I'm pretty sure it's more akin to "it's not worth getting entangled in foreign conflict because America keeps cocking it up and leaving behind a bigger mess than when we first got there. See recent history over the past few decades as my evidence." How is that fallacious reasoning?
It is fallacious because it does not take the facts of the matter into consideration. So when we try to consider and weigh the facts of the matter, we run into logical fallacy after logical fallacy. It ends up with: It’s a foreign entanglement and we shouldn’t get involved with foreign entanglements. Going backwards from there, one asks “was there ever a foreign entanglement that was right to get involved with, and why” and the lack of critical thinking becomes incredibly apparent. On every edge of factuality and reasoning, there is circular reasoning, a priori fallacy, and ridiculous specious approaches to simple facts.