The thing with critics is that anyone can be one, it's easy, especially with hindsight.
What is difficult is being in the position of ultimate responsibility over the lives of many people, making a decision and living with it. Everyone thinks they know what is best or what they would do, I don't think so.
Criticism (IMO) should always have a response on what should have been done instead, given the information at the time. Otherwise it's just playing Monday morning quarterback.
Is supporting Philippine control of the Philippines a hard position to argue to? It is really easy to propose better strategies than almost anyone was going with in the early-mid 20th century, it is hard to overstate how badly the leadership of that era got it wrong. The US system did an amazing job of outperforming the Europeans and Asians, but it wasn't because the quality of its people was higher. The US presidents didn't suddenly become incompetent with Trump and Biden - they've consistently been not up to the task and it is just the visibility in the modern era is a lot better.
The only reason the US managed to look good coming out of the 1900s is because they were doing a much better job of limiting the government than the Europeans or Asians. Both of whom had significant authoritarian factions that managed to get embedded in the official power structures and refused to see sense for an embarrassing number of decades. Very much critics-don't-count people, the authoritarians. It is amazing looking back at the trials Europe had to go through to see out the monarchies.
"It is not the critic who counts..." was a great speech and there is a kernel of truth there, but it just so happens that there is a reason it is a US president who gave it. The reason the US does so well is it makes it as hard as possible for the president to do anything because the critics are shooting fish in a barrel when they start making legitimate, accurate and important criticisms of US president that certainly do count. It is a dream of the US presidents that the critics would stop reminding everyone that there are better options that said president should be choosing.
What is difficult is being in the position of ultimate responsibility over the lives of many people, making a decision and living with it. Everyone thinks they know what is best or what they would do, I don't think so.
Criticism (IMO) should always have a response on what should have been done instead, given the information at the time. Otherwise it's just playing Monday morning quarterback.