Trump lured into Syria attacks

Our President is well-known for his temper and his blatant disregard for truth.  Especially famous are his twitter rants that have become a unique American delicacy. 

For example, one beautiful morsel of pure Donald came out of his account the morning after his controversial travel ban was halted.

“The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!†This was only one of his eloquently worded tantrums that morning. 

Despite his unusual capacity for being twitter baited, he received praise from both sides of the political aisle for his reaction to Syria’s use of chemical weapons. 

I agree with his choice to punish Syria for the war crime.  His actions, however, were a long way off from his campaign rhetoric and relatively recent “America First†policy. 

“We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS? ZERO,†he tweeted in 2013 during Barack Obama’s second term. 

Trump clearly didn’t think it was worth attacking back then, so something must have changed. 

The chemical weapons attack must have done it.  He was so moved with moral decency that he attacked Assad to prove a point. 

In 2013, when Obama was considering a retaliatory strike for a similar attack, Trump was just as moved to protect people back then when he said, “AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA — IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!â€Â 

So he obviously doesn’t care for the victims in this attack, despite his recent statements to the contrary.  He only seemed to care after the pictures of the most recent gas attack were circulated, to which he responded with a bomb.  He was baited.  Just like on twitter.

Instead of harmlessly ranting to the American people, he is harmfully launching missiles at the Syrian people. 

Now, the President elected because of his firm stance against intervention in foreign wars has officially intervened in a foreign war. 

For clarification, I still think it was a good thing.  Sort of. 

For one, Obama should have intervened a long time ago.  War crimes, especially against civilians, are unacceptable. 

Secondly, I don’t think Trump has a plan. 

The War in Syria isn’t being fought by loyalists and rebels alone.  There are also the Kurds vying for independence, ISIS and a coalition of anti-ISIS nations all with powerful military forces in the region.  And that list ignores the mysterious Russian interest in the region. 

The situation is complicated, and Trump went from “Fight ISIS, leave†to “Fight ISIS, depose Assad, leave†too quickly. 

Trump was baited into bombing Syria.  He didn’t originally say he had a plan to depose Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and the destruction of a few airplanes clearly hasn’t done the job.

Pictures of a deadly attack are circulated — and all of a sudden — Trump decides to depose the Syrian government.  He was baited into using American weapons to attack a foreign government.  And quite frankly, that’s terrifying.\

Ian McCord is double majoring in business economics and finance at the University of Memphis.  He grew up in and around Memphis and is an ardent supporter of the Democratic Party.  Recently, after the election of President Donald J. Trump, he got involved with the U of M College Democrats hoping to stand up and be counted in support of the party’s platform despite their defeat in November.