I think he is right about Eisenhower. Of course, Eisenhower had a real advantage in terms of knowing about the real capacities of military action, having been appointed the Supreme Allied Commander in the middle of WWII. I think he was one of our great presidents.
Obama is no Eisenhower. His reasons and logic (if you can call it that) are nothing close to Ike’s. The author makes some good points, but he ultimately fails because his goal is political rather than intellectual. He is trying to save an obvious horrible record (Obama’s) from becoming an historical fact. It is what it is. Obama has made a mess of the ME, not because he failed to oust Assad, either. The author is trying to draw parallels where they do not exist because his own political ship is Obama the foreign policy titanic.