Do you notice how nobody in America cares who the leaders in Europe are? Because it doesn’t matter. Which should tell you that you guys are bad at picking leaders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...
I hesitate to even mention Kissinger who was effectively an autonomous nation-state during the carpet-bombing of Cambodia.
This is non-withstanding the fact that WW2 was effectively a result of punitive measures and economic destruction following WW1 (a blueprint for the post-Charlie Wilson's Afghanistan if you will).
The causes of WW1 however - bad faith alliances during the right-wing rise of imperialism, militarism, and nationalism - look to be back in play in the North American Continent.
Europe had hundreds of years of plundering the rest of the world. WWI happened because Germany wanted a piece of the pie too, and the other, more established powers didn't want to share. None of that had anything to do with American Exceptionalism.
And, yeah, America's not perfect. We got thrust into the role of being a global superpower after the second time Europe tried to blow itself up. The other option was the USSR (who did their own share of empire building).
In Europe, president's power is much more limited, there are more political parties and one party winning elections doesn't immediately change the country's policy to everything, even winning parties need to consider opinions of other parties. So overall country's policy more closely reflects the average opinion of the whole population instead of just the currently ruling party. Changes are much more slow and gradual and a single leader change doesn't immediately affect that much.
Politics are boring as they should be.