What's particularly disappointing is that Obama was elected after promising to end US military operations in the Middle East, and did much the opposite. Bush could at least be said to be doing what was expected of him, in continuing the legacy of his father.

Voters should really be holding their leaders to account the fiscal and moral costs of these wars, especially given their strategic objectives haven't been met. OTOH, one could argue it's kept a lot of people employed, and those people vote too.

That article is grossly inaccurate. It's one thing to say "Obama applied hard power more than was expected" as opposed to "He was worse than Bush" which is completely unjustified. There is absolute no equivalence between drone usage and the two ground wars engaged by Bush. The 2 week Shock and Awe campaign in Iraq dropped more ordinance and killed more people than 8 years of drones. And the drone campaigns were mostly carried out with the private consent of the nations with targets. And saying the Libyan Civil War was "US-led" is just a complete lie. It was most directly lead by Libyans, but the air campaign was led by France.

I did say other associates.