Absolutely right-an example is China 1930's-impoverished,beaten down,divided,attacked from within/without-the Japanese thought the Chinese would surrender in 3 months to a year-no,we /they did not and endured and resisted with our barehands if necessary and fought and fought .China tied down 75% of the Imperial Japanese forces and fought/endured like tigers to the death.Battles like the 100 Regiments Offensives ,Pingxinguan,Sihang warehouse,Battle of Shanghai countless other battles big/small etc where often 8-10 Chinese soldiers died to kill 1 Jap soldier were the norm-KMT army/Communist 8th Route Army-no difference-all patriotic Chinese defending the Motherland and her people-Wang Ching Wei surrendered to Japan hoping for mercy/compassion from the evil Japs-didn't work out did it.
No, that’s completely different. China didn’t go around provoking and challenging Japan and being hostile towards Japan. So they didn’t have an active hostile policy. It was more of a policy of colonial conquest and securing resources which Japan learned from the European, Russian and western powers and Japan wanted to also have her own colonial territories and resources to power her economic growth and compete with Western powers and the Soviet Union . There is not much the KMT leadership could do to prevent that. So the war and damage they suffered is not on them .
Plus back then the word was different with different powers vying for influence and colonies, and international law was no really as well established and followed compared to today. It was more of a great power politics and colonial conquest era . So you can’t compare that to today at all . It’s two completely different era. It’s like comparing the 18th century to the 20th century. Very different dynamic and power play.
Today country’s have a form of sovereignty and international law is still more established with international organizations and media platforms spread around the world for faster information sharing . So things are much different . So if a country’s leadership is smart nowadays they can avoid such invasions and wars with shrewd/smart diplomacy towards great powers. In this regard countries like Malaysia, Indonesia , Thailand, Singapore etc have been very smart in how they play the game and balance their interest between different powers while avoiding being hostile towards any one great power (US/West, China, or Russia ). They have understood the game well, and get the benefits from all sides.
that’s how you act as a leader not going around picking “righteous” fights with superpowers . That’s stupidity.
Do you think it was courageous and brave for Ukraine’s leadership to righteously face a bully like Russia and be hostile towards Russia ? Using your logic, Ukrainian leaders are real hero’s for standing up to the Russian superpower bully and being conformational towards them which led to the war. Some will agree that they are heros and brave for doing that irrespective of the consequences they are facing today. For me I disagree, I believe it’s stupidity and lack of shrewd diplomacy . Small/weaker countries should know their strenggths and weaknesses and how to act while facing great powers. They are not on the same level. Since great powers can impose much more severe damage to them without suffering as much. So