> the standards of 'provocation' are applied only to the west. have you not been following the conflict? in the build up to this, and this goes back 20 years and maybe even more, putin has said that they are willing to die for this. in this conflict they are willing to escalate it to nuclear if that is what they need to do to secure their interests in ukraine. they believe they have legitimate reasons for this and they are actually willing to wage nuclear war over it. when someone is that position, ist up to you to either also be willing to take it there or not. yes that creates an asymmetric situation where the most willing side feels, says and acts like the standards are different for them.  > they're being selective in their outrage if they believe it of course, because things are different. you don't react to everything the same. some things are more worthy of reactions and outrage then other things, and people are also different in what situations they feel should have more outrage, based on the potential consequences of those situations and so on.  again, there is a difference between the missiles and troops on the ground. with long range missiles being used on russia it could change the tide of the war, it could hit them deep in their country, it would worsen the situation for them, and russia are not allowing that to happen, by saying that if that happens they will either start nuking shit and die for it, or to start doing hits inside of nato countries that are supplying the weapons, and then if retaliated they too will retaliate, and we are back to the nukes. there is also the rules the doctrine of russian defense where if they are attacked their response is to nuke etc. then there is the whole thing about:
Norway