The post's author begins, "Let's assume Clinton means fewer people have died in Iraq than would have if we'd overthrown Saddam and left immediately, rather than if we'd never invaded at all. And let's also assume Bosnia and Iraq are closely comparable situations (as unlikely as that seems)."
Even assuming Bill is talking about "post Saddam", we are still looking at more than three years in the past. I would make the argument that had we left after accomplishing the two pre-set goals of our invasion (WMD and deposing Saddam) there would have been some form of international intervention to head off the civil war that has ensued as a direct result of our invasion.
However, I cannot bring myself to accept anything other than the obvious truth which is this: Our invasion and occupation of Iraq has resulted in the deaths of over 600,000 Iraqis and the displacement of some two MILLION more. Because I recognize this simple fact, I cannot/I will not accept a candidate for president who voted FOR the authorization and has yet to fully accept the error of that vote and the resulting responsibility for the lives lost as a consequence.