Hacking, internet based propaganda, and disinformation are all elements of asymmetric warfare, and the USA has used all these.

What's your point?

Is there a point to your relativism? I can hold that Russia is partly to blame, and should be punished for enabling a minority of Americans to elect a highly damaging president, AND I can hold that the US is heavy-handed in, for example, managing "democracy" in Turkey and that leads to problems.

And the USA should be punished for it's mischievousness?

You left that out both times.

It feels like a lot of US folk are still in the blame-somebody-else stage of grieving.

Is it Russia's fault the US electoral college system allows a minority to elect the president?

What does that have to do with anything?

If an external country convinced 60% of a population to vote against its establishment (and for the sake of argument, their (the voters) own self interest), it is immune from punishment because it convinced a minority?

We now want to punish countries that say different things than Americans agree with? Speaking Pro-Trumps and Anti-Clinton statements is VERY different than false propaganda.

Should the US be punished? One could conclude that the coup in Turkey failed because many Turks thought so. Similarly, Russia should not get away with pumping up our racists.

Internet based propaganda and disinformation are protected by freedom of the press, and should remain protected. It is up to the reader to parse and verify truth. No one says the "flat earth society" or the "moon hoax" people should be punished. While I disagree with what many people say online and have different views, the freedom to publish anything, including propaganda and disinformation is sacred and should be protected.

I doubt very much that "freedom of the press" as guaranteed by the First Amendment in the United States applies to the right of foreign nations to engage in propaganda.

I also doubt that any country in has ever accepted foreign propaganda, Manchurian candidates who subvert their electoral processes (speaking generally, not about any particular candidate) and mass manipulation of its populace (the fact the the US has engaged in this sort of activity does not make it right either).

I agree, up to a point - where the disinformation represents a concerted attempt to suppress factual information or delegitimize truthful sources, and the degree of political instability creates an existential threat, for example, or where the publication of information will result in injury with no discernible public benefit, as in the dissemination of child porn.

In any case, freedom of the press is already very robust in the US, unlike some other countries.

>the freedom to publish anything

Including libelous material?