourage democracy around the world and discourage autocracy. If smaller democratic countries are not defended against autocracies, than the current world order serves no purpose and it is totally de-legitimized .

There's really no real standard of what defined a "civilized world".

• For the Communist, civilized world is a world where the right of workers is respected and the power of socialism is applied to everyone else
• for the Islamist and other religionist, the civilized world is a world where the law of god is made supreme above others.
• for the liberals, a civilized world is a world where absolute personal freedom (bad or good) is made supreme above all considerations
• and so and so

And because standard is the name of the game, the collective West and what they define as civilized is by most account is the least appreciable of them all, because their "standard" of what defined acceptable or not, good or bad, do's and don't is so wild, people wonder if they have any standard AT ALL. Just less than a century ago, immorals like homosexuals and transsexuals are considered the very lowest of society in the West, yet today, they're very much king to the point that speaking against them could get you cancelled, funny stuff. So there's no standard, and if there is one, that standard better not come from the West. if your standard change every 50 years or so, better not expect people to take you seriously.

So I don't find it shocking that some countries wont view the war with the same level of importance with the West when it comes to Ukraine, and some of those countries are advanced countries the likes of China. You may disagree and goes on with the old wisdom that China can't survive without the West, but shocks rarely came early. For them this is just a war, that's it.

Again, the word " democratic" is no substitute to the word "you have no right to harm me"....it doesn't work like that. For Ukraine, by selling themselves as democratic is the sure (and smart) way to go and secure Western support, but not everyone else in the world. In fact I could write the word " Wakanda is a democratic country, we must assist them" replace the word democratic with something else and it really have no difference in substance whatsoever.

Wakanda is a democratic country, we must assist them​

Wakanda is a marxist country, we must assist them​

Wakanda is an Islamic country, we must assist them​

Wakanda is a liberal country, we must assist them​

Wakanda is an autocratic country, we must assist them​

​

see ? no difference whatsoever

In the past where the Western world is pretty much supreme, lesser countries must obey their whims on certain standard or face pretty painful consequence. Now, with countries in Asia are gaining position and power rapidly, it's not going to be like the old days, where the West dictate what to do. Certainly now, the west couldn't dictate the likes of China and India, and have to tread carefully on middle powers like Indonesia or Turkiye if they want their support. 300million Indonesian, that's pretty big. I wonder what's the bargain for our vote of condemnation in the U.N assembly.

our coalition will disintegrate.

which doesn't affect us at all at even the slightest.

Look no further than Germany which had its pragmatic interests aligned with Russia, but because of the Western values it was forced to side with Ukraine. Values trumped realpolitik in this case.

Germany is Germany, They're playing leaders of Europe, they must bear the consequence. But not everyone else.

 

[Ryder]

I think it all boils down to this. You consider the system of government irrelevant because of “realpolitik”, while I consider the system of government to be extremely relevant because of legitimacy and morals.

The discussion started when I said Ukraine war is more important than others because Ukraine is democratic, and it is the duty of the civilized world to defend democratic nations from authoritarian ones. This duty should trump realpolitik interests.



In the grand scheme of things it would be of great difference if a democratic country gets invaded, ravaged or destroyed. The duty of the civilized world is to defend democratic countries in order to encourage democracy around the world and discourage autocracy. If smaller democratic countries are not defended against autocracies, than the current world order serves no purpose and it is totally de-legitimized .



When your coalition of countries is based on some human perception of good and evil, it also counts in geopolitics. The current Western-values coalition of countries is tied together by the ideas of democracy and freedom. If we allow national interests to trumple the “values”, our coalition will disintegrate. Look no further than Germany which had its pragmatic interests aligned with Russia, but because of the Western values it was forced to side with Ukraine. Values trumped realpolitik in this case.

Germany was forced because it has no say.

Dont expect much from a country that lost its great power and superpower status.

Before Westerners start questioning about Turkiye's motives.

Ukraine is a valuable partner while Russia is just a country who Turkiye trades with while at the same time both engaged in a geopolitical struggle.

Turkiye is not against the enlargement of Nato when it supports Bosnia, Georgia, Ukraine and Kosovo becoming members.

Sweden and Finland have themselves to blame for pissing off the Turks.

 

[Mailman]

If Indonesia is smart they will do everything that suits them at the U.N pending the international order collapses by its own.

I admire Gary for hes non-compromises and swiftly ignoring tough questions. Of course West has sins to salvage, but this attitude goes way back before WWII and was then overwhelming. Nobody knows this better than Estonians, but how much I try- I cannot make it unhappen. Yes, the hated West/dearly beloved Russia colonized also parts of Europe and Russia even now is trying to colonize Ukraine. Condemning such behaviour by the country colonized in the past is the least this country can do. Ignoring new colonisations, using whatsaboutism, is morally questionable and the very reason why Indonesia should not be neutral about this. This is victims attitude and appeasing call for quite some- these guys think they can do it alone!

