Let's consider for a moment. (1) Trump has previously been against acting without congressional approval. Is this Congress friendly or hostile to Trump? (2) The strikes come two full days after threatening to strike. You've taken some doctrine and strategy at this point, my friend - would an attack two days after threatening an attack be effective at damaging crucial materiel, particularly of the easily-transportable kind? (3) The strike was called two days after threatening them, ten days after the gas attack that provoked them, but before approval by the UN Security Council. Obviously, there are reasons to strike Syria (which could be debated, but I'm not in the mood). Obviously, there are methods to strike Syria and justifications to strike Syria. But can you say, in a confident and dispassionate tone of voice, that Trump was abiding by those methods and justifications, rather than taking tips from Ainsley Earhardt? I cannot. Fox and Friends airs at 6am EST. US missiles hit Syria between midnight and 1am EST. Do... you think you could talk May and Macron to fire a couple cruise missiles at Syria in eighteen hours?