There were three kinds of reactions seen after Trump's missiles targeted a Syrian Air Base.
Firstly, we had the average Joe who hasn't really been following the war closely, save a few snippets on various Syrian cities going either way. These individuals were a mix of confused and uneasy, though perhaps comforted when the unsubstantiated claim that Assad used Chemical Weapons was repeated on every news channel.
We then had the anti-imperialists; often those, like myself, who had been following the war for a number of years. We were the losers in all this; we simply saw a war crime committed by a fascist dictator - and I'm not referring to Mr Assad.
Lastly, we had the joyous liberals - finally, their arch-nemesis had seen the light! He had come on board SS Humanitarian, when America bombs democracy and human rights into other countries. The neocons had allied with the liberals - the #ImWithHer crowd with the imperialists.
True to form, Ms Clinton and the worldwide Establishment were quick to support Trump's actions - 'the first time we see him as a president!' - as Theresa May, Malcolm Turnbull and other world leaders rushed to support illegal military action. These include Erdogan, Netanyahu, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Al-Qaeda linked rebels, of course.
Let's get onto the main issue here - the strikes. Killing seven and damaging vital aircraft that was being used to destroy ISIS in Homs, the FIFTY NINE Tomahawk missiles certainly hit their intended target. This was a unilateral action launched by the bipartisan imperialists dominating the US Government, and Trump's decision to bow to such powers has caused ripples amongst his reactionary support - indeed, they thought he would be different.
These strikes were based on evidence clearly presented at the United Nations, ratified by independent committees and passed by the Security Council - sorry, that's just how rational nations act. It's different for the World Police.
Let me clarify (as Liberals insist that being against military action means you are an 'Assadist') that I am no fan of the Syrian Government - actions taken against protestors in 2011 were reprehensible. However, for one, they deserve their sovereignty in a war exploded by foreign funding of rebel fighters. Secondly, if action is to be taken for war crimes, I expect similar action for crimes committed by the strikes' supporters in Iraq, Yemen and Palestine. Lastly, before any action is taken, it is imperative that any accusations are ratified by the United Nations.
In any sense, there has been thus far no proof of the Government using Chemical Weapons - and after the Rebels used Sarin Gas on civilians in 2013, would you really count them out? In addition to this, let's analyse the decision making of the Government; having slowly taken back vital cities and areas in Syria, having slowly turned worldwide and internal public opinion in their favour, having secured the support of Russia, Iran and China - decide to launch a gas attack on their own civilians, on the summit of an international meeting regarding Syrian policy, no less. We have to wonder what prompted the Syrian Government to commit political suicide.
I must stress, until any evidence is ratified, no action can legally be taken against the Syrian Government.
As the Establishment celebrates Trump's graduation to a true President, ordinary Syrians are somehow left fearing even further for their nation. One can only hope that this doesn't escalate.