Well, you can try. Alone. Perhaps you can make it. Alone.

Indonesia has some sort of profit form the global order of the the day, true. But it's not what you call a winner, but merely a follower of the order. Indonesia is better off course with the current global order to support its growth, but what if the likes of China win and the global order are re-written once again ?

One thing is not clear for me and perhaps Gary is kind enough to explain. Why Gary thinks Indonesia is not the winner of global order? What could be the winning solution for Indonesia?

 

[Mailman]

Germany was forced because it has no say.

Dont expect much from a country that lost its great power and superpower status.

Before Westerners start questioning about Turkiye's motives.

Ukraine is a valuable partner while Russia is just a country who Turkiye trades with while at the same time both engaged in a geopolitical struggle.

Turkiye is not against the enlargement of Nato when it supports Bosnia, Georgia, Ukraine and Kosovo becoming members.

Sweden and Finland have themselves to blame for pissing off the Turks.

I am risking to disappoint my opponent, but the world is not spinning around Türkiye. Sweden and Finland are peaceful countries, perhaps too eager to support deomocary and accepting wrong immigrants.

Be careful with Germany. It took six years from Hitler to bring this country out from the economic crisis, rearm the nation and oocupy most of Europe. It took another six years the effort of half the world to drown this nationlistic expansion. Does anybody think they cannot do it again?

 

[MaciekRS]

Where are those who say that when the Ukrainian counterattack begins, this war will end in March or April at the latest?

What, leopard 2 or challenger 2 will win the ukr-rus war. Hahaha.

Dont create stories.
No one believed the Ukrainian offensive during spring is possible, they are not stupid (that why russian offensive WAS possible they ARE stupid)

 

[Gary]

Condemning such behaviour by the country colonized in the past is the least this country can do.

Within a personal level yes, I myself condemned Russia for this and my past post will confirm such.
But in modern geopolitics, use the same soft heart approach, you die.

Ignoring new colonisations, using whatsaboutism, is morally questionable and the very reason why Indonesia should not be neutral about this. This is victims attitude and appeasing call for quite some- these guys think they can do it alone!

You know the world doesn't work that way. Ideally past experience should've direct nations to side with what they could relate. But that is the ideal, and the world rarely if ever is ideal.

To this day in the Middle East there exist a country that were born by methods of land grabbing by relocated Europeans of Europe that suffers persecution under some European despot , yet even with past suffering, the same people today would watch in excitement as they bombed civilian houses, which also is their neighbor. Is this country familiar to you ?

If Indonesia is heartless (I'm only one of roughly 300 million Indonesian btw), then its justifiable, because the world is like that most of the time.

Indonesia at the time is not powerful enough and not self sufficient enough to do it alone, so better play the game until we're powerful and sufficient enough. But there's a clear trend for this. Maybe for our hate towards China wrt to our dispute, there's a lot to learn on how to minimize our vulnerabilities.

 

[Nykyus]

Using your logic, Ukraine would have still existed after getting absorbed by Russia. If a year ago Russian conquest of Ukraine was swift, we will be likely seeing the same model used in Iraq. Set up a new government, independent only by name but reports directly to its conqueror.

Russia is not pursuing the same policy in Ukraine as the United States in Afghanistan. They annexed the Donbass, forbade learning the Ukrainian language, killing pro-Ukrainian activists, mass bombings, turning cities and villages into ruins. Did the Americans forbid learning Arabic in Iraq? I don't remember anything. Putin is an analogue of Hitler.

And no great power will tolerate any other great power getting too close with them. The U.S has the Monroe doctrine which insist that no outside power should have any influence of importance in the entire Americas.
Why do you think the Sino-Japanese war of 1898 and Russo-Japanese war of 1905 started in the first place. Isn't it because the protagonist are getting uneasy about the presence of other great power getting to close to their hoods.

Yet the West is a lesser evil than the bloc of China, Russia, North Korea, Iran. In some ways, their ideas are attractive: a multipolar world, Chinese money for the prosperity of the population.

Algeria, Bangladesh are not former Soviet satellites...

Bangladesh probably abstained to balance between the two because it's a poor country. Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, has taken the example of economic cooperation between West Pakistan and China. Algeria, as far as I learned, was close to the socialist camp in order to resist the pro-Western Morocco.

Win or not win nobody can tell. But me, who come from this particular part of the world with China has every reason to dismiss your claim. But this is for another thread.

