[arp242]

I'm just explaining what the thought process was that lead up to the invasion.

But yes, I broadly agree with you. Although I'm somewhat sceptical you can do this kind of state-building imposed from the outside in the first place though. But if you must do it, then the way the US went about it was clearly the wrong way.

[throw310822]

> I'm just explaining what the thought process was that lead up to the invasion

Are you sure you explained the thought process, or you just explained the justifications and the propaganda in support for a plan that had different purposes? Because of course if you need to convince an entire country (including its politicians and intelligentsia) to start a war, handwaving things such as "democracy", "domino effect" and spreading fears about WMDs is an obvious strategy.

[const_cast]

The way you do it is covertly and from afar. You need the people to think they wanted their own revolution. It's what we do today and in the past across Africa. Soft-colonialism just works better.

Turns out, if you come in with guns and start making demands the people will hate you. And you need the people. The people aren't just the dudes living in a country - they are the country.

[moomin]

I think your scepticism is justified. Reading about Germany invasion the 1950s suggests it didn’t go massively well there. But they didn’t even try.