You may suggest whatever you wish, of course, but that does not make it true or accurate.
Your argument continues to be simplistic and either shows little knowledge of human psyche or intentional ignoring of it.
Russia's history is not the Russian people's history. Their origins are, in any case, Ukrainian. - An irony, I know, but a fact nevertheless.
If you took the time to study world geopolitics you would if you chose to do it rigorously enough, perhaps begin to understand how geographical features and borders as well as politically drawn artificial ones are major reasons for the many conflicts and wars of the past and of today.
Your assertions about the Germans as a people are erroneous and demeaning and again prejudiced. Your assertions about the treatment of the nation after each of the World Wars is entirely contradictory to the reality.
Ethhics is not "Ethics is the scientific way to determine categories of right and wrong". Ethics are simply a code and to behave ethically is simply to behave in accordance with that code.
Morality is concerned with values and these are inherently personal. Yes, some values are almost universally held as being appropriate but exceptions are found even to those. The 'freer' a society is, the more will differences in values be expressed openly and vice versa.
You know nothing of my education nor what was taught to me, nor what I have learned both through formal study, informal study and life experience. Your personally abusive comment that: "They taught you a lot of fancy words, however, the critical thinking skills are lacking." is completely inappropriate.
If others read our exchanges on this issue, any lack of critical thinking will be more than apparent in your own assertions.
Your repetitious maligning of my language and expression by referring to, "fancy words" is puerile. I accept that your own understanding of the language and its grammatical structure is not good. There may be many reasons for that but I can't know what they are and so have, so far, avoided referring to them. I only do so now because or your repeated spurious criticism of my language use. If you cannot cope with nuanced vocabulary or comprehend the meaning of complex sentences, that is not reason to criticise me for being able to do so.
In answer to your final questions:
1. After two centuries of Crimea being part of Russia, Kruschev transferred it in 1954 to what was then the Soviet Republic of Ukraine. This was a time when no-one envisaged the collapse of the Soviet Union & therefore the possibility of its loss of control by Russia.
2. There are no longer any empires. There are still groups of nation states (a relatively modern concept) that are under centralised control or significant influence. Some are so, willingly whilst others are not. This is one of the reasons for the many smaller but still enormously destructive conflicts that continue to ebb and flow across the World.
3. No, the German people were not "completely" responsible for what the Nazis did. The Nazis were responsible for what the Nazis did and even then, only some of them did so willingly.
It is never valid to generalise from the particular. That a table may have 4 legs does not mean that all tables have 4 legs. That a father and one brother in a family are Nazis or support Nazis does not mean that every member of that family does so.
Human life and human behaviour is not the simplistic manifestation that you choose to paint it. Neither are the actions of ethnic groups, nation states, or collective groupings such as the Russian Federation or the European Union or North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.
Human beings are complex; humanity is complex; life is complex.
Ironically, if you will, it's as simple as that.
