Fire Across the Middle East

There have been public uprisings across the Middle East lately, as crowds gather to protest their living conditions, political process, and call for their long-time leaders to step down.

It started in Egypt, then moved to Bahrain and Libya, with pundits and analysts extolling that just about any country over there was vulnerable.

I've heard some people claim that this spontaneous call for democracy is a justification for Bush jr's invasion of Iraq, since this is what his (eventual) stated goal was, and they were inspired by him.

This argument seems to have two main problems with it. The first country to feel the fire was Egypt. When the president offered partial concessions, the crowds insisted that it wasn't enough and they wanted the military to assume power.

When the protests started, the newscasters made the point that Egypt was our closest ally in the Middle East. Is this what we wanted for our friend? To kick him out of office with a military coup?

The second issue with attributing these protests to Bush is one of timing. If these are motivated by the American military might, why didn't they happen in 2003 when we ran the invasion? Why didn't they happen in 2004 when we enforced law by giving Saddam Hussein a trial rather than summarily executing him? Why didn't they happen in 2006 when he was finally executed? Why not when elections were held in Iraq, or when we withdrew troops, thinking that they would be available to support protestors in other countries?

Why now, two years after Bush has left office?

If anything, I think this proves just how misbegotten, wrong-headed and wasteful the invasion was. These protests are getting results, even to the point of removing leaders that had been in power for decades, and they have been largely peaceful. No invasion, outside-enacted regime change, or specious rationales required.