A better analogy is Syria. The US actively interfered with Syrian society by amplifying anti-government sentiments in social media. Then when things escalated to the point of active revolt against the government, they used that unrest and the deaths of protesters to launch an "intervention".
They would have probably toppled the Assad government within weeks, if Russia hadn't stepped in to help them. Their support allowed the Syrian government to last years against the US invasion, u Tim the US had lost all momentum in the country.
See...that analogy matches almost exactly what's happening in Ukraine. Except I Ukraine, the Russians were the ones interfering in Ukraine's internal politics. And the Russians are the ones that eventually invaded the country by force. But this time, it was the West that stepped in to help the local government defend itself. Russia thought it could take the whole country within a matter of weeks...but instead Ukraine has held them off for years.
By your logic, Syria should have simply given up and let the US have whatever they wanted. By your logic Assad, and by extension Russia, are solely responsible for every single death that has occurred as a result of their efforts to stop the US. By your logic, the US had every right to take what they wanted from Syria, because they were the stronger force. All that death that resulted from the US invasion, could have avoided, if only Russia had stayed out of it, and let Syria fall.
Does that sound about right to you?
Aah. You don't know anything about 20th century history, do you?