The world is simply not a victim of our actions (whether from evil intent if you really hate America; or from our sheer size and ignorance of the impact of our actions, if you are a little more charitable in your condemnation of our policies).
One result of the view that we cause the problems of the world is that minor flaws of ours--even as we punish and correct those mistakes (or crimes)--are amplified, while the enemy's crimes or failings are minimized or excused--often excused as an acceptable reaction to what we do. (Recall the "understanding" of mob riots by Moslems over the Danish Cartoon Imbroglio.)
Victor Hanson comments on the widely different standards that are applied to our conduct of the war versus our enemies' conduct. He also notes that our power is sufficient to win our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq but that the power of our press and the way each side is portrayed makes our war a race:
Imagine this war as a sort of grotesque race. The jihadists and sectarians win if they can kill enough Americans to demoralize us enough that we flee before Iraqis and Afghans stabilize their newfound freedom. They lose if they can't. Prosperity, security and liberty are the death knell to radical Islam. It's that elemental.
I've long used this analogy. So of course I like it. Only one side can win this race and there will be no silver or bronze for the runners up. That may be too black and white for some to accept, but there is no nuance involved here. It really is that elemental.
We need more than the ability to endure low-level casualties. We need to have confidence that we deserve to win.
We must believe we are better than our enemies. We must deride the so-called "sensititivies" of our enemies as the pathetic whinings of our inferiors.
We must defend our freedom of speech not by loudly condemning imagined restrictions on our free speech by our President; but by loudly dedending our right to free speech even about Islam in the face of Islamist rants.
We must believe that our lack of perfection does not make us inferior to our enemies who, on a good day, do not rise to our levels of behavior on a bad day.
Contemplate that the very concept of "human shields" is meaningless to stopping our enemies. The fear of civilian casualties only applies to stopping Western attacks on our enemies because we care more about their childrens' lives than they care. Were we to surround the targets that our enemies go after with civilians, we'd only make our enemies happy and increase the carnage of innocent lives snuffed out.
Our war effort in the Long War would be a lot more successful if only our people shared the conviction that we are the good guys on the planet and that we deserve to win over the beheading, suicide-bombing monsters who successfully pose as victims of the America that all too many "progressive" Americans believe exists--an America at fault for the world's problems.
This war wouldn't even be a race if we could do this.
