No, I want my country to have democratic rule of law on the inside (including when dealing with normal criminals of any kind, including murderers).

But when dealing with an outside state-level aggressor, I want my country to be be a cunning, hypocritical, powerful strongman.

The distinction under what mode a certain event should be treated should be pretty straightforward and can be determined using democratic means, e.g. a normal judge ruling "I rule this cable cutting incident to be an act of state-sponsored aggression against our democracy" (which would allow the alphabet agencies, special ops etc to "do their thing" with no repercussions whatsoever.)

for example:

1) a murder happens between a husband and wife, two normies, after lengthy, normal court proceedings the proof who did it is not 100% conclusive, accused person goes free

2) a murder of an anti-russian political dissident happens, a russian ex speznas officer is caught in relation to the event -> he "disappears" one day and the case is closed

I believe this is the only way to "win" this cold war.

People in other places don't have rights, and lives, and deserve freedom? If they don't, you don't. If they can be ruled out, so can you. Freedom and rights only exist if they are fundamentally universal.