Yes there is. That's why the neoconservative philosophy supports the former.
And yet, when they got into power, that's not what they did.
It's a no brainer to try and create a stable government upon destroying a nation in a war. World War I and the sequel demonstrated that.
Even then it's dicey. We had good cause to go into Afghanistan. Now we are faced with the difficult situation of trying to impose federalism on a nation that has been tribal for as long as it has existed.
It's also a no brainer that going to war to try and impose self determination on a group of people who haven't signed on to that notion is a recipe for disaster.
We'll be lucky to get out of Iraq without being even more bloodied. As soon as we leave, Iran will go to work to try and split the nation and make a land grab that they couldn't accomplish while Hussein was there. The second we set foot into Iraq, we strengthened Iran considerably, and the circumstances and facts over the past six years support that.
Like most political philosophies, "neo-conservatism" briefs well, but is not grounded in any sort of reality.
....