Ready to admit it was far better to leave Muammar Gaddafi, Hosni Mubarak, Sadaam Husein, et. al., alone rather than play Thomas Jefferson and ‘spread democracy’?
No, they were not nice guys. But it takes a ruthless thug to deal with a ruthless thug.
Bush Sr. warned against going after Sadaam, but W had to play the rebellious child. Save Reagan, nobody was better on the international scene that GHWB and James Baker. But Condi and Donny would have none of it.
Obama's motives in toppling the remaining strongmen are far more questionable, as we know how he really feels about 'democracy'.
Saddam himself was involved in terrorism, including Islamist. For example, giving checks to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. I don’t regret taking him out, BUT we should have handled things differently.
You are absolutely right! All we created were vacuums into which anarchy and chaos invited the brutal sword of Islamic tribalism.
...rather than play Thomas Jefferson and ‘spread democracy’?
Thomas Jefferson's incursion onto the Shores of Tripoli were not to spread democracy, but to end the Barbary piracy upon American shipping. American independence ended the Royal Navy's protection of its former colonists' shipping, and Jefferson refused to pay the $300,000 Jizya tax that was demanded for our safe passage. That said, I am just as skeptical of this idiotic (and futile) notion of "nation building" as you are.
“Ready to admit it was far better to leave Muammar Gaddafi, Hosni Mubarak, Sadaam Husein, et. al., alone rather than play Thomas Jefferson and ‘spread democracy’?”
You are preaching to the choir.
Baker is a renown antisemite.
Saddam was the single most destabilizing force in the Mid East. It was a damned if you do and damned if you don’t topple him.