Your original quote: "Even if we grant that one actually can free a civilization by invading them against their will, blowing up any opposing Iraqis and then occupying them for an indefinite period in which we hold all meaningful political power." I think you referred to this idea as "fornication for chastity."

You are correct in that we went to war not to liberate Germany and Japan, but because they declared war on us and we had to defend ourselves. The case is a bit fuzzier in terms of liberating places like France, but it has to be admitted that this was a secondary motivation. While alternate history speculation is dangerous, I believe that if Japan had left us alone, and raped eastern Asia, that we may have sent some support to China, but would have done little else. Similarly, if Germany had simply settled within acceptable borders and not gotten a bad case of Manifest Destiny, we would have probably left them alone too. We wouldn't have heard about the Jews until much, much later. If at all.

But the motivation is irrelevant to this particular argument, which is whether or not it is feasible and effective to reform a nation positively* by armed force.

We went into those nations with full military force, nations that were NOT welcoming us in, nations that did their god-damnedest to see that we died trying. We invaded them, blew up MILLIONS of their people, and used naked force to obliterate their current governments and force them to change.

Whether we did it from self-defense or not was completely irrelevant to those Japanese or Germans fighting us. Do you think their responses, military and emotional, would have been one bit different had we simply come out of the blue and decided to attack a peaceful Japan? A non-belligerent Germany? Did a single Japanese or German soldier suddenly lay down their arms declaring, "well, hey, we started it, didn't we?" No. They laid down their arms because we (the Allies) beat the crap out of them.

The methods worked. Both nations ended up with completely new methods of government and prospered.

I don't know what percentage of Japanese or Germans were relieved and encouraged to see us show up and take out their governments, as opposed to those who supported the current regimes. I know a good percentage of Iraqis were glad to see us show up. A lot of them--the ones not in the mass graves--wished we had shown up ten years ago after the Gulf War. We actually stand a good chance of doing the job right in Iraq.

China is not free yet, and neither is Vietnam. You are correct in that they have a good chance at reforming themselves--China has come quite a ways since the Cultural Revolution for example--but I ain't holding my breath just yet.

The "Eastern Bloc" was essentially part of the Soviet Union, so can't really be counted as separate examples.

However, to add points in your column, there are other examples that I thought of since then. The Sandinistas actually allowed themselves to be voted out of office, which is a small miracle in itself, and I think a number of non-communist dictatorships have decayed of their own accord in places like Africa.

*It sure as hell is possible to change a nation negatively by armed force. It's been done for thousands of years.