"We aren't the world's policeman." Fine. That is beside the point. Decide on policy: Either we will police certain evils, or we won't police certain evils. But don't cop out and say we are surrendering because the other side is killing too many of us when the death rates were historically low for the gains being achieved. Act like you have a pair, and just admit that you no longer want to achieve those objectives, and you feel no obligation to honor the objectives of the past president.
"We should have learned from Vietnam to not get involved in a civil war." Again, fine. Whatever. Irrelevant to my point.
"Why sacrifice our men and spend trillions of dollars to break up a conflict that will resume as soon as we pull out?" Good point. That was my concern before we went in. I consistently said the war would be easy, but the peace would be hard. Unfortunately, I was right. But at least Bush tried to manage a peace. Obama just decided to undo everything, calling surrender "peace." He's the president, so he can do that. There are legitimate reasons to not have gone in, and maybe even to withdraw. But the death rate was very low compared to what was being achieved, and I honestly think the death rate had nothing to do with the reason Obama withdrew. If that cost was too high, then you are basically an isolationist. Again, fine -- be an isolationist. I respect that viewpoint. But try not to insult the military when you decide you don't want to use them. They stand ready, and they were doing a damned fine job when they were asked to do it. Don't sit there and say they weren't. Admit that you are changing directions in foreign policy.
"Do you see a major shift towards democracy in the middle east?" No. They are not ready for democracy. Democracy cannot be given; it must be taken. It was foolish for Bush to try to establish democracy in the Middle East, just like it was foolish of Obama to support the Arab Spring in Libya and Egypt (while opposing the Green Revolution in Iran).
"Our military don't always understand that a war will not solve all the problems." Good thing our military's opinion matters little on that point. That is the president's job to understand that. It is the military's job to provide the president with all possible options. Even when the best option is a bad one, they provide the best possible option for the president to decide what to do. I don't know why you even typed that sentence.
"You are allowed your opinion but not your facts" ... this from the guy who thought our military lost the war in Iraq. Comical. The war plan against Iraq was perfect. And when the US military fought lesser groups, it did well. And if it was over there now, it would destroy ISIS. Your points on a sustained peace are legitimate, but don't confuse them with the war effort. (By the way, my 3500 was combat deaths, not overall deaths. My facts were accurate. Your number is also correct. Understand your numbers, and you will understand why number is also correct.)
Let me know when you want to answer my question below about global warming.