Wouldn't the same argument apply in reverse to the Roman Empire, which was brought about by the destruction of the Roman Republic?
Perhaps, but since the Roman Empire, unlike the modern republics I mentioned, no longer exists, I don't spend too much time worrying about its origins.
I prefer monarchy to republicanism in theory, but concede pragmatically that republicanism may be acceptable in practice when it is more compatible with a particular country's heritage and traditions.
It does not follow from the fact that I oppose the transformation of monarchies into republics that I am obliged to oppose the transformation of republics into monarchies with equal vehemence. The Netherlands was once a republic, but now that it has been a kingdom for almost 200 years I would prefer that it remain one.