But by whose standards is the intervention "worse" than the pre-existing problem?  Sertainly not for Iran, they now have a pro-Iran Shia dominated government in Iraq (assuming it survives).  Certainly not, in general, for the Shia in Iraq who were oppressed by a minority for generations. 

And no, not everybody warned of the chaos that would ensue.  Many in Europe did, which of course you see as everybody, because you view europe as the end all be all of human achievement, and see everyone else as irrelevant.  That is fine if you want to live with blinders, there are many americans who do the same thing, quite a few in the current administration in fact.

And again, "helping people against their will" brings up the earlier question: Which people?  There were many Iraqi exiles who very much wanted help to return.  Certainly the Kurds and Shia had no particular love for the pre-existing situation, but I suppose those people can be safely ignored.

"The problems with just letting innocents get on with the way the(ir) lives are going, is that sometimes doing so is more inhumane in the long run than interfering."__gomper7

I agree that in many ways it was probably a humane thing to rid the citizenry of Saddam, but some in the U.S. government - and other governments - felt that it wasn't enough and instead of beginning on a course where it would have been out of Iraq by now instead it veered into where we are today. The "humanity" of it all had monetary and power motives. Thus, the intervention as we have come to see 
is hardly humane.

Bottom line, there was never any intent to leave Iraq to the Iraqis, it was a takeover of real estate with potential for resources dividends and strategic positioning for future operations. You think a half-billion dollar embassy not to mention enduring bases were and are being constructed so as to turn them over to the Iraqis? In this movie Shane doesn't go away, he sticks around and makes life for the townsfolk even more complicated and with more casualties than the previous boss man.

With that type of operation in place there is little room for “innocents”.

------------------------------------------------------------

"This has nothing to do with Bush."__Cryptomaniac

Nothing to do with Bush?  That's like watching a boxing match and someone next to me says it has nothing to do with one of the boxers. Yes, the Ahmadinejad/Ground Zero issue may not have Bush in the particular details but let's not dismiss the big picture here since this issue is part and parcel of it. Point blank, George is as thick into this as the pope is into catholicism and all the talk from government about bombing Iran doesn't particularly make him a naughty choir boy of no consequence. 

With regard to Ahmadinejad not saying a kind word about the U.S., oh, if he were the only one who ever said an unkind word about the U.S. we'd certainly have us a bona-fide demon for target practice, wouldn't we?  But the fact of the matter is that Ahmadinejad is merely the next convenient demon to throw before the public in order to jack them into a retaliatory mind set. Bin Laden, Hussein, Ahmadinejad; who's going to be next? Whoever gets in the way of government "business", that's who. Right now Ahmadinejad is not the obstacle to peace, but the obstacle to the U.S. getting their piece of the Middle East.

Forget Bush for a few minutes? Hey, I'd like to forget not only him but every other associate of his forever. But the people of Iraq won't be forgetting Bush so soon and neither will the millions of Americans like myself who instead of seeing an entrance into the 21st century with progress and resolve for a better future instead have witnessed an entrance with a war for special interests that fronts itself as that better future. It's certainly making for a bright and lucrative future for defense contractors and private military corporations but I'd hardly call that progress for peace.

Bush has nothing to do with the topic at hand? Ok, I'll play along. Ahmadinejad's already back in Iran, the issue about his visiting Ground Zero is yesterday's news. We're now back to Bush & Co. front and center with regard to the future of our country, to the future of our lives. Quick, wasn't it? The evil foreigner goes home and we’re left with the cowboy who according to the former president of Mexico, Vincente Fox, doesn’t even like horses.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/21/wbush121.xml

In short, some made damn sure that no one would even get the slightest idea by seeing Ahmadinejad at Ground Zero that perhaps he was really sincere in paying respects. What type of people would not want this to happen? How about:

"BUSH USES 50 FIREFIGHTERS AS PROPS IN DISASTER AREA PHOTO-OP: A group of 1,000 firefighters convened in Atlanta to volunteer with the Katrina relief efforts. Of those, “a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew’s first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas.” [Salt Lake Tribune; Reuters]

http://thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline

Enough said.