So you make vague assertions about what I supposedly turn a blind eye to but when asked to actually name a specific example you suddenly back away, perhaps you shouldn't make accusations if you aren't willing to back them up?
Because I don't believe any of these incidents can be conclusively proven yet in the current environment where Ukraine can do no wrong, you do. This is the impasse.
Am really not sure what rock you were living under when the US invaded Iraq in 2003 but I was in the UK at the time and plenty of Newspapers called out Blair and Bush for their BS in launching that invasion and condemned it wholeheartedly.
Yes there was token resistance but nothing that was NOTHING like what they currently do with Russia for basically doing the same thing only being worse at it.
And there is it..., they had it coming, why I am not surprised...
Given that it's hardly a new idea I never expected you to be.
Most civilized people would be against people dying in a war of aggression on principle even if they cannot do anything tangible.
Ah the "I am more evolved than you" angle. This is only supportable if the invaded nation did nothing to provoke it and the invader has no defensive case to make for the invasion. Also as has been pointed out many times, the kinetic phase of warfare is not necessarily the first one, this war already started decades ago with NATO being the chief aggressor and Ukraine firing the first shots.
This is not a war Russia started in a vacuum, it's a civil war that Russia (whether it agitated for it or not) only kinetically entered after it had already started.
SA had a choice to keep going with Apartheid, at least no one invaded us to force us to treat people with decency.
Apartheid was going to end anyway, it's about how it was forced to end and who was forced into power.
We are discussing things on a forum, no one is forcing anyone to do anything. You seem plenty willing to take a position about things in the US that have no effect on you.
It's about the rank hypocrisy as well as how their failed invasions PROVE that foreign interference never solves anything but instead makes it worse..... and a reminder that yet again their arms industry in profiting from the deaths of people of a foreign nation.
This "meddling" narrative is very tiresome, Ukraine, like SA is a developing country, Ukraine and SA ask for foreign investment. If Ukraine or SA didn't want foreign "meddling" they could adopt an isolationist policy like North Korea. If Ukraine didn't want to keep fighting, do you really think the US could force them to continue their resistance? It really is a bizarre argument,
There is no such thing as a "developing country" that is Social Darwinist nonsense. There are countries that are more or less globalism efficient. SA is "developing" into being such a nation..... for "developing" countries to be in any other way true would mean there is a hard end goal.... which no one has ever actually defined.
The very fact that North Korea exists in the first place is foreign meddling.
Isolationism which I advocate for in general in no way touches on business dealings since it is a political matter.... but then again.... I don't think it a good idea for countries to operate businesses in other countries anyway, if you set up your economy on the money of other countries instead of your own.... you don't actually own your own economy.
The only way Ukraine still resists is the loans it got from foreign countries, if this war ends with a Ukrainian victory.... they basically won't own their own country anymore for generations. While pretending to be morally superior the Western institutions have basically collectively captured a country. Everyone goes on about "invading a sovereign country"..... Ukraine is NOT sovereign anymore.
The moment you cannot chose your own policies or make your own laws as you see fit you are NOT sovereign over yourself. This whole #IStandWithUkraine narrative is built on a series of scams. If Russia wins the scammers will lose billions.... which is another reason they want to try and force it to lose.