Russia is also a colonial empire that emerged 400 years ago by conquering, in most cases, Turkic lands. Peter I gained experience in the Netherlands, there are some similarities between these two countries. Turkey has more rights to Crimea than Russia, because pro-Turkish forces from Anatolia, that is, modern Turkey, arrived in Crimea as early as the 1200s, 500 years before Russia (Muscovy).
If Russia tramples on international borders after 1945, then what rule cannot force other states to claim the same lands? Is it all about power? Then Turkey can also lay claim to the North Caucasus, because the Adyghes were forcibly resettled in Turkey. If military power establishes the rights to the borders, nothing prevents Turkey from regaining Crimea by military means. Can nuclear weapons be a deterrent to redrawing borders? Hitler had a weapon of mass destruction - a chemical weapon that could wipe out the population of Moscow and London, but he did not do this, do you think that Putin will be more radical than Hitler?

If the Indonesians fight the Chinese like the Ukrainians fight Russia, the Chinese will lose. Russia and China have become overconfident after the failure of US policy in Afghanistan. After the USSR left Afghanistan, the socialist government lasted there for another 3 years, and in Afghanistan their democratic government fell immediately after an American soldier escaped by plane.

I am sure that before attacking Ukraine, Putin received permission from his Chinese comrade Xi Jinping. Because the attack took place immediately after the end of the Olympic Games in Beijing. The failure of the Russian army in Ukraine is also the failure of China, their "one belt one road" strategy. Russia's special operation in Ukraine has become a cold, debilitating shower on their hot heads. According to Russian sinologist Nikolai Vavilov, China was supposed to attack Taiwan in April 2022, but due to the failure of their plan, the offensive had to be postponed.

 

[Afif]

Bangladesh probably abstained to balance between the two because it's a poor country. Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, has taken the example of economic cooperation between West Pakistan and China. Algeria, as far as I learned, was close to the socialist camp in order to resist the pro-Western Morocco.

Being poor country is not the reason why BD abstain.

There are african countries that voted against Russia that can barely fits into the definition of modern state.

And I can tell you even if we were three time richer our position would've been the same.

Even though, BD is the 'fifth largest democracy.'

 

[Gary]

Did the Americans forbid learning Arabic in Iraq?

Difference in method doesn't made for the uniformity of intent.

This is a scene from the Netflix series Barbaren, based from the historical battle of Teutoburg forest.

In one scene, Governor Quinctilius Varus forced a German barbarian to kiss the Roman Aquilla (Eagle), he refused and die decapitated. Confronted by his adopted son Arminius that such practice is not accepted by local law. This is Governor Varus reply :

You see, for Russia their satisfaction comes when their victims adopt their language (like in the Baltics and Ukraine), for others, the likes of Rome and U.S they satisfy themselves by forcing people to adopt their lifestyle and model of governance (law). The U.S might be content with Bedouins speaking Arabic but they can't stop themselves to democratize every country, using force if need be.

Same energy btw between Russia, Rome, USA and many other great powers out there.

Yet the West is a lesser evil than the bloc of China, Russia, North Korea, Iran. In some ways, their ideas are attractive: a multipolar world, Chinese money for the prosperity of the population.

More less the same ? In China you could be in trouble for going against the thought of Xi. In the West you could lose your job if you are homophobic or being against the Semites.

Bangladesh probably abstained to balance between the two because it's a poor country. Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, has taken the example of economic cooperation between West Pakistan and China. Algeria, as far as I learned, was close to the socialist camp in order to resist the pro-Western Morocco.

In other words, every country has its own agenda and has its own difference in the way they calculate things. That doesn't make them evil or indecent.

Russia is also a colonial empire that emerged 400 years ago by conquering, in most cases, Turkic lands. Peter I gained experience in the Netherlands, there are some similarities between these two countries. Turkey has more rights to Crimea than Russia, because pro-Turkish forces from Anatolia, that is, modern Turkey, arrived in Crimea as early as the 1200s, 500 years before Russia (Muscovy).
If Russia tramples on international borders after 1945, then what rule cannot force other states to claim the same lands? Is it all about power? Then Turkey can also lay claim to the North Caucasus, because the Adyghes were forcibly resettled in Turkey. If military power establishes the rights to the borders, nothing prevents Turkey from regaining Crimea by military means. Can nuclear weapons be a deterrent to redrawing borders? Hitler had a weapon of mass destruction - a chemical weapon that could wipe out the population of Moscow and London, but he did not do this, do you think that Putin will be more radical than Hitler?

If the Indonesians fight the Chinese like the Ukrainians fight Russia, the Chinese will lose. Russia and China have become overconfident after the failure of US policy in Afghanistan. After the USSR left Afghanistan, the socialist government lasted there for another 3 years, and in Afghanistan their democratic government fell immediately after an American soldier escaped by plane.

This is for another thread, I'll reply this in the geopolitical thread