Someone I know has a kid in the reserves who will be sent overseas if there is a conflict. They're absolutely terrified over it, and when I told her that republican presidents love to start wars, she literally weakly responded "...but hillary..." No sympathy for the idiots who voted for this guy and are willing to die for him.
As far as I see both US parties were/are quite into "let's strike":
1) War in Korea - Truman (democrat)
2) War in Vietnam - Kennedy (democrat)
3) Proxy wars all around the world (not sure if they qualify as US Army units weren't involved) - Raigan (republican)
4) First Iraq War - Bush (republican)
5) Strikes on Serbia - Bill Clinton (democrat)
6) Second Iraq War - Bush (republican)
7) Afghan war - Bush (republican)
8) Strikes on Libya (which has given up its nuclear ambitions) again, no direct US Army involvement, so might or might not qualify - Obama
So, outcomes for democrats:
#1 - saved South Korea, positive
#2 - total disaster
#5 - Kosovo's independence, "new order", arguably positive
#8 - Libya is a big mess, regimes giving up nuclear weapons would now think twice
Outcomes for republicans:
#3 - risked to start WWIII, ended up winning cold war, risk of ending planet Earth, positive outcome
#4 - repelled Saddam, freed Kuwait, positive
#6 - weakened US positions as a world leader, messed up Iraq, disaster
#7 - defeated taliban, which is positive, still can't withdraw troops, neutral