I can agree that the current de facto blockade of oil is an unwarranted act of aggression and that the embargo was bad policy but the embargo was hardly criminal. The premise of the embargo was that Cuba expropriated American property without compensation so congress was punishing the Cuban government in turn. Again, its bad policy but not really unusual or criminal per se. The embargo has also had a ton of carve out since the end of the Cold War and the US is the main supplier of agricultural good to Cuba. The Cuban government has also engaged in a lot of bad behavior over the decades that warrants some sort of international sanction. They fueled the Angolan Civil War and made the broader conflict far worse (it was sort of their Vietnam). They prop up the worst security states around Latin America, like SEBIN in Venezuela until very recently. They were also involved in helping rig elections and suppress dissent in a number of Latin American countries.

> It feels similar to Putin invading Ukraine because he didn't like the example of an EU-aligned country prospering next door and the populace starting to ask difficult questions.

This is a misreading of Putin's motivation IMHO. He states clearly over and over again that it's about a historical concept of greater and historic Russia. He has even stated publicly it has nothing to do with NATO. So this is a false equivalence.

>He has even stated publicly it has nothing to do with NATO.

That's not true. It has always been about NATO absorbing Ukraine that is unacceptable to Russia. Putin warned about it since his Munich speech in 2007, that Georgia and Ukraine has to stay a military neutral countries or it'll result in a war with Russia. USA just decided that they may ignore it and do whatever they want anyway, pushing NATO in, after organizing "revolutions".