Eh... your example is pretty far from reality, especially considering California was never part of the CSA. Ukraine was part of the USSR, and was part of the USSR when the meltdown happened.

If you want a better analogy, it's like referring to Massachusetts as England when discussing colonial America. Semi-accurate at the time, main difference being Massachusetts was part of the British Empire along with England, but was not actually owned by England itself. The fact that there was a long and bloody war that followed between the two doesn't change that mostly-accurate history.

Yes, Ukraine wasn't part of Russia. But it was part of the USSR, which split into several countries, the most powerful and influential of them being Russia. It's a colloquialism just as much as it is an inaccurate statement.

Apropos England, you'd better not go to Scotland and refer to it as "England" either... people will be justifiably mad at you. And those two countries are currently united.

This one is also an exaggregation. Russian government supported anti-government forces in East Ukraine, so they could fight against their own enemy. Russian profit in it is destabilized buffer between RF and NATO expansion (driven by purely military ambitions of the force external to conflict). I had few discussions with eastern ukrainians. All of them hate western Ukraine (mutually ofc) and said it was always like that. Absolute evil-izing of russians is a big mass-media program in Ukraine, not the other way round. It is not very succesful though, because both nations are heavily mixed.

I’m not appreciating the situation, but let’s not fall into Evil Axis delusions.