It was our moral obligation to go to war with Saddam, ask for an outline of details as I and as I recall Steve saw them if you want, but the moral case starts w

It was our moral obligation to go to war with Saddam, ask for an outline of details as I and as I recall Steve saw them if you want, but the moral case starts with "you broke it, you fix it" ... and come to think of it we followed the same pattern with Vietnam, except for our unprovoked breaking of that country vs. our responding to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. And that war was very successful and improved things in general, if for no other reasons than removing Saddam from power and blowing open the Khan nuclear production network (for which we rewarded Qaddafi with death...). It was also our moral obligation to properly handle the aftermath, after we'd finished completely breaking the country, and that's where the horrible failures started, with e.g. the appointment of the clueless proconsul Paul Bremer (although killing zillions of jihadists on ground of our choosing was one good result).