Trump’s retaliation against Syrian chemical attacks could be justified

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

On Apr. 6, President Donald Trump launched a seemingly justified military attack on the Shayrat aircraft base in Syria. This airstrike was a response to the chemical weapons used by the Syrian government that killed 80 innocent civilians, including women and children, but was meant to deter the self-proclaimed Islamic State (ISIS). The response from Trump attacked the same airbase where the alleged chemical weapons were launched.

This would not be the first time chemical weapons were allegedly used on Syrian civilians by their President Bashar al-Assad. Al-Assad used these attacks as a fear tactic to keep the population from supporting opposing  parties, according to the New York Times. By being able to strike fear in the eyes of Syrians, al-Assad portrayed how the other nations cannot keep them safe from him.

Trump has criticized former President Barack Obama for intervening in foreign combat and had warned him via Twitter to not be involved in Syria. But it now seems that Trump has had a change of heart and better understood his duties as president. Hopefully Trump had made the order for the airstrike to advocate for the Syrian people and to denounce al-Assad.

It could be possible that al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against ISIS could be justified but the continuous killing and injury of innocent civilians is unacceptable and contradictory to the purpose of the chemical weapons and whom they are meant to harm.

The evidence points to al-Assad being the initiator of the attack but his allies and supporters have spoken out to deny the accusations, once again, even though al-Assad’s regime maybe the only source powerful enough to accomplish such an attack in the country.

Even with the denial, Trump ordered tomahawks to target the Syrian aircraft base.

This is the first military action the U.S. has taken in a foreign country since Trump was inaugurated and, according to the U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, it may not be the last form of action by the U.S., since the U.S. government is beginning to realize the severity of al-Assad’s rule, according to the New York Times.

Due to Trump’s close relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, it would seem that he wouldn’t have conducted any retaliation toward al-Assad due to the alliance between Syria and Russia.

The U.S. must take stronger action against al-Assad if any Western powers of democracy have any hope that the chemical weapon attack will cease or that ISIS will be defeated. So far, Trump has taken the first step in the right direction toward these hopes and other nations should follow suit.