So the Trump military strategy is

"What'd they think of that?":

According to Spicer, Trump asked on Thursday night "about reaction from the world community as well as congressional leaders and was informed that there was fairly unanimous praise for the decision and the actions the President took."

I suppose this will encourage him.  Same song, second verse, little bit louder, little bit worse.  And when their is no unanimous praise, perhaps even unanimous condemnation?  What then?  We stop and let Assad go back to using chemical weapons, or go on with barrel bombs?

A barrel bomb is an improvised unguided bomb, sometimes described as a flying IED (improvised explosive device). They are typically made from a large barrel-shaped metal container that has been filled with high explosives, possibly shrapnel, oil or chemicals as well, and then dropped from a helicopter or airplane.

The explosives in them can be as simple as fertilizer and diesel fuel.

The Syrian regime dropped almost 13,000 such bombs in 2016, aided by the Russian Air Force.

Putin is SUCH a nice guy.

The UN considers their use in Syria a war crime.  But we have no pictures of babies, little babies, being killed by barrel bomb explosions, so bombing another Syrian air field wouldn't be "Presidential."  Assad has also bombed medical facilities in Syria "as if they were military encampments."  But again, not productive of pictures of babies, so apparently not a reason to be Presidential.

And if we topple Assad, we have another Iraq on our hands; which didn't turn out to be all the Presidential.  So whether or not, or even how, we follow up on this attack, may or many not depend on how what kind of reviews the next action, or non-action, gets.

We await the verdict of the critics, and hope the ratings come in at a level high enough to keep the show from being cancelled.