Notice that those are all slum nations and corrupt banana republics, with the exception of communist China with their ICBMs pointed at us. We rebuilt none of them, like we are planning with Iraq. None became reformist examples to a hostile region that we want for Iraq. AFAIK, battles there did little if anything to uplift or even pacify the region.
If we’re not really engaged in a war to defeat terrorism, by changing the tyrannical environment from which it grows and from which it’s supported, then I think that Fallujah is a great example. It allows an unrecognized balkanization of Iraq to fester, where kids grow up mesmerized by resistance stories against the infidels, and go on to build dirty bombs and harbor wanted terrorist without fear of anyone more pro-American than the Fallujah Brigade. Iraq looks pretty good for an election year, and maybe it won’t be a disaster for the next generation of Americans, or maybe it will.
A Balkanization of Iraq might not be a terrible outcome if controlled. Say a loose federation of Kurdistan, Mesopotamia (Baghdad) and so forth. Probably wouldn't be very stable, but it might be a start like our own Articles of Confederation were.
Only reason that we have resisted allowing Iraq to break up till now is the threat from Iran. Iran appears ready to fall apart again, as it periodically does.
I think that the conditions in this country are not yet ready for a mature debate about what is really going on: a major reshaping of the realities of the Middle East. If that were the enunciated policy the Media would be running around using the word "Crusade" and the ballgame would be over.