Actually, it was our lack of a "large" standing army that made both of those operations the clusterfucks they became....True, having a large standing army of trained soldiers made Iraq (and Afghanistan for that mattter)
In both cases we went in with far fewer than the numbers needed to accomplish the mission. As result, those engagements wound up lasting longer, costing more in lives and treasure, and accomplishing less than if we had gone in with sufficient force to not only bring down the regimes, but provide the security environment needed to stand up effective new governments.
The "Rumsfeld Doctrine" of attempting to conduct these operations on the cheap completely backfired.



