Redux

Iran/Contra - selling weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages then funding and arming the Contras in Nicaragua with the proceeds - illegal
Iraqgate/BCCI - funding and arming Saddam through shadow bank transfers - illegal
School of the Americas - propping up right wing "democracies" in South America by training para-military thugs to oppress (kill) dissenters
Torture of detainees at Gitmo and black prisons.- violations of Geneva Conventions and UN Convention against Torture

You didnt address any of the above.

I am a believer in the rule of law.

Even beyond that, the first two (Iran/Contra, Iraqgate) came back to bite us in the ass, one with a propaganda advantage we gave them on a silver platter and the other with our own weapons...Chavez came to power in Venezuela with his anti-American campaign, including rallying against the killing of trade unionists and indigenous leaders by para-military trained at the School of Americas....and our Iraq invasion/occupation and torture policies, by many reports, inlcuding NIEs to Bush, have been a "cause celebre" for terrorist recruitment.

added:

Then consider Clinton's response to the Bosnian civil war/ethnic cleansing v Bush's Iraq folly...both nation's governed by thugs who oppressed (killed) civilians but neither of which presented a direct or immediate threat to the US.

Bosnia - a true NATO partnership, total of less than 10 US deaths, and less than 100 civilian deaths after NATO intervention, resolved by forceful diplomacy involving all parties, even the bad guys that neocons would probably not have allowed at the table (dayton accords)

Iraq - few willing partners (most were bribed with US aid) 4,000+ US deaths, an estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths, a new constitution that relies heavily on sharia law and a nation still facing significant instability, a stronger Iran in the region as a result,....

Granted, there are signficant differences of circumstances, but which approach was more successful?