But how many of the radicals we need to be world police for came about as a reaction to the US trying to be world police?
I think that's what Mr.Y is trying to say.
edit:
To elaborate: What I reckon that Y argues, is that the US military is a creation of the past, tailored to be
the deciding factor in the Cold War struggle against an opponent applying a similar strategy. Like a pair of twins, together with the Soviet equivalent, it grew to an unprecendented size, being the
de facto focus of USA's budget spending over roughly half a century. After the fall of the Soviet Union, suddenly there wasn't any more clearly-defined enemy to justify the sustained funding of that huge military. Yet, due to the ingrained way of thinking about the world, instead of reducing the size and importance of that behemoth and refocusing the attention towards internal development and prosperity, new enemies were named to fill the void - China, Terrorism, Iraq&Iran, Extremism, Fundamentalism etc. USA appears to still be thinking in that outdated terms of Us & Them, the 'good ones' and the 'evil ones', etc. The world has changed and it's time to change with it, or suffer the same fate every other empire in history of mankind has suffered.
The point is, that there wasn't really any need for USA to become the world's policeman - it named itself one because it needed a
raison d'etre for it's military machine.