I, too, am not enthusiastic about the US "strategy" in the Middle East, or rather, lately, the practical lack of one. Nor am I enthusiastic about the ill-fated strategy attempted by the US in Iraq and Afganistan. I believe we do need to go after our enemies, but that doesn't include "nation-building" on the premise of "fix what you broke." Let the natives build their own country and if the result is a dangerous enemy of the free world, then suffer the consequences. We stuck around in Iraq and Afganistan thinking we could change their hearts and minds and have them secure their own government. Sorry, they have a different set of values and we won't and shouldn't try to change that. Not much of what the US created and propped up lasted after we left.
Perhaps, Easy Steeet is correct that Russia is not the number one strategic threat. But I think Putin wouldn't mind changing that, and if the truth be known, he is in the background fomenting many anti- west activities in this world, including particularly those of Iran. He is a bigger threat than is obvious. I believe his objective is to restore super-power status of Russia, and do that primarily by undermining the welfare of the US and her allies. He needs to be consistently resisted because he promotes international insecurity. This is evidenced by the lack of a single true peace-seeking action from that country. Crimea, Ukraine, and even the remainder of former Soviet/Warsaw Pact states have no doubt about Vladimir's designs. We ignore them at our peril.