Europe

To white people, if the political influencing in the world and things like the drug pandemic in the US, and Russia, don't count. The cleansing in Indonesia of Communists was caused by the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366 . A bit more than 50 years, like Bangladesh, but isn't that enough to make Russia the lesser evil?

If we are taking this from 1960's in this weird comparison of ours that has nothing sensible to do with Ukraine (as USA is not a part of neither Ukraine or the Russia), the we'll also need to take into account those who died in the Soviet prison camps. The death toll was absolutely maddening until the GULAG system was closes in the late 1950's, but even after that deaths were extremely common. The death toll of the Soviet prison camp system after 1950's is a seven-digit number.

Though, all of this doesn't matter: Even if the death toll of Soviet camps had been only, say 1000 people per year, it would still not mean that those were not okay. It's impossible to find US numbers without a Soviet counterpart that is even higher. That doesn't mean that the USA is somehow a fantastically awesome country or anything like that. It only means that they were very murderous instead of very extremely murderous back in those days.

And indeed: Even is USSR had been only very murderous instead of very extremely murderous – or even if it has been merely murderous, genocides are still not an okay thing to do. It doesn't matter if you make a very big genocide or a genocide that is very small when compared to some other genocides. A genocide is never acceptable. Never ever.

The intervention of Nuland is documented.

That happened in year 2014. Putin having the Russian grammar altered so that the "в Украине", as it was officially correct since year 1991, was replaced with "на Украине" happened in year 2008, six years before this phone call you are referring to.
And in case that you are not aware of that rule in the Russian grammar:
When you are talking about independent countries, in Russian languages you always say "in Germany", "in Ukraine", "in Russia", "in Spain". The Russian word for "in" is "в" (or the same translit to Latin alphabet: "v").

And about regions, you often say "on". In Russian you say "on Crimea", "on the Krasnodar land", etc. The Russian word for "on" is "на". Or, the same in Latin alphabet: "na".

In year 1991 they said that now it's officially "in Ukraine", although during Soviet times they had said "on Ukraine", because back then Ukraine was not an independent country.

But then there was the orange revolution, and after that, Putin decided Ukraine should no longer be allowed to exist, and began a campaign for taking over Ukraine. One part of that campaign was this change of grammar, basically forbidding all official outlets from using a grammatical form suggesting that Ukraine is a full-fledged independent country.

What you are saying here is that Nuland went 6 years back in time with her phone call.

And also, in that phone call she says who she would prefer to see in the leading position in Ukraine. You bet in the previous elections, the embassy of Finland in Washington D.C. had a similar phone call, where the some important worker in the embassy of Finland told someone in Finland who they would prefer to see as the next president of USA and why. Does that mean that Finland was making an intervention in US politics? Well, I know. It does. And apparently the intervention was a failure. But hey, at least we tried!
You bet there were similar phone calls being made also from the Swiss embassy in Kyiv. And from the Polish embassy and from the Portuguese embassy – because why the heck would there not be? It's the job of embassy workers to keep their home country's officials on track with what they think is in best interest of their own country and talk about it. Please listen to that phone call with this in mind. You will also notice that it was very unlikely to have travelled 6 years backwards through time. It was not a call important enough for that purpose.

(My friends were at Maidan in Kyiv back then. I know what they were doing there and I know why they were there. This whole "Ukrainians have no agency" you are spouting is a horrible story that you should not allow to rot your brain. They were there to protect their country from an autocratic coup that was being done by their president. They were doing pretty much what people in USA should be doing right now. But people in USA are not Ukrainians. They will not surround the centre of Washington DC. They will not build shields to protect from ICE. They will be okay with landing in fascism.)

I don't think that they [lemmy.ml admins] argue against human rights. The problem comes from them arguing that things like the Holodomor were justified.

They removed a comment of mine because I said that putting Uyghurs in concentration camps is not okay. That is arguing against human rights. A very crude kind of arguing, as outright deleting a comment is not a very constructive argumentational device, but arguing all the same.

Human rights are not as fundamental as they are presented.

Here you are wrong. And also, I think after this comment of yours, I can save myself the work of having this conversation with you.

To oppose human rights, there is Guantanamo and the share of the the black prison population.

How does that oppose the concept of human rights?

And still, the US remain the champion of human rights.

Now really. It is not. Just look at goddamn Trump and what he's doing. I will not be able to see whatever you reply, because after going through all this "US has done horrible things" you still fail to see that USA is not a champion of human rights. Was a nice conversation until this post of yours. Bye.