Neoconservatives have been asking that very question. I was asked once toooften so I thought I'd take a bit more time with an answer.
I'll start with a neocon who was in the news last Thursday: Richard Perle, known as "the Prince of Darkness" in some circles.
Adviser resigns: Richard Perle, one of the most outspoken advocates for invading Iraq, has quietly resigned from the Defense Policy Board, an influential bipartisan Pentagon advisory group. [Detroit Free Press 02/26/2004]
This is the same Richard Perle who resigned his Chairmanship of the same Defense Policy Board March, 2003, when questions were raised about his dealings with bankrupt Global Crossing.
He's also the same Richard Perle who, on the day after the infamous "Mission Accomplished Gung-Ho Flyboy photo op on a carrier" episode, gushed:
"Relax, Celebrate Victory," By Richard Perle May 2, 2003
"From start to finish, President Bush has led the United States and its coalition partners to the most important military victory since World War II. And like the allied victory over the axis powers, the liberation of Iraq is more than the end of a brutal dictatorship: It is the foundation for a decent, humane government that will represent all the people of Iraq.
"This was a war worth fighting. It ended quickly with few civilian casualties and with little damage to Iraq's cities, towns or infrastructure. It ended without the Arab world rising up against us, as the war's critics feared, without the quagmire they predicted, without the heavy losses in house-to-house fighting they warned us to expect."
He didn't do so well with that, and things don't seem to have gone a lot better since. A few months later, Salon told us:
"D.C.'s 'Prince of Darkness' has prospered in the shadows between the Beltway and big business — but the latest scandal threatens to bring him down...