WASHINGTON — President Trump’s order for a cruise missile strike on a Syrian air base, which has alienated some of his supporters, has fueled speculation of hidden motives and hoaxes.

Websites like Infowars are calling the chemical attack that drew United States fire a “false flag” operation, while liberal blogs have pointed to the strike as evidence of “wag the dog” diversion tactics.

Ian Bremmer, the founder of the Eurasia group, said he was not “buying any of them” and pointed out that the theories conveniently fit preconceived notions and motives, but don’t really make sense.

Here’s an assessment of some of them.

Information Clearing House argued that President Bashar al-Assad had no reason to use chemical weapons

“With the Syrian Army and its allies in a comfortable position in Syria, making advances across the country, and recovering lost points in rural Hama, why would they now resort to using chemical weapons in Nusra Front-occupied Idlib? It is a very simple question with no clear answer.”

THIS IS MISLEADING. There are numerous reasons Mr. Assad’s forces would conduct a chemical attack.