Yes.
US illegal aggression overseas can come home to bite you.
This failed conjecture is easily disproved for example by the Barbary Pirates episode* (see below) yet we hear it again and again. In reality the West can at most 'catalyse' the apparition of new islamist groups (usually inadvertently, due to bad assumptions regarding the nature of islam, like al Qaida, ISIS etc) but what creates them, and the huge monstrosities we witnessed, is islam itself. 'Ghazi' style warriors have always existed in islam I'm afraid, often held in high esteem by the whole Islamic community. In reality the
'rabbit hole' is much deeper than what many people think.
Al Qaida, IS, Boko Haram, al Shabab and so on may be defeated soon but the religion itself will continue to produce such organizations in other historical contexts, which could even become mainstream in better circumstances, for example if the West declines and / or if the influence of the Islamic world grows. The crux of the matter is that Islamism is not a modern invention but (in a slightly modified form) also an integral part of the classical Islamic civilization, with strong roots in basic Islamic traditions. Part of the confusion in the minds of ordinary people comes directly from Western Academia where even scholars of the old orientalist school (after 1945, active before Edward Said ideas conquered Academia) marched the often heard now idea that islam is not Islamism or at least that jihad as a religious duty to expand Islamic rule to the whole globe was secondary to more 'secular' reasons for conquest even during the Middle Ages.
The problem is of course that Muhammad, the 'right guided' caliphs, and many Islamic scholars of the middle Ages said something very different, the idea of rightful 'booty' and islam comes in the same 'package', the Umayyads were far from being 'quasi-secular' in spite of preserving some pre-islam characteristics, and generally in the middle Ages faith was very important (as a side note here neither is the alleged 'important' progress made by the 'classical islam' a viable conjecture, the fact that finally only the foreign intervention, of the European Powers, brought the Islamic world in the modern era says everything, in reality the progress was extremely modest, no reason to expect the necessary great changes in the future if the basic assumptions behind islam are left basically intact).
Sadly the truth is that the islam taught and lived by Muhammad is islamist at the core and offensive jihad to extend islamic rule to the whole Earth was central both to the founder of islam and the medieval Islamic civilization (according to basic Islamic traditions; happily we can at least approach the islam taught by Muhammad, not all interpretations of islam are equally probable). The Islam of Muhammad is also largely incompatible with Modernity even if jihad is pushed into the background, no surprise that the whole Islamic world is characterized at best by 'half-sharia' states, where sharia is at least a source of the laws, something which make the introduction of modern legislation conflicting with it very very difficult. Finally the postmodernist reinterpretations of islam, like those we see in the West which continue to keep the inerrantism of the quran, are unlikely to be the key to success (as evidence proved plenty in the last 70 years they cannot exist outside the strong pressure exercised by the non muslim world; by the way exactly because they are far far fetched, only by openly accepting that Human Reason has precedence over Tradition and even part of Revelation can they become viable).
What we need is a real Islamic Enlightenment and this is not possible without important changes at the theological, educational and institutional levels of islam. In other words islam needs a transformation. Instead of defending the 'mainstream' islam of today (which preserve much of the infrastructure of the old medieval islam and keep the door way open for important returns toward the past) we should rather encourage the apparition of a 'critical mass' of muslims who are not inerrantist; only by exposing muslims to the idea that maybe islam is not the last word can we hope to achieve something on long term, the advent of a 'critical mass' of 'muslims 'moderate' in the western sense of the word, capable to 'direct' islam where they want.
The approach of 'progressive' liberals toward the same outcome via leaving islam basically untouched is pure fantasy, what they propose lead actually in the other direction, where islam 'directs' even more people's lives via important returns toward the past, especially if the West declines and / or muslims gain political and military power. Unfortunately there are ideologies which just cannot be improved much by being generous with them and I'm afraid the islam of the last 1400 years proves plenty of being one. Only truth can set us all free here.
* the Barbary Pirates had not been harmed at all by the newly created America and yet they attacked American vessels; as their ambassador to London explained to Jefferson and Adams in the 1780s:
"The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their prophet; that it was written in their Koran; that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners; that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Mussulman who was slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."
