So President Trump launches some missiles at Syria in retaliation for a chemical attack on civilians, and his supporters light their hair on fire, shrieking, "We elected him because he promised not to get involved in other countries' wars!".
Where to start.
First of all, I run hot and cold on Trump. He has done some great things already in the few months that he's been in office. Appointing Neil Gorsuch to the SCOTUS being the best example. However, he does seem to be swayed by the Leftists in his midst, his son-in-law in particular. Truthfully, I still don't trust the guy to be the Conservative that he ran as during the campaign. I voted for him, but it was reluctantly.
What amuses me about these missile strikes on Syria, is how quickly his supporters turned on him. Their "support" is a mile wide and an inch deep. Shallow. And, unfortunately, it kind of confirms what the MSM has been saying about them: they really ain't all that bright. If they could think about the situation for a second, they'd calm the fuck down. They reacted just like the outrage-mobs of the Left: no thought given, just instant outrage because he did something that they didn't like. And, of course, the conspiracy theories came out immediately - again, just like Leftist snowflakes.
If his "supporters" were capable of any strategic thinking at all, they would understand that the missile strikes served a few purposes.
1) Putting the world on notice that chemical weapons are not to be used.
2) Putting the world on notice that any action that threatens America - directly or indirectly - will be met with swift action. Trump hit Syria within 72 hours of the chemical weapons attack. That is extremely fast in the political world.
3) But, most importantly, it puts the world on notice that the policies of the pussy Obama administration are null and void. There's a new sherrif in town, to use a cliche, and we won't be dithering about and hemming and hawing and wringing our hands for months before we issue empty threats about "red lines" and then never actually do anything.
The New York Times asks, "After the Airstrikes on Syria, Now What?". To which my reply would be, "How about - nothing?". Of course, the article is the usual NYT's Leftist, anti-Trump drivel, but it is the important question. The problem is, Trump's supporters, Like the NYT, seems to think that the missile strikes may be the first step towards a full-scale invasion of Syria and/or Iran. For both the Leftists and many of Trump's supporters, they just couldn't wait to set their hair on fire and leap into the pool of sweet, sweet outrage. It's very sad that the same people who brought some hope, however small, to this country by electing Trump now can't wait to burn it all down over what is, in reality, a very trivial matter that won't be remembered in a month or two.
Trump didn't promise to never use military force, but his followers seem to think that is what he campaigned on. He promised that he wouldn't be indulging in nation building and going to war over things that weren't in our nation's interest. I don't see how launching some missiles to send a message invalidates that position. But, then, I tend to think before I react.
UPDATE: The administration seems to be validating the fact that this was a one-time thing and that their policy in Syria hasn't changed at all.
Also, this explains the points that I made above: To Kill a Chicken to Scare Monkeys.