There have been several threads here where she was attacked for calling for this type of attack - during the election, after the CW attack, and after Trump attacked. On Daily Kos, the only thread speaking of Dems in favor is https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/world/middleeast/werent-syrias-chemical-weapons-destroyed-its-complicated.html?_r=0 , which is the number one reccomended diary.
Using find, there are 3 Kerry references, two praising his efforts to get a ceasefire, diplomatic solution and bringing in humanitarian aide. The other one includes Kerry in a list with Schumer and Pelosi as "supporting it". There are 22 comments - only 4 defending her hawkishness - for Hillary Clinton. I also looked at twitter and there are not many tweets mentioning him negatively by our side. There are many claiming that the CW deal was not successful or even a lie all with RW links. There are also many tweets mostly from the right linking to RW sites referencing the Politico story.
That, incidentally is an attack on Obama as well - because if you say that it was not successful, you could claim that Trump's strike did more. However, the fact is that 1300 tons of chemical weapons were removed. That is NOT in question and anyone who thinks that havingan additional 1300 tons of CW in Syria would not have led to greater death and destuction - especially if either Al Nusra or ISIS got some of it - is nuts. Here is a good summary of that - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/world/middleeast/werent-syrias-chemical-weapons-destroyed-its-complicated.html
Kerry has neither spoken to the media or tweeted anything about Trump's attacks. There are several articles all refering to a comment written by Politico that a Kerry "friend" (unidentified) says he was in favor if it were done carefully and linked to trying to advance diplomacy. Clinton, on the other hand did speak out. Blinken, a former deputy SoS and before that Biden aide is quoted directly.
= new reply since forum marked as read