Just want to reiterate your point Caleb on “clear occasions that military intervention are required for the greater good of humanity”. While it is agreeable, there must be comprehensive, principled and transparent leadership on these very occassions to initiate military intervention.
Containing or degrading a threat to humanity is a just cause and a plausible strategic response for use of proportional military force, however the case made seems predicated as you mentioned on the “strong man” approach. What many will largely see as a legitimation of Trump authority can just as easily be seen as unilateral bullying.
I only wonder if anyone in the administration is capable of perceiving the collateral damage that has historically and will foreseeably beseige the United States diplomatically from such military actions.