The U.S. government isn't particularly keen on getting into another war in the middle east, considering that they've just ended up creating more enemies.
the problem isn't getting into another war-
it's the absolutely terrible regime overthrows in Libya, Syria, Iraq, etc that the US was implicitly and intimately involved in which created power vacuums allowing for the expansion of terrorist groups such as Daesh.
Obviously willingly entering a fight against a bunch of guerrillas won't win much, if anything - it took Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq to show this to us, and we still haven't learned from it if attempting to fight a war with guerrillas is still in the playbook.
But creating tremendous power vacuums by overthrowing leaderships and installing a powerless puppet government does absolutely nothing to help the situation, and is almost always worse than just leaving the regimes be.
Was the Muammar Gaddafi's regime ideal? Certainly not. But there is
sufficient evidence that his regime was keeping the refugee crCIA from hitting mainland Europe. The benefits of toppling his regime are minimal compared to the multiple crises this has unleashed.
So no, getting into another war is a bad idea, but meddling with other governments is a stuffty solution as well- one that recent administrations (Clinton, Bush, Obama) have employed to very little success.
Obviously this is all fairly speculative, because I can't say for certain what would happen in a war against Daesh, but there IS sufficient historical evidence that suggests it would be a terrible idea.
