The writers of this Associated Press article are equating President Trump's "mission accomplished" statement with President Bush's.

President Donald Trump on Saturday declared "Mission Accomplished" for a U.S.-led allied missile attack on Syria's chemical weapons program, but the Pentagon said the pummeling of three chemical-related facilities left enough others intact to enable the Assad government to use banned weapons against civilians if it chooses.

"A perfectly executed strike," Trump tweeted after U.S., French and British warplanes and ships launched more than 100 missiles nearly unopposed by Syrian air defenses.  "Could not have had a better result. Mission Accomplished!"

His choice of words recalled a similar claim associated with President George W. Bush following the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Bush addressed sailors aboard a Navy ship in May 2003 alongside a "Mission Accomplished" banner, just weeks before it became apparent that Iraqis had organized an insurgency that tied down U.S. forces for years.

There's no comparison.  The writers obviously know that this mission was to take out specific facilities with little collateral damage, and that is exactly what our forces did.  In other words, this mission was accomplished.  He did not say there would be no more missions.  The media just can't stand to give Trump credit for anything.

In 2013, Syria's Assad dictatorship attacked his people with chemical weapons.  This left President Obama on the horns of a dilemma because he had drawn the fictitious red line in Syria and he didn't really want to follow through.  Therefore, he, and his secretary of state, John Kerry, came up with a fantastic solution.  They would claim that Syria had turned over all of its chemical weapons, and, with pure brilliance, they decided that the extremely trustworthy Russian dictator, a supporter of Assad, would hold him in line.  What could go wrong with that strategy?  Of course, Russia's President Vladimir Putin and Syrian dictator Bashar Assad did not keep their word.  Now it has been left up to Trump to actually protect the Syrian people.

It is amazing how the media act as though Obama was tough on Putin and then project that Trump is weak. 

Last week, in his confirmation hearing for secretary of state, Mike Pompeo was asked if he would be a yes man for Trump.  He said "no."  Isn't it a shame that neither the media nor the Democrats ever cared that Obama surrounded himself with yes men?  Everyone at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, the IRS, the Justice Department, the State Department, the intelligence agencies, the Interior Department, etc. did exactly what Obama wanted, and journalists and Democrats also almost universally all supported it.

Back then, we had this:

Barack Obama welcomed  a Russian proposal on Monday for Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control, opening up the first real chance of a political settlement to the crisis since hundreds of civilians died in an attack on a Damascus suburb last month. 

Russia's proposal came after an apparent stumble by the US secretary of state,  John Kerry, which set off a diplomatic scramble in Washington as administration officials sought to assess whether it offered a way out for Obama from what has become an increasingly intractable problem.

Speaking in London, Kerry suggested that the only way for Syria to avoid the threat of a US attack would be for it to hand over all its chemical weapons within a week.

Throughout Obama's eight years, he had two main missions: to remake America and to lead from behind on foreign policy.  He had many successes toward those mission statements.

On leading from behind overseas:

He was extremely flexible with the Russians, not putting up missile shields as promised, not helping Ukraine, and allowing Russia to take the lead on Syria. 

Instead of letting Iran collapse, he built it up, allowing the mullahs to spread terror throughout the Middle East and throughout the world.  Iran is also helping Assad kill his people in ways that include chemical weapons. 

Essentially, he did nothing to stop North Korea. 

He pulled out of Iraq prematurely and as a result allowed ISIS to build up.

At the end of eight years, Obama left tyrants in Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Syria in stronger positions while the U.S. was left in a more vulnerable position.  He left Trump with a lot of things to fix.

On remaking America:

His policies were all built around making the government more powerful.  His continuous regulations and high taxes gave the U.S. the slowest economic recovery in seventy years despite almost zero interest rates and massive Federal Reserve intervention. 

Obama succeeded by making more people dependent on government instead of allowing them to move up the economic ladder. 

Obamacare took away freedom of choice in health care options and jacked up costs as well as destroyed competition.  The goal was to get to complete government control.  Thank goodness Trump stopped that. 

Immigration laws became meaningless. 

At the end of eight years, he left a much more powerful government and a stagnant private sector.  It was left to Trump to slow down this massive power-grab by government.

Trump has two main missions: leading overseas and to Make America Great Again by giving the power, purse, and freedom back to the people, where it belongs. 

Thank goodness we didn't get Obama's designated successor, Hillary Clinton, who would have continued Obama's mission to remake (destroy) America and to continue the power-grab by the greedy government and to continue to weaken our position throughout the world.