Yes, I do care. I think morally there are circumstances where attack is justified, for example if one believes to be under very serious danger. Do you not agree with this? Another question is whether or not that is the case for this instance - we can discuss this too. But do you or don't you agree? And if you don't agree, do you apply the same standard to all the times our country invaded another?

This by the way was also the justification to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, whether the fears at the time were correct (they weren't) is a different question. But if the mistake had been honest, I would say the attack would've been morally justified.

Do you agree? (I'm just trying to understand whether you really see the world in black and white in which case I'm not really interested in talking to you, or whether you can see that some times circumstances can be quite extreme which might call for extreme measures, in which case I'd be interested in finding out where we're disagreeing.)

No, I think annexing other countries is a pretty black and white issue.