By Julia Latchana, Asst. Section Editor
A humanitarian crisis does not need more violence, and the Douma chemical attacks did not need to be met with missiles.
Bashar Al-Assad regime’s chemical attack on April 7 killed about 70 people through chlorine gas and sarin, both nerve agents.
President Trump’s response was to attack supposed chemical warehouses with missles, something that Trump did last year. Yet missile strikes have done little to deter future chemical attacks.
Assad has been using chemicals on his citizens since 2013, when an attack killed seven people.
Trump’s 59 missile strikes last year did little to deter Assad’s chemical weapons program, which has still managed to attack Syrian civilians, so why continue to attack a regime that will continue to dust themselves off and develop these weapons?
Because it is the only thing that the United States is willing to do.
While the U. S. government is OK with using millions of dollars on means of war, only 11 Syrian refugees have been admitted into the country since the beginning of this year, according to National Public Radio.
Trump claims that he wants to save the Syrians from the “monster” (Assad), but he doesn’t want to let them into the country and has tried numerous times to ban all immigrants from Muslim nations.
To those that say that the strikes are an attack on the regime, you are wrong. The attacks are on the Syrians.
Assad is killing Syrians and the world’s response is to go and bomb the country. Our solution to solve a humanitarian crisis is to cause more threatening situations, way to go!
Trump, however, did have a personal agenda when it came to striking the country.
On April 11 Trump tweeted that “Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart!’’
However, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, wanted approval from Congress before attacking Syria, an approval that did not happen, thus violating the War Powers Act.
Trump made the announcement on the night of April 13, and by the morning the U. S.public was told that the strike went off without a hitch. But it didn’t.
Russia and Assad shot down some of the missiles before they hit their intended targets, and it is unknown as to whether or not the strike hurt civilians. Also, by morning the regime was seen celebrating in the streets. This doesn’t seem like the response Trump was hoping for.
Perhaps the regime wanted the United States to strike back, but Trump wanted to prove that he wasn’t all talk.
Now I am not saying that Syria doesn’t need help, but barraging the country with missiles will do nothing of the sort. Do you want this situation to turn out like Vietnam, Iran or Korea, turning against us at every turn?
Missle strikes have done little to daunt the Assad regime, so why continue to attack the regime with them when they will continue to attack their civilians?
The seven-year Syrian Civil War needs to be put to an end through diplomacy, not weapons.
Posted: May 9