I mean, the conventional position is that avoiding the chaos in Libya/Syria would have required more US military interventions (including drone strikes.) Obama did try to solve problems with less military force; it was well-intentioned, but it was a failure.
Some people do think he avoided a quagmire.
Some still insist on thinking of Obama as a decent man? That man approved the assassination via drone missile of a US citizen not on the field of battle. And then two weeks later, he approved the assassination of that man’s son, also a US citizen, via another drone missile, again not on the field of battle. Establishing a dangerous precedent that a US citizen’s life can be forfeited without the due process of law. All it takes is to name him an enemy of the state.
The quagmire was getting deeper into the muck as Obama did. He ran in 2008 on getting out of Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo. But hardly anyone wants to remember that. Instead, he not only expanded operations there, he sanctioned the MIC’s involvement in
five other countries: Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Ukraine. In addition, he made that ill-fated deal with Iran.
Of all these, attacking Libya was the worst foreign policy blunder since the Iraq War was reopened in 2003. Destroying Libya opened the door to numerous negative ramifications since. Many of which are still playing out. It’s extremely difficult to think of a positive good that came out of this completely misguided adventure. It was as if Obama and Hillary purposely wanted to sow chaos for their own ends.
The Democrats had the opportunity to go the anti-war route in picking Obama’s successor. Instead they threw Sanders under Clinton’s bus. Then they did that again this year with Sanders and Gabbard. There are many Democrats and progressives who want out. They won’t be heard by their current leadership.