It is doxxing, but whatever floats your boat. I'm not going to post the names of anyone, so if you don't believe me, up to you. Like I said, I can't know if you're genuine or not either. But if you are, there's some chance you could rethink these views, or at least be open about your conclusions.

But yes, these are discussions you can have when you meet people offline. If you live anywhere professionally attractive - like Germany - you'll get to talk with a lot of people. They're mostly not long in-depth discussions, but when you ask or express genuine concern about the situation, you get some responses. It could be a lie, or well-hidden hatred, or a skewed sample, up to you to decide.

If you're happy to spread this narrative - which you seem to be - then I think you fit the bill of a geopolitical warrior. You think it's right to treat all members of an adversarial country as adversaries before they did anything, and I think it's wrong/counterproductive/bad to do so, especially if you're not a member of your country's military or security apparatus or have a personal grievance which explains it. Currently it's Russians for you, tomorrow it'll be the Chinese, Americans, whomever, based on where you live and who now is the adversary.

Serbia has had plenty of experience with "undue Russian influence" and conquerors of similar profiles, but sure, it's not the same. I think the Russian government isn't very different from other imperial powers, which are notoriously not representative of their people, and problematic for neighboring states and their people. If this wasn't the case, Russians wouldn't be on your radar. Simple as that. You don't have to equivocate cultures to notice a general pattern in geopolitics, and you don't have to tolerate adversaries to treat normal people normally.

As far as those other examples go, ask an LLM of your choice, preferably in Incognito mode: "What has $COUNTRY done that would explain why others hate $COUNTRY_MEMBERS?" See what comes out.