[hayst4ck]

> Peace implies disengagement by maintaining long-standing borders.

Before I write a novel of a response, can you rigorously define "long-standing borders", as well as the implied words of "nation", "country", and "state"? How far back in history is "long standing" valid for? Some of these things are matters of history, how do you deal with historians disagreeing on the ground truth? What happens when someone strongly asserts something that is factually untrue?

All wars are defensive in that the combatants are told they are defending, not attacking. Russians in Ukraine don't think they are attacking, they think they are defending Russia from NATO or de-nazifying Ukraine, or at least that is their national narrative.

Mostly I think your post proved my overall point, which is that peace is not a meaningful word because its meaning is relative to its speakers beliefs rather than in reference to a universalize-able moral framework describing about what justice is.