I don't see it that way. To me its more a case of recognizing the hypocrisy of being outraged when somebody else does exactly what the US does. I don't see the fundamental fairness in anything being justified for some but not for others. We falsified evidence to justify regime change in Iraq. We did what was necessary to justify a decision we made based on what we saw as in our interest. I think it is hypocritical to set a double standard when Russia takes similar actions for purposes that they feel is in THEIR interest. We invaded Grenada for less justification than Russia has now. Even after the 2014 coup, Russia tried to work with Zelenskyy and his predecessor to reach acceptable conditions. They'd reach agreements, and then the Ukrainian side would inevitably renege on what they had agreed to.
There are numerous examples of the US taking actions to implement regime changes around the world in the past 60 years. The US has interests that they need to pursue, just as France did when they helped the US throw off British rule in the 1700s. I won't deny Russia the same rights that we grant ourselves.
A key part of the rule of law is that the rules are set, and then they apply to everyone. It isn't "We can do it, but you'll be punished if you do the same." The rule of law doesn't allow for different standards, depending on who has more or less political or military clout.
I'm much more concerned about whether the US is abiding by the rule of law themselves than I am about them trying to get everybody else in the world to abide by it. The US shouldn't be seizing and freezing assets of other countries. The US should be using their power to STOP piracy, not to use their financial and military power to engage in piracy themselves.
It seems that the US wants a unipolar world. We decide right from wrong, and if anyone disagrees with us they can face our wrath. That viewpoint is bound to lead to fear and animosity from leaders of countries around the world who wind up becoming fearful of what will happen to them if they get on our bad side. Not only the countries big enough to directly challenge us (specifically China and Russia), but a lot of less powerful countries think it would be better if the US didn't have that much power, especially when the US has shown they won't apply the power equitably. Besides their own economic calculations, I think the power dynamic was a factor in some of the 160 of the 195 countries in the world not enacting sanctions on Russia. They know they'd find favor with us if they comply with our wishes, probably thereby gaining some rewards, but they're willing to forego that to avoid harming Russia as a counter to the US.
“I don’t see it that way. To me its more a case of recognizing the hypocrisy of being outraged when somebody else does exactly what the US does.”
You now grasp how the game is played, and has been played since ancient Babylon, and likely before. It’s not hypocrisy, it’s just national interests, and leverage. But to be supportable they must be justified under the circumstance and conditions that exist at the time.
“We invaded Grenada for less justification than Russia has now.”
Uh, no. We invaded Grenada — which was under occupation by Cuban forces — pursuant to the request of the OECS (which, at the time, consisted of Antigua and Barbuda; Dominica; Grenada; Montserrat; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Lucia; St. Vincent and the Grenadines), and to rescue several hundred US students who were trapped because of the ongoing revolution. Tell, me: Which international body asked Russia to invade Ukraine? Which foreign nation — other than Russia itself! — had massed troops in Ukraine?And as for rescuing one’s nationals, we didn’t destroy the island nation of Grenada to achieve that nor did we even attempt to; our action was pretty much confined to the restoration of stability and the rescue and extraction of our people.
“Even after the 2014 coup, Russia tried to work with Zelenskyy and his predecessor to reach acceptable conditions.”
The “coup” was AFTER Russia had already invaded Crimea and annexed it, and AFTER Russia had invaded the Donbas region.
The rest of your comment is just an anti-US screed.
I get it; you don’t like the US. You are pro-Russia and anti-US.
I’m pro-US, and in this instance, I am anti-Russia. If China invades Russia I will in all likelihood be pro-Russia and anti-China, because China is the bigger threat to the US.