The thing you are missing is that every action like that carries a risk of causing a war much larger than the original action. As a matter of fact within military circles even the Bin Laden raid was criticised because almost all other operations were cordinated with Pakistan and since Pakistan is particularly unstable and also nuclear the risk was considered worth it for the value of the target, but there was a major potential for escalation and lots of political capitol was expended to quell the reaction to that action.

China is not nearly as constrained by diplomatic inroads or other mechanisms at play (such as cultural considerations) that would vastly change the potential of any overt action against China causing an exponential series of increasing escalations that could end up as a major war.

I'm not excusing China and not saying the US or other western countries should lay down for China's increasingly agressive diplomatic and strategic actions, but rather that the utmost care should be taken in the response, just as the US is doing in the conflicts going on in the south China sea and increase in espionage cases.

As an Iraq combat vet who has spent quite a bit of time trying to understand these subjects, my general thought is that I really dislike so many armchair quarterbacks speculating and being so eager to throw away others lives, even if in the of potentialities such as your suggestion. War is one of the most horrible things humans can ever experience and any avoidance of it should be sought in almost all cases possible. It's also annoying how many of those armchair quarterbacks usually don't volunteer to serve themselves.