A US president does not need to be an expert in foreign affairs or in any particular field. But he needs to appreciate the complexity that is involved in the subject matter, and gather around himself a team of experts that can handle it. Like most US President, Obama came to office with no expertise in foreign affairs. Unfortunately, he also did not appreciate enough this subject to look for experts. His lead "advisor" is Hillary, a person without foreign experience nor a good grasp of it. Let us recall that Senator Hillary was one of the few Democrats who supported the authorization of Dumbya Bush to invade Iraq. More recently, Hillary gave advise to Saad Hariri (regarding the international investigation of his father's assassination). Hariri followed, and lost his premiership, bringing Hizballah to power. Now we have US bombing in Libya. The problem is that the Arab world is full of potential Libya situations. In the majority of cases, it will be US friends, the Emirs of the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia, who will be fighting their people for their dynastic survival. How would the US justify NOT intervening there, now that Libya is a precedent? And will the US intervene in Syria if there is a revolt there? The US should not have gotten directly involved in Libya. The US should have let the EU take care of its own backyard and refrain from establishing a terrible precedent for itself. He who does not learn from the past is bound to repeat it. And it was so easy to learn from Dumbya Bush!
U.S.-led coalition stages 41 airstrikes on ISIS targets in Syria and Iraq - joint command (Reuters)
from the article: The only thing worse than going to war is losing