1) I think this strategic attack on Syria is a great example of differing political ideology. Democrats demonized the limited support of the United States to take in Syrian refugees but they didn't demonize President Obama for not doing anything about the Syrian peoples' reason for seeking refuge in the first place.
2) One of the best things that happened with the bombing is that the State Department will have a tool in their negotiation box that Obama had taken away from the State Department and that is a military option. Other countries weren't concerned about Obama's response to their negative actions because economic sanctions only work if all countries abide. It is a false pretense in that politicians try to convince us they’re doing something when they’re not.
3) Along with the strategic bombing in Syria came a hit to Liberals' narrative/lie about there being a bromance between Trump and Putin. This won't prevent some Democrats from continuing to sell the lie to their constituents who are so biased against Trump that the truth remains a distant object.
4) Republicans invoking the "Nuclear Option" to ensure their Supreme Court pick will only serve to change the game permanently, because when Democrats have control they too won't worry about getting 60 votes. Both parties are constantly doing things for short-term gain that the other party uses against them later on. From what I can tell, constantly changing the rules has led to more divisiveness and less results. Our politicians aren't getting anything done. At this point we should ask ourselves why do we need them? We might as well set up an encrypted system to where Americans could vote on legislation.