I'm amazed at how many people still see the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions as correct moves. Just last week I was having a friendly mostly non-political conversation with two of my coworkers and then the topic verged to the military and then to the Iraq wars. (For context, I'm Canadian and they're both US ex-pats in Canada.) Both had the opinion, still, that the Iraq war was the correct move at the time. But coul…
The initial Iraq invasion was to enforce Kuwaiti sovereignty and stop Saddam's unilateral aggression which was destabilizing the region. We tried bribing him with aid, but he still invaded, so the U.S. kept true to their promise to enforce agreements. The U.S. helped a small country and protected its image. The second Iraq war may or may not have been WMD based, but Saddam slaughtered hundreds of thousands of mostly…
I'm not saying that this isn't very bad, and worth stopping, but how is it different from what happens all the time on a lot of places on that region? (Is the US planning an invasion of Israel right now? I don't think so.)
Countries normally don't interfere on such things because doing it has a tendency of backfiring and making things worse than they were at the beginning. From my impression many thousands of km away, the US people mostly did held that opinion at the time, and would refuse to allow an invasion if the government didn't lie to them. Also, the WMD focus was such a blatant lie that it's impossible that anybody with any power believed it.