we were not "foisting our way of life" on iraq until SADDAM HUSSEIN invaded our ALLY kuwait, with whom WE had a treaty of defense. he was defeated, and signed CEASE FIRE agreements which he REPEATEDLY broke. we were justified in reentering iraq at any time after he threw out the inspectors.
perhaps you should read the "iraqi liberation act of 1998" signed into law by bill clinton after hussein violated the cease fire agreement that ended the gulf war
http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/libera.htm
in which he clearly states that we are going to help the dissident faction of iraq overcome saddam hussein and were going to "help them back in to the community of nations", ie foist our way of life on them
i cant imagine the kind of cruel heart that sees people ground into the dust by polpots, castros, husseins, stalins, maos of the world and says "hey, if they didnt like it theyd change it or move, not my problem". you are obviously so spoiled by the safe free world you live in that you dont even think its remotely necessary to understand the circumstances that obtain in other countries.
you think the people of iraq "chose" to be ruled by saddam hussein??? you think they were free to move about as they wish? make money and save it in nice stable banks like you and just hop on a plane and leave? you must then think other countries dont need to have "our way of life" foisted on them because they already HAVE it. they do not.
in order for the people of a country to choose their leaders there have to be certain elements in place, political liberty, stable rule of law, private property rights vouchsafed by a judicial system based in predictable procedural due process and most importantly, a system of government in which the GOVERNMENT is answerable to the people, NOT the other way around. very few countries in the world have these elements and iraq had NONE of them.
the greatest examples ever of "foisting our way of life on people" was the resounding success of the marshall plan after world war 2. you think japan and west germany became stable, first world democracies overnight after the war ended? should we have left them under the yoke of nazi totalitarianism and the emperor? how far do you extend your sink-or-swim attitude? should the world have hassled south africa into ending apartheid?
the president of the US is the commander in chief of our armed forced. he is required to get the advice and consent of the US CONGRESS before going to war, NOT the "UN", and he DID. he laid out 26 reasons for going to war, only 2-3 of which dealt with WMD, and congress voted to authorize the war. see? thats how it works. the UN in an advisory body of diplomats that ATTEMPTS to solve world disputes with talk. it is NOT a world government that has a higher authority of the US than our own constitution. the UN is a made up, ideologically driven human instution of dubious genesis and short history. like the league of nations, it will be a distant memory one day