Most of what you listed here came about because John McCain and Barack Obama decided to destabilize Syria after Syria refused to allow Qatar to build a natural gas pipeline to Europe across Syrian territory.
Russia having a naval base in a country that’s friendly to them is none of our business.
If Russia were to attack and invade Japan because we have naval bases there that pose a threat to the east coast of Russia how would you expect the US to respond?
Does Russia have a right to protect their ally?
Are you willing to go to war with Russia when they eventually shoot down US warplanes that bomb Syrian soldiers on Syrian territory like the US did last week?
Is a Qatari gas pipeline worth starting a nuclear war?
How the situation may have come about, does not change what is.
And what is, is what I have listed, and you can not refute - a string of “legitimate interests” - arguably the world’s greatest concentration of them. Outside of China/North Korea, it is currently the epicenter of geostrategic confrontation.
Your approach is apparently to simply retreat from any confrontation, unwilling to risk fighting, allowing any competitor or mortal enemy to expand at will, ignoring the future implications.
Regardless of how we got to this point, there is a lot to lose by simply throwing the region to the wolves, and burying our heads in the sand, wishing that it doesn’t matter.