I Both agree and disagree with your statement.

First, I completely agree that during most of world history, this were this bad or worse in terms of world politics. From the massacres of the past, to world rulers and conquerors, etc. etc. etc.

Secondly, I disagree that the post 9-11 shift in policy for the U.S. is excusable or insightinifcant in scope because of world history. The U.S. is a world superpower capable of something that no other civilization in world history has been capable of - complete world destruction, the ultimate trump card that has dramatically changed the world geo-political landscape since ww-2 - wouldn't you agree?

However, the U.S.A., being a young country, also shifted the geo-political landscape dramatically in 1776-1778 with the Constitution, and creation of the United States, a very defensible geo-political location that would shape foreign policy, and thrive to the point where it is today. And During this declaration of independence, they proclaimed a number of absolutely unbreakable rules.

Thus, a sort of trust was created between the population and the creation of the nation. (say that 10 times fast) A trust founded on the principles laid out centuries ago.

Now, 9-11. The most powerful superpower on Earth, which has thrived with a set of core values, is attacked, and the response...is to suspend some of those "never break" rules, in favor of security...

So, I disagree that it was not significant, and it had global ripples. The thing is, this isn't like the past, this is being played on the biggest scale ever, and is uncharted territory to some degree. Thus it is unknown how much we can expect the historical results of the past to be the exact result currently.