You can hold your view, it does not matter, after all, that you are stating above, I too agree with it that we need to raise the cost for adversary however at the same time we need to keep in mind our current circumstances from political to economic stability before we can be in a position to hit back. A decade ago we could not imagine our enemies taken out on foreign soil. In fact, they were living there with impunity. Now they are not! This is something.
Yes we can do more like stopping attacks on our soldiers one like today, save lives, but it's going to take a while.
On the other hand, a decade ago we could knock off a RAW officer abroad and now we can't imagine doing that. So, we have traded lower-end gains while the real backers are getting more and more out of reach.
I believe the beauty of asymmetric approaches and capable intel orgs is that they allow you to punch beyond your weight --- so, even against overwhelming odds, you have a deniable solution to deal with foreign nations creating trouble for you and DIRECTLY being involved in the slaughter of your citizens and security forces. The trouble is that we didn't modernize with the times, so we can hunt the terrorists but not those who fund, train, and support them --- thus we end up in a cycle of violence where we keep taking out what RAW considers replaceable cannon fodder.
I am 100% with you in the welcome targeting of enemies beyond our borders.