Robert asks:
"..., what mighty thing, what glorious triumph, we've achieved in Iraq."
Tom says:
"We freed twenty million people from a tyrant, and from a dynasty that looked like it would have made Saddam's regime seem mild by comparison. Is this nothing?

I am flabbergasted that this fact is routinely shunted aside..."

Foxs says:
"I certainly don't think it can be considered nothing, and perhaps in time might stand as a mitigating factor in criticism of the war.

But for me it becomes a secondary issue because freeing the people was not a primary reason for invading Iraq. We supported the war, first and foremost, because we were told Iraq was making and possibly distributing WMD."

Tom was answering what was accomplished. Not why we went over there and kicked Saddam's butt.
Saddam will be a interesting footnote in history, but he is not very important- he didn't DO anything of any importance. All he did was mismanage his country causing misery and poverty. Preventing Saddam from doing further serious misery, won't be seen as much of a accomplishment from a historical perspective. E.g. If Saddam by some miracle had simply decided NOT to try to kill millions of Americans, that would hardly be considered as "doing much". It's like a murderer deciding not to continue murdering. Or robber deciding not to rob some 711.
Putting down the toilet seat is a bigger accomlishment.
What Bush has also acomplished is he has strengthened international law by not allowing Saddam to ignore his commitments. He has also increased US security by reminding countries that the US will pay the price in treasure & blood to maintain it's interests.