Please clarify...where do you suggest we went wrong? Holding elections in Iraq? Encouraging democracy? Invading Iraq? Desert Shield/Desert Storm? The creation of the state of Israel?
I mean, it's real easy to say democracy won't hold there. And I won't say you're wrong. There's substantive debate possible on the subject. But the options that spring to mind, leaving Saddam in power, establishing our "own" dictator, etc ALL seem far worse than trying and giving other peoples a chance.
Was the creation of the Israel state a wise one in hind-sight? Given the turmoil of what's gone on since, it is a legitimate question to ask. I don't have the answer, either - I'm too young to understand the problems that faced the world body politic in its day. Maybe it goes back even further; to the resolution at the conclusion of WWI and the holding of Germany economically accountable for that war.
Anyhow, the United States will be paying the indirect costs for our hand in those decisions for a long, long time to come. All we can do is to continue playing our cards and keep making the 'calls' and 'checks' while we still have chips on the table.
We should eliminate all foreign aid...its unconstitutional and, as Senator Helms, once correctly noted...its money down a rat hole. Once the US cuts off all foreign aid to all foreign governments, the US government won't have to deal with the uncomfortable situation of having to cut off that aid to a democratically-elected government that's brought into power through an election we endorsed. Of course, we have the right to dispense foreign aid wherever we like...but the reality is that cutting off aid to the Palestinians after the election to Hamas (which is an enemy of Israel but not the US) will be seen as another example of US one-sidedeness in the Middle East. In the end, the push for democracy was, I believe, intended to eliminate the backwardness and authoritarianism of Middle Eastern governments because those conditions were seen as conducive to terrorism against the US. So obviously, the Arab and Muslim perceptions of the US are important to us and underly our approach to the Middle East. But, its no secret that the US is mostly reviled in the Middle East...for lots of reasons...the (correct I think) perception that we prop up corrupt regimes there...the perception that we benefit economically from the existence of these regimes...the (correct) perception that we favor Israel in their disputes with Arab Muslims...and the fact that as the lone superpower...we get a lot of blame for everything....fair or unfair
I think invading Iraq was a mistake...it seems to me that it will do nothing to improve our image in the minds of the Iraqis...I don't believe Saddam was ever really a serious threat to the US...and might even have been an ally had we not intervened in Iraq's invasion of Kuwait (it is a fact that Iraq approached the Bush Administration before invading Kuwait and was told by April Glaspie that the US was "not interested in Mid East border disputes"). The US maintained a permanent base presence in Saudi Arabia after Desert Storm...which was the original gripe of Bin Laden against the US.
I think that democracy in Iraq will ultimately strengthen Iran and, unless the US maintains a presence in Iraq for years to come (not something I think any of us want to pay for or have our children or grandchildren pay for)...the country will ultimately split apart...strengthening both the Shiites in Iran and Sunnis in Syria.
I guess I'm a non-interventionist (an isolationist some would say disparagingly)...the history of US foreign policy (and all nations; foreign policies) is one of unintended consequences...I think minding our own business is the best route...just my opinion