You have to look at both sides of the story.
MSM is mostly fake news, that's pretty well know by most free thinking people now.
East Ukraine is populated by more than 8 million ethnic Russians who want nothing to do with the EU. Can you blame them?
Russians in Ukraine - Wikipedia
Ukraine turned like this before in WW2 where the (mostly) Western part of Ukraine tried to side with Germany and persecuted the Jews big time.
Lviv pogroms (1941) - Wikipedia
The Northern, Eastern and Southern parts of Ukraine stayed loyal to the Soviets.
In 1991 following the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO made an agreement with the Russian Federation that it would never encroach on the actual boundaries of the Russian Federation and would leave a Buffer Zone out of mutual respect.
It failed to do this.
Why not look at it from Russia's point of view.
There was a time I blindly believed everything the UK/USA/France and ''allies'' did was for the good, without question.
I don't anymore. My bias has gone, I just try and get a balanced view and a better understanding.
I just wish we'd all get along a lot better, with a more easy-going understanding for others, rather than keep up a chest thumping and war-mongering type of mentality.
War is not funny.
Both sides? OK.
Here is my side. Ethnic Russian, born and raised in Sevastopol (Crimea). Descendant of two military dynasties. My ancestors lived in Crimea since about middle of XIX century (or may be earlier, but this is so far as surviving written accounts tell).
So, in your books, I'm one of
"8 million ethnic Russians who want nothing to do with the EU".
There is one "small" problem. Personally, I want nothing to do with Russian Federation who occupied my home city. Yes, the annexation is not just the "western belief". And despite all my scepticism towards the Brussels bureaucracy, I consider EU to be rather practical and decent choice - among all others.
Am I the exception, minority in 8 mln? But no poll or research support your bold claim about
"want nothing to...". Integration with EU is supported by roughly 55% to over 60% of Ukraine's population. It is, indeed, lower in three eastern regions (oblasts) where it goes down to 30%-35% but neither of those regions are populated by ethnic Russians only.
I kindly ask you to study more about the countries you voice your opinions about. At least some vital statistics. Feel free to ask live (and not imaginary) people like myself.
About 1941...
There is another bold statement of yours about regions of Ukraine (USSR) stayed loyal. WWII was very complex maze of complicated events and the USSR was not an exception. Not "regions" but millions of people across occupied territories who made their choice of loyalty - to one regime or another or to their own case of independence. And not just in Ukraine.
Lokot Republic was located in RSFSR (Russian Republic) in the very heart of historical Russia. Overall most Soviet collaborators were, not surpisingly, Russians by ethnicity.
Again, I kindly ask you to study more. Assuming you don't read Russian or Ukrainian (Polish, etc), why not to start with "Bloodlands" of T.Snyder, for example.
Last but not the least - again about my Crimea.
Transfer of the Crimean region from one republic to another was done in full accordance with the USSR laws. The case itself was not unique and there were several other territory transfers/swaps in the Soviet period. The myth about "the gift" was born afterwards during Brezhnev's era when earlier leader was demonised in typical Soviet fashion. This myth was buried for awhile later on, only to be discovered again and brought to propaganda in Russian Federation in post USSR period.
And by the way, Nikita Khruschev was not in a position to make any "gifts" or to bend the legislation in January 1954. He signed no documents either (Voroshilov and Malenkov did). Khruschev was the Party leader but just for 4 months and he was not strong enough. His position strengthened later in 1955-1956 and he became the ultimate leader in 1957 after ousting "old guard" (Molotov, Zhukov, etc.). I could add as well that the transfer itself was long term project devised years before 1954 and there were pressing economic issues... but I'll stop here.