I understand the sentiment but the logical conclusion of that argument is that the US should disarm and cease existing.
That it won't is a mixture of cowardice, cynical opportunism, and complicity with unprovoked aggression.
In which case, I posit that yes, if you're fine with threatening or inflicting violence on innocent people, you don't have a moral right to 'self-defense'. It makes you a predator, and arming a predator is a mistake.
You lose any moral ground you have when you are an unprovoked aggressor.
He literally threatened a peaceful nation (also an ally) of invasion and annexation. How worse can it get?
There are more options than arming an aggressor and capitulating to foreign powers. It's a false dichotomy to suggest it.