1. NATO expansion isn't driven by US imperialism. We aren't conquering countries and forcing them to join; they are asking to join - and not because we're tying a big aid package to NATO membership. They're joining because they're worried about Russian imperialism.

2. You say it's accepting propaganda to see Putin as weak. But you see him as being pushed into war by the US. That's not something that happens to someone who is strong.

3. "As it is a strategic move to have russia use up its arms fighting a neighbor rather than the US."

Absolutely. More: It's to NATO's advantage to have Russia use up its arms fighting a non-NATO-member.

Sure, Putin is not a good leader for Russia, he's power-hungry and does not seem to have the best interests of the Russian people in mind. However by those same metrics you should consider US leadership as also being a weak evildoer.

Is it good or evil to push other countries into war knowing that thousands will die?

Is it good or evil to profit off the resulting energy crisis?

Is it even smart to risk a global nuclear war to destroy outdated arms and decades old tanks?

Is it good or evil to trigger economic collapse via sanctions causing starvation both inside the country and to export nations? Don't we consider Mao and Stalin some of the most evil people that ever lived for doing the same? Starvation is a terrible way to die yet it isn't even seen as collateral damage.

Putin will die anyway in the next couple decades. It made no sense to poke the bear and trigger all this. It ultimately just strengthens China and increases the amount of global suffering.

The US did not push Russia into this war. Putin chose this war.

All your moralizing is completely missing the point, because you are assigning cause to the wrong agents.