Prior to the US-backed coup in 2014, Ukraine was slightly more inclined to support Russia than the West. That is why there was a coup.
Post-coup, the Donbas Oblasts were excluded from polling, so the balance swung in favor of the West, but not by muchh over 50%.
Prior to the 2004 US meddling, Ukraine was smart to maintain a balance between West and East. Business with both sides was good.
It was the "Western mafia" (your term) that decided during the Bush years to push forward again with NATO expansion, this time with Georgia and Ukraine.
Dick Cheney convinced the president of Georgia to attack, resulting in Russia coming in to bring peace. Who started the agression is no longer disputed, even by western leaders. That of course doesn't change what the public was told for more than a decade. The West did not come in to save Georgia, despite implicit support from Cheney. You'd think Zelensky would have taken that lesson to heart.
I'm a tall, white, CIS-gender, male American. I'm doing fine in the US empire, just as the dominant demographics did fine in the other empires you list.
Saying the US Empire is not more evil than "the Spanish, Dutch, whatever" is really low bar, and a very easy to make when you're not the one being oppresed by said Empire.
I want no empires, and particularly no global hegemony. They can only be held together by increasing levels of violence. We've seen this over the last 30 years.
There are so many flaws in the video you linked to it would take a REALLY long post to respond, and I don't have time today. I'll only make three points.
Jake Broe assumes that the goal of Russia is to absorb all of Ukraine and then go further. He can't possibly know that. Starting from a flawed premise leads to flawed conclusions.
Ukraine's army is being decimated. According to Ukraine, they have 100-200 KIA per day, with 3-5x as many wounded. Ukraine started with 200k. Meaning in about 3 more months, the best half of Ukraines complete fighting force will be dead or out of action. Very likely the losses are much higher. Ukraine has been consistently understating their losses.
IMO neither the US nor any other NATO nation is going to declare war on Russia over Ukraine. There is no "Allied Army" vs. "Axis Army" dynamic here. More likely when the Ukraine forces collapse, Poland (the US aka NATO) will move into western Ukraine to create a protectorate as in Syria, and the two forces will avoid direct confrontation across a DMZ (also similar to north and south Korea).
This is not WWII. Russia has China, India, and most of the Global South either on its side, or tacitly on its side. That is at least half of the world. We (the US) lost in Vietnam, a tiny country compared to the US. We at best came to a draw in Iraq, where we had a massive advantage. We lost in Afghanistan. Again we had massive advantages. The difference in all those fights is the same one that gives Russia the advantage over NATO in east of Ukraine (not so much in the west). They plan to stay and see it as their home.
Final point: The analogy of time of Mr. Broe's is massively flawed. See my first two points. Time is not on Ukraine's side. In the 1990s the massive (and IMO evil) Microsoft monopoly illegally conspired against upstart Netscape. Netscape won in court...but only after Netscape ceased to exist. Microsoft you might have noticed is still around. Bill Gates is as evil as ever.
If Putin actually is deluded and attacks a NATO country first (e.g. Lithuania), then the math totally changes. As long as Russia sticks to their stated goals at the beginning of the war, it doesn't look good for what remains of Ukraine.
