Anyone who can READ knows that the Kievan Rus were Russian, and a high schooler with a world history class under his belt knows that the Mongol drive displaced tribes as far east as Spain. Your claims to superior historical knowledge notwithstanding, we aren't on substantially different pages on the facts. Where we differ is the conclusion you draw, which is completely unwarranted. We have no argument that the territory was not a "state of Ukraine," historically, but by that standard there was no France, England, or Germany, or even U.S., and they can't be nations, either! We don't dispute that perhaps the folks there aren't even united enough to BE a nation. But that there was no 'state of Ukraine' united by a common ancestry does not somehow disqualify THIS 'state of Ukraine' from nationhood, which was obliquely your point.
We might even agree on the point I think you were driving to, which is that it might not be a bad idea to Balkanize the Ukraine. But I would prefer instead to keep it united, given the mass of people who might suffer from such a split due to the usually fractious nature of such divisions, and I hope that the country simply aligns more right than Communist left.
Ukraine sides with Russia or the EU - there are positives and negatives in both those futures.
kievan rus is ukraine not russia. russian propoganda under the soviet regime not only stole ukraines history but also its culture.