>>>Kind of surprised no one is talking about this (yet)
>>
>>Despite all the hollering in the press about the ineptitude of the Trump administration up till now there were no serious negative effects.
>>
>>This blunder is real and will have negative effects.
>>
>>The US is not threatened by Syria and is not responsible for the safety of anyone in Syria.
>>There was zero justification for this strike.
>
>Depends on how you feel about the so-called "Responsibility to Protect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_to_protect
>
>If it applies, one issue is that the UN, as usual, is quick to assign responsibility and glacial in assigning corresponding authority. The mismatch between responsibility and authority is one thing many people instinctively hate about the UN even if they can't articulate it.
>
>There is a discussion at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-law-idUSKCN12O2S3 .

I didn't see anything in the US constitution about the "Responsibility to Protect" anyone except US citizens.

I'm OK with using whatever force is necessary to disable groups and individuals who want to attack us.

Regarding intervention though, It's legitimately questioned by some, but I think that my war, the Korean conflict, was the last intervention by the US that was justifiable.

As I see it, there haven't been any justifiable sustained uses of US force since then.