A conservative on FB has made the plausible argument that Putin is not entitled to the Tsar's patrimony, to which I responded:
Fair enough, but how would we respond to the argument that, if Putin is not entitled to the Tsar's patrimony, then the government of the USA today is scarcely entitled to the purchases and conquests that added the Louisiana Purchase territories or the Southwest to American territory. We could show our good faith by returning Alaska to the Russians.
When the example of Lincoln was introduced, to an an ironic touch, I responded:
The cases of South Carolina and Ukraine are quite different, since the one seceded from Britain before joining a confederal union, while the latter is a border-region without a national history, much less a state. I would not presume to read Putin's mind, but it is a natural desire for Russians to reestablish control over those parts of the Ukraine that are culturally Russian and once belonged to them.
A comparison might be drawn with the Krajina region of Croatia, again, a frontier region of an artificial entity (Yugoslavia), given by a federal government to appease a strong minority group and dampen the sense of unity in the dominant group, whether Serbian or Russian. What interest the US might have in propping up the Bidens' friends in Kiev, I'll leave to Hunter Biden to declare.