I think history will probably say the US became potentially powerful due to geography (resources and relative safety in the 1800s), as well as technological innovation and relative stability and freedom for a couple hundred years. But then, that WW2 and the Cold War led to becoming an empire, and that once the empire lost a (fairly real, if pointless) external enemy, it started casting about for enemies, and found two: external "terrorists" and any kind of uncertainty or decentralization (i.e. domestic freedom).
I'd prefer an American empire to a global caliphate, but that's not really the a likely decision. What is likely is a hegemonic US empire vs. some kind of decentralized system with autonomy and freedom at different levels (individuals retaining a lot, local governments and companies having some, provinces some, nation-states other, regions other, and global some). That would be a pretty clear choice, and I don't think you can say opposing a US empire is opposing the US overall.
I'd prefer an American empire to a global caliphate, but that's not really the a likely decision. What is likely is a hegemonic US empire vs. some kind of decentralized system with autonomy and freedom at different levels (individuals retaining a lot, local governments and companies having some, provinces some, nation-states other, regions other, and global some). That would be a pretty clear choice, and I don't think you can say opposing a US empire is opposing the US overall.