Konoha was in no condition to fight the cloud without starting a war they might not win. The Kyuubi attacked left them weakened, the fourth died, orochimaru left, tsunade left, jiraya was out hunting orochimaru. The village was at its weakest. There was no way to deal with the cloud. The orochimaru thing is a personal failing and a character flaw, something that every single character has. The uchiha situation is not hiruzen fault alone. None of the Hokage before him could solve it either. If anything, they all added to the problem until it blew up on his hand. They are all equal parts guilty and the uchiha aren't innocent either. Danzo might have been brutal but there was no lie. The uchiha intended to rebel. As for naruto? He lived in a big house which kishimoto himself confirmed, was given the same shinobi training that the member of the main clans were given and was given a lot of latitude for all the trouble he caused as a kid. Naruto's childhood wasn't great but he wasn't abandoned.

I was willing to put up with the corny self insert romance because the idea here seemed fun enough. I even tolerated the complete character assassination of ice man just so that your SI could have rogue. But this ridiculous hiruzen villain plot point on top of that is too much. I can only imagine that the reason for this is going to be some nonsensical scapegoating to get tsunade into a harem.

This is so idiotic. What if he later on asks who was this mysterious elder that saved them? This is a lie can be disproven so easily...

Just to chime in on this, for people outside of Asia it might be obvious that Kimchi is Korean, but the truth is that in those countries this is something that is widely disputed by experts in the field from both sides. Regional cuisine, especially in places with similar cultures, that are very close together or have a historical rapport of interaction have many of those conflicts. Like the croissant between France and Austria, or Kebab between Greece and Turkey. The reason for these disputes is often because both parties have a dish that is either very similar or that is identical but use a different name or a slightly difference process for it. In this situation, while Korea has Kimchi, China has the Pao Cai, which is also a Chinese term for Kimchi. To us, outsiders, it might seem to be something obvious, but to them it is a disputed thing. It is not just blatant "nationalism" or an outright lie. There are plenty of good arguments on both sides. In the end, it all comes down to their own personal traditions and it is hard to say which one came first and which one doesn't when both sides have such old cultures with so many years of history. Maybe one side copies the other, maybe they both happened to develop the same dish under different names. Who knows. It certainly isn't something that is worth having such a fight over when not even experts can prove with 100% certainty. Thanks.

Just to chime in on this, for people outside of Asia it might be obvious that Kimchi is Korean, but the truth is that in those countries this is something that is widely disputed by experts in the field from both sides. Regional cuisine, especially in places with similar cultures, that are very close together or have a historical rapport of interaction have many of those conflicts. Like the croissant between France and Austria, or Kebab between Greece and Turkey. The reason for these disputes is often because both parties have a dish that is either very similar or that is identical but use a different name or a slightly difference process for it. In this situation, while Korea has Kimchi, China has the Pao Cai, which is also a Chinese term for Kimchi. To us, outsiders, it might seem to be something obvious, but to them it is a disputed thing. It is not just blatant "nationalism" or an outright lie. There are plenty of good arguments on both sides. In the end, it all comes down to their own personal traditions and it is hard to say which one came first and which one doesn't when both sides have such old cultures with so many years of history. Maybe one side copies the other, maybe they both happened to develop the same dish under different names. Who knows. It certainly isn't something that is worth having such a fight over when not even experts can prove with 100% certainty. Thanks.