Barry Lando asks the question. He concludes:
The current outcry over a film insulting Mohammed is just the tip of an emotional iceberg. Underneath it all are more than half a century of Western and American interventions in the region, as well as the U.S.'s continued support of Israel.
While the U.S. has spent huge sums, trying to overthrow regimes, punish perceived enemies, prevent nuclear proliferation (except in Israel), and shape the outcome of the new political forces that are roiling the area, the Chinese have had their eyes fixed on one objective only -- getting hold of vital natural resources to fuel their ravenous economy, finding new markets for their products and mammoth projects for their construction companies.
Why can't the U.S. do the same?
That's the kind of basic questions that American should be discussing in the wake of the killing of the U.S. Ambassador, as they go about electing a new president.
But don't count on it.
And, of course, China is not inserting military bases into Middle East countries, or sending its troops in to "liberate" them. And China has its own history with intrusive foreigners from the West. You know, those Opium Wars? The Western forces that killed hundreds of Chinese during the Boxer Rebellion? (That same intervention depicted in a movie, 55 Days at Peking, featuring David Niven and Charlton Heston as yet another landmark in the history of the West's prevailing over Oriental barbarity? It still pops up on sundry movie channels. Ah, those good old days, huh?)
Read the rest of Lando's essay, here.