He was asked about options on Venezuela, he said he had many options including the military option.
Turning that into talk of regime change is bloody ridiculous.
Oh yeah let's talk about that article:Sorry, are you talking about this cited 538 article which completely counters your argument with evidence?
and“One day we’re bombing Libya and getting rid of a dictator to foster democracy for civilians, the next day we are watching the same civilians suffer while that country falls apart,” Trump said in a speech laying out his approach to foreign policy in April 2016. “We’re a humanitarian nation. But the legacy of the [former President Barack] Obama [and former Secretary of State Hillary] Clinton interventions will be weakness, confusion and disarray.”
Trump is focusing on ISIS and he isn't interested in getting rid of any dictator. Doing a single strike against Assad so he doesn't use chemical weapons again is still perfectly fine....well that and not allowing Assad to humiliate the United States like he did.After Mike Pence suggested in the vice presidential debate last fall that the U.S. should take a stronger stance against the Assad regime, Trump publicly dismissed this view, saying “Syria is fighting ISIS.” In an interview with the Guardian during the campaign, Trump said, “What we should do is focus on ISIS. We should not be focusing on Syria.”
A few days before the chemical weapons strike Haley and Tillerson had come out publicly saying they'd abandon the policy of regime change in Syria while the Trump admin was moving to cut their support of rebels fighting him, which they did by the way. They got plenty of condemnation from the hawks in Congress for this.
They got rewarded by Assad doing a chemical weapons strike, so in order to cover their backs they struck Assad, made it clear it would be tolerated again and then moved back to what they were doing before, including ending the CIA program.