When there's a conflict, I generally look at the "weight" of the opponents. Can you, with a straight face, call Iraq a real opponent or even threat for the US? More than that, do you think the US really needed allies to invade Iraq? (except for trying to use them to legitimize the war).
It's very easy to throw statements after the facts and aftermath is known, many years after it happened. But when events are hot, it's another story. Lets forget about Iraq, and return thinking about notion of ally, in it's essence.
If you're beating up a little guy you don't need allies. You need fellow bullies.
And your whole notion about "hot events" is ridiculous. It wasn't like Iraq in 2003 was USSR v2 and only the US intervention stopped it from taking over half of the world...
When there's a conflict, I generally look at the "weight" of the opponents. Can you, with a straight face, call Iraq a real opponent or even threat for the US? More than that, do you think the US really needed allies to invade Iraq? (except for trying to use them to legitimize the war).