Today the U.S. military has as many as 3,000 troops in Iraq helping to train security forces and more than 35,000 military personnel in the Persian Gulf to reassure and work with our partners. For nearly a year, U.S. warplanes have bombed targets every day in Iraq and Syria — nearly 3,000 airstrikes so far — and Special Operations forces engage against terrorist targets, as last weekend’s raid into Syria proved. In the past few weeks, Washington has begun military training of the Syrian opposition at a cost of $500­ million. And the United States is partnering with other countries; today European allies are contributing to the Iraqi air campaign and training mission, and Arab states (and Canada) are part of the strikes in Syria.

Few Americans are clamoring for the next president to seek new military adventures, which is why conservative critics tread so carefully when asked what their chest-thumping rhetoric would mean in practice. When they do outline what should be done, it is hard to see what would change much from the way things are today. Perhaps the United States would augment the air campaign in Iraq by introducing some on-the-ground spotters or add more trainers to help the Iraqis. But these are adjustments to the existing policy, not the kind of fundamental change their advocates claim.