That describes US policy over the last 20 years. The lack of self-awareness is astounding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
As an individual American who is not involved in intelligence or military work, I can condemn such actions by any nation while maintaining moral consistency.
So then why do you feel the need to justify yourself by saying that you don't work in defense? :) You basically stepped into the same trap you warmed me against :) Maintaining moral high ground seems to be a vital need, something on the level of instinct it seems. 'Tu quoque' or no 'tu quoque' we like to feel morally justified.
A = [commit murders on foreign soil, invade other countries and other nasty things] B = [made this relationship a lot less attractive] C = [it is wise to improve our relationship]
The original claim is A -> B, A(Russia) -> True.
The response is that A -> B, A(US) -> True. Therefore, if C(US), C(Russia) is also not ruled out. Logically sound.
This isn't claiming that rbanffy's argument is wrong because A(rbanffy). I suspect rbanffy is probably not even committing murders on foregin soil, le alone the other stuff, so it isn't a tu quoque fallacy. It is just pointing out that A isn't an international norm for cutting off productive relationships.