Perhaps you'd like to elaborate just how Iraq was improved by being invaded. I'm not fond of the place, but after so many casualties:
"In the United States, the cultural “gold standard,” as Andrew Bacevich has put it, for the
casualties that matter is the US uniformed soldier, killed in action. That number for Iraq
and Afghanistan, 6,051, is relatively small as America’s wars–or anyone’s wars, for that
matter–go: over 53,000 US soldiers died in the Korean War, and 405,000 in World War
II. But that small number is the result, one could argue, of the increasing emphasis over
the years on force protection, cost containment, and of the extent to which other allied
forces have fought, died, and been wounded alongside Americans. Force protection
efforts have kept down the number of US soldier deaths at the expense of higher numbers
of civilian deaths and injuries and, perhaps as well, of a more drawn out war with more
insecurity and violence. Cost containment efforts have led to the privatization of many
functions previously performed by soldiers and so high death and wounding rates among
the contractors who do those jobs, and much higher proportions of non-citizens doing that
work and taking the risk.
The Afghan, Iraqi, and other allied military deaths and injuries have been extensive. By
conservative estimate, nearly 20,000 of these troops have died, and over 68,000 have
been wounded. Together with the US numbers for troops and contractors of 8,000 dead
and 150,000 wounded, the total grinds up to 28,000 dead and 218,000 wounded,
officially or by conservative estimate.The true numbers are significantly higher.
Considering that many TBI, mental injuries, and toxic exposures in all the troops and
contractors involved are not symptomatic or diagnosed until return home, the actual
wounded figure is likely at least double the official 218,000.
More than twice as many Americans have died as a result of taking the country to war
after 9/11 as died on that day. The U.S. wounded of these wars – in uniform and out –
now number in the hundreds of thousands." - http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/11/attachments/Lutz%20US%20and%20Coalition%20Casualties.pdf
I can only conclude that this (Afghanistan, Iraq especially) was a colossal waste of humans. Moreover, it was based on lies, misunderstandings and ignorance.
Those figures above were generated by closely watched and documented Allied sources. Even then, you can probably double those numbers as suggested above.
G-d only knows how many Iraqis were killed and injured by us and the various insurgencies.
So, again: No, it wasn't worth it. No country is "improved/bettered" by that kind of carnage.
Again, I regret no "Prime Directive" exists.
I especially regret that the ones who declare and cause the various wars aren't forced to lead the troops into those wars as well as those who lead the industries and economies into those wars... To bad they are so very far from the hell they unleash, hiding behind their "principles, ideologies and 'need' for them to be at home, leading others".