As I write, it’s Friday night and we’re watching the news as the US, France and England attack Syria.  We are theoretically retaliating against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad because he poisoned hundreds of Syrian civilians — men, women, and children — using prohibited chemical weapons.  The problem with being a US citizen under this administration is that President Trump’s motives taint everything.  A lot of other people have said the same.  Trump is selfish, narcissistic, almost pathologically dishonest, and deeply corrupt.  Even when I agree with Trump’s actions, I’m still looking at that ethically crippling question: “Sure, but why did Trump do it?”  Trump isn’t motivated by things that don’t benefit him or his immediate family.

Trump creates so many mind-destroying scandals it’s hard to keep up.  The DOJ just raided Michael Cohen, alternately described as Trump’s personal lawyer or someone Trump barely knows.  Now we have rumors that Cohen recorded many phone calls, and facilitated a $30K payoff to the Trump Tower doorman to hide Trump’s lovechild with his housekeeper.  Add that to the usual money-laundering, illegal donations, payoffs and other bribes.  Shake it all in a bag with James Comey’s freshly leaked book.  Trump is already apoplectic.  We know that his first, second, and third response is to throw out another, even more lurid scandal as a distraction.  So Trump was going to do something; we were waiting to see what it was.

I’m not questioning Trump’s timing in Syria.  He had no choice about when.  After Trump mindlessly spewed his ignorant applause line about “Pulling out of Syrian” in another ego-stroke event, President Assad took Trump at his word.  Within days, Assad dumped chlorine and possibly Sarin gas on rebel civilians. Our TVs filled with videos of suffering children.  Trump was boxed in, with no choice about when to act.

But it’s easy to question the magnitude of Trump’s response.  There were rumors that National Security Advisor and sexist bully John Bolton wanted more war, while Defense Secretary James Mattis was advocating a more proportional response.  We know Trump would be attracted by the most theatrical possible response, so long as that didn’t substantially threaten Russia, who he’d already warned, days in advance.

Since we included our allies in the strikes, I assume Mattis won the argument.  But I’m still stuck.  What are Trump’s motives, really?  Why did he go along with Mattis, and what will he do next?  Trump already knows that shooting missiles is fun, and it will entertain his base enough to quiet their questions.  And as I’ve already written, there will be no limits to what he’ll do when he feels threatened.