We were protecting against Communism in those nations. We weren't there protecting ourselves from getting killed. If he intends to ring out our role as the world's lone supercop, he will get my applause.
Exactly, that's how we won. Today, there are different enemies, and different wars (asymmetrical), and different regions of theater. "Fighting [alQaeda, Islamofascists] there so we don't have to fight them here" is exactly about that.
If he intends to ring out our role as the world's lone supercop
We are not there entirely alone, nor are we playing "supercop" there. Same people who want us to leave Iraq (and Iran), where we fight real enemies who are there to defeat us because of who we are, want us to be "supercop" in Darfur and other places where we don't [yet] have an enemy. Same as in Kosovo where we didn't have national interests, nor NATO allies' interests' have been attacked, yet we played "supercop" there.
Destroying one enemy in Iraq (Saddam) and staying there to attract and kill and capture the resources of a bigger and more elusive ones (al-Qaeda, Iran) while simultaneously building and protecting the foundations of allied governments in the region is not playing "supercop", it's essential for our very survival. Our problems with Iraq are not in Iraq, they are in Iran and Washington (and, by extension, their allies in New York and Hollywood).