Islamic terrorists also harm Muslims in their own country, it's not just "fighting back" against America like some action revenge movie.

They live to disrupt. They launch violent campaigns in their own communities to enforce hardline sharia everywhere as far as they can reach. They brainwash boys into thinking that everyone outside of their narrow sect, is the enemy. They pay for the boys food, health and "education" over many years to put them on the jihad path, and I don't mean the good type of jihad.

Look up the Peshawar school massacre, and notice how that had nothing to do with America, it was terrorists being terrorists. Sneaking into a school and shooting as many kids as they possibly could. Yep... keep those media reports coming in, we won't stop reporting it.

One terrorism breeds another. Sweep in front of your own house before pointing out the dirt in front of neighbor’s.

I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure "freedom" is one of the other principles of what Americans do things in the name of. You know, like freedom to drive a car even if you're a woman. That sort of thing.

They really hate it when other powers repress these basic freedoms.

I'm not trying to suggest United States is perfect, but there's a reason why so many refugees are flooding into Europe... hint: they're not fleeing from US drone strikes.

At the same time they block the UN in everything related to the oppression of Plestinians by Isreal and US puppet governments.

Like I said, let’s start with the biggest global terrorist - the US government that btw helped in the creation of ISIL. There is a nice analysis here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/...

The fact that you have to use square quotes there may hint at the difference.

OTOH, while the US was backing unpopular dictators in Latin America like it does in the Middle East campus and engaging in mass direct and covert armed intervention against other regimes, violent (including terrorist) internal and international opposition to the US policy was also quite common.

But also, that was in the context of the Cold War, which both meant that the opponents often had state (perhaps indirect) support and that there were constraints on activity fron that sponsorship, because things like major attacks on the US homeland risked escalation against the sponsoring state.

Once again, the US isn't doing the same thing to LA as it is in the ME; when it was, LA produced anti-US terrorists, but the manifestation was difference because of the Cold War context, which both supported such terrorists and imposed constraints on them as condition of the support.

> You don't hear about suicide bombings in Venezuela or Cuba or the many other countries the US has meddled in.

The US meddling in those countries failed, though, and suicide bombings aren't the only terrorist tactic. Anti-US terrorist attacks we're not unheard of in LA when the US was successful in imposing unpopular dictators. (There's no real modern parallel in LA to the occupation of Iraq, or the US role in Israel-Palestine.)

> There are many former French colonies and you don't hear about these colonies producing homegrown terrorists to attack France.

Yes, places that France is not currently imposing an unpopular regime on or seen as currently meddling in a manner hostile too aren't generating the same kind of response current and ongoing US action in the Middle East provokes.

> We shouldn't confuse correlation with causation.

But that's exactly what you are doing with Islam, while steadfastly ignoring other factors.

We have seen that. In fact Cubans were the stereotypical anti-US terrorists before Arabs (often sponsored by Cuba and/or the USSR, during the Cold War) took over the role.

In the Cold War, Cuba played a role in Latin America very similar to that Iran plays now in the Middle East.

It's not the only unsolved problem.

Of course I'm not very worried about getting shot.