I look at it this way:
We could have gone with him, or McCain/Palin.
He entered office at a very insecure time, during which there was left-over conflict put into motion by the Bush administration and the Bush administration only, and furthermore he entered during a worldwide economic crisis (by which he had to try to put one of the world's largest and most diverse countries into a stable situation -- someone with knowledge of how economics work on the national and global scales would be aware that this is by no means an easy task).
Anyone who thought that the conflict would disappear is very, very optimistic. I somewhat doubt that there's anyone who could walk into that office at this time and work miracles -- sure, maybe you could name someone who could do "better," but even that would be optimistic, especially if you're considering social issues, economic problems, world crisis, armed conflict, etc.
As for pulling troops "immediately," I knew before the elections even started that there was realistically no way that was going to happen. Once you get involved, it's very difficult to just quit until the situation is in a somewhat stable state -- difficult, irresponsible, and dangerous. That was one of the issues with Vietnam (to a certain degree; there were also very shady dealings and more incompetence than needed). Quite frankly, the public can wave signs and rant on about peace all they want, but it's a helluva lot more complicated than that. I think 1-2 years would have been a much more realistic goal to begin with, regardless of how much the president "wants" peace and safety of the troops -- there's just so much to go into pulling a large scale operation of that nature, and you have to consider the safety of all parties involved.
And that's just one facet of it. I mean, let's face it; Obama's not so much a crappy president as a president that's in a really crappy situation. I don't think many people could do much better.
