In situations involving lies and/or violence, does Buddhism teach siding with truth and peace against lies and violence, or does it teach ethical neutrality i.e. not taking stance on such subjects?

Specifically,

If someone is obviously lying or is simply badly misinformed, should a Buddhist defend truth or is it preferred to remain uninvolved (to avoid making things worse)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach pacifying the attacker and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers.

In situations involving lies and/or violence, does Buddhism teach siding with the good against the bad, or does it teach neutrality i.e. staying outside the conflict and not taking sides?

Specifically,

If someone (knowingly or unknowingly) spreads lies or misinformation, should a Buddhist challenge them to defend the truth OR is it preferable to remain uninvolved (to avoid provoking a conflict)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach fighting the aggressor and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers - i.e. this is not a rhetorical question.

In situations involving lies vs truth and violence vs peace, does Buddhism teach defending truth and peace against lies and violence, or does it teach ethical neutrality?

By "ethical neutrality" I mean a view like "the notions of villains and victims, liers and honest people and even the very notions of Truth and Peace are subjective simplifications-generalizations-reifications, therefore a good Buddhist stays neutral."

Specifically,

If someone is obviously lying or is simply badly misinformed, should a Buddhist defend truth or is it preferred to remain uninvolved (to avoid making things worse)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach pacifying the attacker and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers.

In situations involving lies and/or violence, does Buddhism teach siding with truth and peace against lies and violence, or does it teach ethical neutrality i.e. not taking stance on such subjects?

Specifically,

If someone is obviously lying or is simply badly misinformed, should a Buddhist defend truth or is it preferred to remain uninvolved (to avoid making things worse)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach pacifying the attacker and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers.

In situations involving lies vs truth and violence vs peace, does Buddhism teach defending truth and peace against lies and violence, or does it teach ethical neutrality?

If someone is lying or is simply badly informed, should a Buddhist defend truth or is it preferred to remain uninvolved (to avoid making things worse)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach pacifying the attacker and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers.

In situations involving lies vs truth and violence vs peace, does Buddhism teach defending truth and peace against lies and violence, or does it teach ethical neutrality?

By "ethical neutrality" I mean a view like "the notions of villains and victims, liers and honest people and even the very notions of Truth and Peace are subjective simplifications-generalizations-reifications, therefore a good Buddhist stays neutral."

Specifically,

If someone is obviously lying or is simply badly misinformed, should a Buddhist defend truth or is it preferred to remain uninvolved (to avoid making things worse)?

If someone violently attacks someone else, does Buddhism teach pacifying the attacker and defending the victim, or does it teach staying out?

Are there examples of such situations in the Pali Canon and later texts?

I mean this question literally as written and am sincerely looking for answers.