Latvia is, at least for now, a sovereign nation. Not part of one, bigger nation. We have similar issues in Europe, Belgium, Spain, England and Scotland. It seems mankind still didn't figure a way around people's self determination that doesn't regularly end in open warfare since the end of WW1.
Ukraine is also not part of a bigger nation, it is a nation.
As for self determination: as long as it isn't financed and pushed by a foreign adversary I say have at it. But in the case of Ukraine it is pretty clear who was pulling those strings.
Ukraine is a nation, parts that might prefer not to be are no nation. Everybody is pulling strings in Ukraine, the Maidan revolution was supported by the West, the separatists are supported by Russia, organized crime is supporting corruption. And now?
The problem is that NATO and the West lost so much credibility in the last decades that we stand on shaky ground when we oppose moves such as Putin's. The West invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, especially the latter one was totally unjustified. We happily deal with Saudi Arabia and support their war in Yemen. Spain can crack down on their Catalonian independence movement as much as they want, including blocking voting access with police. The EU lets, literally, drown poor people in the Mediterranean. I could go on. Thing is, Russia has no right whatsoever to invade Ukraine. The question is, what is the world going to do about it?
> Ukraine is a nation, parts that might prefer not to be are no nation.
Might is pretty thin ice, here, they didn't and they don't.
> Everybody is pulling strings in Ukraine, the Maidan revolution was supported by the West, the separatists are supported by Russia, organized crime is supporting corruption. And now?
The separatists are a small fraction (best estimates around 23%) in the East and without Russian support they would have been overrun long ago.
> The problem is that NATO and the West lost so much credibility in the last decades that we stand on shaky ground when we oppose moves such as Putin's.
No, the problem is that NATO is a very blunt weapon that doesn't really work well against nuclear armed dictators.
> The West invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, especially the latter one was totally unjustified.
Agreed.
> We happily deal with Saudi Arabia and support their war in Yemen.
Again, agreed.
> Spain can crack down on their Catalonian independence movement as much as they want, including blocking voting access with police.
Agreed again.
> The EU lets, literally, drown poor people in the Mediterranean. I could go on.
And again. But: even if you could go on, you shouldn't because none of these have anything to do with Russia invading Ukraine.
> The question is, what is the world going to do about it?
Apparently, not a whole lot and it bothers me quite a bit.
> The question is, what is the world going to do about it?
>> Apparently, not a whole lot and it bothers me quite a bit.
Me too.
> And again. But: even if you could go on, you shouldn't because none of these have anything to do with Russia invading Ukraine.
Well, I think it does. Because doing the same (TM) thing all over the world, although for different (official) reasons, limits your credibility when you criticize others. And it makes it so much easier for, in this case Putin, to pain the West as the true aggressor (which, in this case, is wrong). In the war of disinformation it doesn't matter so. And it opens up venues within Western society to create, as limited as it might be, support for Russia's actions. There have already been the first demonstrations in Germany with people carrying pro-Putin slogans.
