it's worth remembering what the argument against the invasion of iraq actually was, on the left.

nobody argued it was immoral. nobody - on the left - argued it was costly. there was a scholarly argument against the legality of it, but the implication was that it would have been fine, if the united nations hadn't voted against it, which made it a sort of a red herring on the question of if it was actually justified. and, nobody argued in terms of cultural relativism, either, if you want to even imagine what that means, as applied to the baathist regime of saddam hussein.

rather, the argument was "we can't do it for them. they have to do it themselves.".

and, there was no movement on the ground in iraq, except a movement towards backwardsness. bush went on tv and argued that they'd treat us as liberators; smart people knew better.

the situation is reversed in iran. it is still true - they have to do it themselves. but, they're trying. i'd like to help.