When we look at the condition of the countries that we have removed dictators, we see major unrest and chaos as you've said. Why this is denied by so many is really strange. Why would this be denied, turn on the damn news and have a look right. So the question for me is, do we have two consecutive administrations pushing an agenda of destabilization for an end goal not readily recognized? Or do we have two consecutive administrations that are grossly incompetent? Neither one is a comforting thought. At any rate, I disagree with the notion of "regime change" for the reason that we Americans and people's in the West in general aren't told the truth to begin with. Dictators while far from benevolent are a stabilizing force. With just the example of Iraq alone, not only was the entire threat a fabrication, nothing we were told about the war was true. Don Rumsfeld Rumsfeld said WMD was in every point on the compass from Baghdad. When asked how long this war would be he said six days, six weeks, I doubt six months. When Bush was asked by congress what it would cost, he said, 80 billion. As we know, that turned out to be a mere down payment. No one asked, but had they, they would not likely have been told that it would cost us 4,500 servicemen/women's lives.
And then we have people who actually support this stuff on a humanitarian basis, but looking at the humanitarian crisis in Iraq now, is our proof of failure, and waste of blood and treasure. The safe haven (ie stability) that Christians once enjoyed in Syria, gone. There's nothing but misery in that nation now.
