A lot fewer people would have died in Iraq on both sides had we gone in with 3 million troops instead of 300,000, which was a lot fewer than we sent to Vietnam but a much larger country, by area.  We didn't have enough troops to provide security for the people after we took out the Ba'ath Party, which was the only security they had.  That left them vulnerable to sectarian violence, and they blamed us for that.

Bush41 went into Kuwait with over 900,000 troops and a much smaller objective.  That war was over in 100 hours, and we only had 172 casualties.

We went "all in" against the Axis powers on two fronts in WWII, and it was over in 3 years, 9 months, and 12 days.  Are the Japanese and German people better off because we won, or not?

These half-assed pin pricks we've used since WWII drag out wars and get more people killed.  Diplomacy never solves the underlying problems and leaves tyrants in power.  We need more boots on the ground.