You must have absolutely no sense of the history of human armed conflict. The Troop to casualty ratio over time has got to be one of the most astoundingly low in recorded history. The successful meeting of stated objectives, from toppling the Taliban, to ousting the Baathists, to establishing democratic processes has been tremendously swift.
Yet you and your ilk wail and gnash teeth because the execution has not been absolutely perfect. If you want an example of "not handled well" by civilian leaders, look to the Johnson Administration's handling of Vietnam, and the aftermath as advocated by Young Johnny Kerry. Can you say "throwing away troops for no reason but politics" and "abandoning a people to totalitarian hell"?
Lex, look at the Brookings Report. It's full of "stated objectives" not met.
I'm a professional historian, and wholeheartedly agree with you about Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam.
I'm just not sure ousting the Baathists, only to have them replaced by Shi'ite Islamacists allied with Iran will be a strategic gain.