You give your bias away by the use of the word “purported” in “The purported chemical-weapons attack” It may be true that Trump benefits from the attack by proving he is no pawn of Putin, but that doesn’t mean the attack was wrong, or illegal. The President has the right in American Law to launch a military attack without asking Congress for their permission. He only has to seek Congressional approval if he wants to extend the military action for more than two months. What he did was a limited, proportional response to a breach of the Geneva Convention by a despotic regime.
Your question “Does anyone seriously believe that Trump was so genuinely moved by the deaths of Syrian children that he felt a deep-seated moral compulsion to act?” is despicable. It should have been “Does anyone seriously doubt that Trump was so genuinely moved by the deaths of Syrian children that he felt a deep-seated moral compulsion to act?”
I get it that everything Trump does is evil to the extreme left wing of journalism, but this goes too far. What did you expect the President to do after watching the Assad regime nerve gas children? Wring his hands and do nothing? That would have been Obama’s response, as it was in 2013.