Really, it's hard to say that the fruits of the Iraq invasion have been reaped, since the result has not yet been decided. One way or another, the issue will be settled, sooner or later. Things will improve for our security if a stable entity, friendly with the West, emerges. I suppose that has always been Bush's intent, though he is not very good at making that clear.
A worse alternative is what could happen if we cut and run; we could get a radical Shiite state, friendly with Iran.
In any case, Saddam's regime always posed a clear danger to the Middle East and the world, taking him out should have been a no brainer. The only benefit I see to having left him in power was the counterpoint he posed to Iran, which now has more freedom to focus its designs elsewhere.
Got to love the way the DO Nothings try to posture as tough guys by pretending they would have committed the force elsewhere. The fact of the matter is the Neo Isolationists who of NEVER done anything but piss and moan. They merely invent some reason other place we should be fighting to avoid admitting they actually would rather we DO nothing. Real simple fact keeps escaping them. We had the political, moral, legal and military consensus to take out Iraq. We HAD no such consensus for an attack against any other of the Neo Isolationists make believe foes. Also, the Neo Isolationists dogma flunks basic Military strategy as well.
You still cling to your mistaken emotion based feelings. Basic strategy lesson for you.. You do NOT leave a foe in the field unfought and commit your force to another major fight against another foe. Saddam had to go. We could not leave him hanging on our flank and commit significant military forces to another battle. Saddam was the most immediate problem. EVERN if Al Gore had won in 2000 and 09-01 happened, we would be doing the EXACT same thing. All the Leftist Democrat Talking Points are so much nonsense. There was no alternative but to take out Iraq