The White anglosaxon protestant (WASP) countries are only interested in keeping other countries under their influence, so they can continue to exploit resources and any other geopolitical advantage they can to keep on top of the pecking order in the world. They are in direct competition with the Russians and increasingly the Chinese.
Muslim countries from the early days of Islam have been seen as a threat and these people have been in conflict with us, sometimes as individual countries, other times as unified blocs. Until you are subservient to them they continue to malign you regardless of whatever image you try to portray.
We are not the same as the Indians, we never will be. They don't consider the Indians a threat because Hinduism has been isolated to the area around India for thousands of years, they don't see it as crossing into "their territory" and India has accepted a subservient role to them, serving their interests vis a vis China, opening it's doors to western corporations to exploit indian workers via outsourcing etc.
Now back to your original point, it doesn't make much sense, you're trying to draw parallels where none exist. What you term as "islamist power" is a basic necessity, it was required to support the struggle in Kashmir and to have influence in Afghanistan because we can't compete with the Indians financially or diplomatically.
Furthermore soft power is developed by governments. The Indians for all their flaws have much better governance than us, and it is seen in the capitalist success they are having, as well as in the diplomatic success. We don't have soft power, because we have incredibly terrible government. I don't think there are many Pakistani's alive who've experienced a competent government, i think the last one was probably during the times of Ayub Khan.
i replied to him look at me did i look dangerous ?
