I think in the case of somewhere like Bosnia. We probably should have gone to War. Certainly a kind of "if you commit one more atrocity whoever you are, serb, muslim or croat, you will be at war with us " kind of thing. The same for Ruanda. I think in both those situations there was little other way. The shooting and massacres were already going on.
I don't think I raq was the same. The situation was more complex. Its my personal opinion and maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think the war was the right move. I think it was started because GW had an obsession with it. Not for any strategic or humanitarian benefit. The other stuff was tacked on to try and justify his and Blairs actions.
And what of the war on Terror. Most of the 911 terrorists were Saudi. A country with bad human rights record and definately not a democracy. What is Bush doing about that? Sweet FA because its all about money. There was no economic benefit in Bosnia. Nor in Ruanda. but there is in the middle east so we put up with govts like Saudi and go to war on the Iraqis. Its hypocracy and just plain wrong. Bush foreign policy is a mess and ours is going down the same tube. we have secret services. I'm sure they could have worked from the inside to bring down Saddam.