[walterlw]

it's about the difference between "was" and "is". Sure, a bunch of states were formally parts of the Russian Empire as well as the USSR. That doesn't mean you can reduce them to "it's just Russia", those lands and peoples had history prior to being invaded and some have been lucky to have had some independence since the fall of the USSR. Considering that there are people out there literally fighting to the death not to be a part of the next russian imperial project i'd politely ask you to be a bit more sensitive about the whole thing.

[ossobuco]

Personally I took that "in russia" like I would with "in europe...insert generalization here". As in Russia the general area, not specifically the country. Similarly we still refer to a good part of the Balkans as ex-Yugoslavia.

[walterlw]

Unlike Europe (which is not a state) or Yugoslavia (which no longer exists), Russia is a country actively trying to expand its borders by force. So using "in russia" as a geographic generalization seems inappropriate to me. Using ex-USSR or ex-Russian Empire would be factually correct, but bestowing "borderlessness" onto Russia is a harmful thing in my opinion.

[alxlaz]

The ex part there is a rather important distinction :-) and there is no "general area" called Russia.