Yes you do. Extremist fundamentalist histories are not exclusive to just one of the three major Abrahamic religions. Christianity was also spread very wide via the sword but it went through its own liberalization process due to the many lengthy stretches of peace and prosperity Western countries experienced.
It's no coincidence that when you rank the Muslim states by their democracy index, the ones near the bottom are usually the ones that have a long history of being fucked with.
en.wikipedia.org
Christianity also went through several centuries of brutal and bloody war between different sects, Protestants vs Catholics, etc. up until and including the 20th century.
There are similar issues within Islamic nations, and it's not just Shia vs. Sunni, there are many minority groups including Christians and Kurds and Druze and many others.
Every country in the middle east has a rich and complicated history involving conflicts between ethnicities, religious groups, familial tribes. It's a complex web, and that lack of a shared identity is part of what makes it more difficult to form nations and states in the western sense, let alone democratic societies.
I'm certainly not trying to argue that western interventionism hasn't caused harm, but it's really not as easy as saying "if only they were left alone they would choose to build societies like ours." I think that's a naive way to approach global cultural differences. And democracy itself isn't always the bees knees, as plenty of examples have shown, so I'm not even sure it makes sense to view it through this lense.
Democracies require strong national identity, good education and a solid sense of comradary between citizens. They requires a level of transparency and accountability that doesn't always fit with pre-existing cultural values. And that's not to say those cultures are backwards or primitive, it's to say democracy may not be a universal solution.
The U.S. trying to forcefully impose democracy regardless of a country's particular circumstances is absolutely an unwise strategy, but that doesn't mean democracy is a natural outcome for every society.
With that in mind, you can ask yourself what role should the U.S. play on the global stage, and there are a multitude of interpretations and approaches to this, each with potential to do good and to cause harm.
It's also worth remembering that the British Empire, for all its many failings, actually was successful at creating democracies where none had existed before. Many of those still exist to this day. So was their interventionism justified?
Also, I don't think it's true that when Islamic Empires were the more developed and more enlightened, and Christian tribes or nations were the underdogs, that Islamic doctrine had any qualms about using and abusing them for their own purposes. So I'm not sure why it's incredibly unnatural to you when the situation is reversed. Perhaps it's the Christian sentiment of compassion, which I assure you does not exist in Islam.