Don't act as if you didn't understand what I meant. They were in a different country because they seceded from your country. Your country then has subjugated their country with force. They stopped existing as a state. Then your country made sure that their country got turned into Your Country 2: Funny Accent Edition. Hell you even did that with all those Native American tribes, too!
How's that different than what Russia did to other countries? Oh - that's right, it's different because Confederation and all those Native Americans never got another chance to secede (unlike all those ex-Soviet republics), because Russia is not as good at exterminating local dissenting population as USA.
After all, how many native people there are in Russia, and how many - in USA? Hell, to further drive the point, compare Soviet Union, the embodiment of subjugation of local dissenting population, under Stalin, the person who deported Chechens and killed millions of people, to USA, the embodiment of freedom and democracy, in terms of percentage of natives among total population.
Feel free to point out where, exactly, I'm writing apologetics for USA's history. I'm fairly sure I never wrote that anywhere. Otherwise, another tu quoque. And hell, you even admitted subjugation by Russia equals death of a statehood yourself!
CSA never had a claim to being a separate nation. As the part 'of America' indicates, really. It was essentially a rebellion with a statelike chain of command. There was never such thing as a Confederate nationalism. There were differences in culture, but you'd find the same degrees of difference within both USA and CSA.
Ukraine, meanwhile, has had its own national identity, formed by a variety of historical factors. It didn't just happen overnight over a bunch of random Soviet provinces deciding they're through with that shit. Poland is an apt analogy here, considering it has also been nommed by the Russian Empire for over a century and underwent intensive Russification attempts. If you want to be consistent, then, it, too, is not a state currently and should immediately surrender to the power of Putin riding a bear.
Also, I hope you are using 'you' as a purely rhetorical pronoun, otherwise I'll be endlessly amused and at least slightly flattered.
And Britain is currently implementing ridiculous laws. Tu quoque is not a valid defense.
How about American politicians? You know, the ones that are saying that earth was created 6 thousand years ago and that climate change is not a thing?
Every country has nutjobs in politics. Can't evaluate a country based on them. Poisoning the well is not a valid attack.
What the hell do YECs have to do with anything? Did you not read the part of the post you are replying to? 'So do you' is not something that absolves you from doing anything.
Poisoning the well is a fallacy because it attempts to refute a logical point with a character attack - Hitler was vegetarian and an opponent of animal cruelty, therefore if you also avoid eating meat and/or not beat your pets daily you are in favor of genocide.
What is not a fallacy is proposing that a country A ran by people who deny the existence of another country B, if A eats up B territorially, will attempt to act in accord to their belief that sentiments of belonging to nation B should be eliminated as incorrect.