Dropping the bomb on Trump’s foreign policy

US Air Force/Eglin Air Force Base/ZUMA Wire/TNS

Photograph courtesy of US Air Force/Eglin Air Force Base/ZUMA Wire/TNS

According to whitehouse.gov, President Donald Trump claims that “peace through strength” will be the premise of his U.S. foreign policy and that this will lead to a “more peaceful world with less conflict and more common ground.”

On April 6, this “advocate for peace” launched 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase.

This action was taken to retaliate against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s recent chemical attack on his own civilians. Trump evidently wanted to protect the very population that he bans from entering the U.S.

“It is in this vital national security of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons,” Trump claimed.

In other words, to prohibit one type of weapon, we fought back with another type of weapon. Because fighting violence with violence is always the answer, right? Spending almost $60 million on this poorly planned endeavor just makes sense, right?

Though the attack did damage some Syrian aircraft, at the end of the day, only a trivial portion was destroyed, meaning Syria’s civil war will continue despite our efforts — and large sums of money spent. Russia’s Defense Ministry said that only 23 of the missiles made it to the base and only six planes were blown up.

Trump initially opposed taking action against Assad’s regime during his campaign, but we all know how well Trump sticks to his words. His inability to follow his preliminary promises and the ease at which he can be influenced further emphasizes his inability to effectively lead. Trump doesn’t care about the Syrian citizens he cares solely about his plummeting ratings and hoped this response could give him the boost he desperately needs. And while some are happy with his decision, it’s important to recognize that violence cannot be the new trend for our foreign policy.

The civil violence in Syria is heartbreaking and should unquestionably be denounced. But an impromptu bombing does not effectively take a stand against this issue and most certainly will not lead us to the peace that Trump has pledged.

This effort to lessen world violence could potentially lead to more violence in the world, as Russia is allied with Syria. Russian President Vladimir Putin said the strike violated international law and is considered an  “act of aggression.” President Trump is not good at very many things, but one thing he is exceptional at is ticking off other countries. Russia is not a force to be reckoned with and when dealing with such a prominent risk, we should not so quickly bring out the weapons.

Trump tweeted, “Things will work out fine between the U.S.A. and Russia. At the right time everyone will come to their senses & there will be lasting peace!”

Oh yes lasting peace. Dropping bombs as habitually as he tweets will not lead to lasting peace in the world. And it’s not a matter of people coming to their senses it’s a matter of taking global matters more seriously and thoroughly considering the consequences of such attacks before making decisions that could very possibly lead to another world war.

And to further demonstrate his “peaceful” diplomacy, less than a week later, Trump made the decision to launch another strike in Afghanistan against members of ISIS. While this decision was more reasonable as it adhered to Trump’s agenda to crackdown on ISIS (something that I do agree we need to concentrate on) it nevertheless represents a detrimental shift in our foreign policy.

Known as the “Mother of All Bombs,” or MOAB, the device was dropped April 13 and was the most powerful non-nuclear bomb ever utilized by the U.S.

In just a little over three months, Trump has launched two major attacks in two different parts of the world. It’s terrifying to think about what his next move could be. With a foreign policy categorized by rash decisions, vast ignorance, a passion for violence and a selfish need to improve ratings, the end results could mean bad news for America.

Bombs are not the answer to every problem. We must thoughtfully pick our battles and not instantaneously rely on violent means.

For someone so focused on “peace,” his current actions do not seem to align with all of the idiocy incessantly spewing out of his mendacious mouth.

“Bombing the shit of of ‘em” will not be an effective solution moving forward and it most certainly will not lead to less conflict in the U.S.

Maybe Trump could spend a little less time golfing and tweeting and a little more time reevaluating his foreign policy.

  • Arafat

    ” Trump evidently wanted to protect the very population that he bans from entering the U.S.”

    This is your simplistic logic and not Trump’s.

    We live in a complicated world and your logic tells us about your prejudice and nothing about the real world. The same thing was done (by the right) and against Obama and it was equally unfair then. You just feel morally superior when using it against Trump.

  • Arafat

    “In other words, to prohibit one type of weapon, we fought back with another type of weapon. Because fighting violence with violence is always the answer, right? Spending almost $60 million on this poorly planned endeavor just makes sense, right?”

    Now I understand. Trump should have followed Obama’s policy; you know, the one that led Syria to its current status.

    Yeah, baby! Let’s talk about not crossing red lines and then look the other way when they’re crossed. Now that’s a foreign policy we can all get behind! (Sarc/off)

  • Arafat

    “Trump initially opposed taking action against Assad’s regime during his campaign, but we all know how well Trump sticks to his words.”

    Here we go, again, with the selective judging.

    One rarely read articles written on this site criticizing Obama for this same hypocrisy, which makes The Triangle complicit in this hypocrisy. Or it makes it an periodical that represents a largely hypocritical student body. My vote is on the latter.

    And this is, of course, the problem with our news. It too is selective, biased, unfair and misleading, but other than that it’s well worth following. You have a bright future in journalism! (Sarc/off)

  • Arafat

    ” Trump doesn’t care about the Syrian citizens — he cares solely about his plummeting ratings and hoped this response could give him the boost he desperately needs.”

    Really? How do you know this? Since when did the Donald give a sh*t about what people think of him?

    Your arrogance and leaps of faith are tiresome and tell us much more about you than they do about the Donald.

  • Arafat

    “Russia is not a force to be reckoned with and when dealing with such a prominent risk, we should not so quickly bring out the weapons.”

    Now this is a foreign policy we can all be impressed with and one, in fact, that helped Syria descend into the heartbreaking place it is in today.

    That’s great: More of the same is your answer? Well that seems to ensure Obama’s Syrian legacy will simply get more heart-wrenching.