While I was opposed to the U.S. going to war against Iraq, I did not doubt that the U.S. would prevail. In fact, I presumed a quick victory, and we see, after an initial surprise of resistance, the far superior U.S. military has indeed made quick work of its Iraqi opponents. Given American control of the air with the most powerful and advanced war machine that exists, this is not too surprising.

Will all the sacrifice, the destruction of Baghdad and other cities, and those who gave their lives, both those who fought and civilians, be worth the result? It is difficult, if not impossible, to measure. But it is up to the United States and Britain, and the United Nations, to insure that these sacrifices were not made in vain.

A good beginning would be for the Bush Administration to conduct post-war foreign policy with an element of humility. We have relieved the Iraqis of a cruel despot, but in doing so we've destroyed their homes and thousands have lost loved ones, millions must endure great hardship. They have paid a great price for the transition to a post-Saddam world. Have we done a good thing? Or merely provided a lesser of two evils?

The Bush Administration launched this war, and its pre-war mobilization, with great arrogance and dismissiveness, alienating much of the world. It now has an opportunity to approach the post-war reconstruction in a way that will repair the perception of America the world over. Bush has somewhat begun to do that, insisting that Iraq will be run by the Iraqi people. But proof positive of American intentions will be seen by how we direct the reconstruction. We should provide Iraqi businesspeople with ample opportunity to take advantage of low-interest or no-interest loans to contribute to the rebuilding of Iraqi infrastructure. The reconstruction should no merely be a kickback to US Corporations, many of whom are Washington insiders.

America should help the Iraqis rebuild, and help them develop their resources, but not milk the country for the benefit of the huge multinational corporations, who pay our politicians campaign bills here at home. We should do what we can to insure that Iraq rebuilds in a way that lays the foundation for a solid economy that can foster the growth of a middle class. Ironically, Saddam's regime encouraged education to a greater extent than most other Arab regimes, and Iraqi citizens are, consequently, highly educated. Helping to rebuild the schools and universities should be top priority.

Some crusaders in Washington have posited that we should now maneuver to, one way or another, take over much of the region. But creating an American Empire is a dangerous proposition.

In doing so, as inequality grows throughout the world, we will be increasing the likelihood that terrorists will attack us here at home, as that will be the only means they see of countering the vast reach of our culture. America will respond by reducing internal freedoms, spending more on external defense, and cutting essential domestic programs. By extending the reach of our power throughout the world, we will become more threatened, and less free, at home.

After Iraq is on a good footing, America should gracefully exit.

Also see Tom Friedman's op-ed "Hold Your Applause".

And Bob Herbert's "Spoils of War"