From April 9 to April 16, the United States has taken bold military actions that have shocked many, only 50 days into a new presidency. However, this means two very different things for the two major political parties and for all the people in the United States no matter their political affiliations.

This huge jump in military attacks is not surprising to the supporters or protesters of the Trump administration. Throughout his presidential campaign this past year, Donald Trump continuously stressed how under his control the United States would be much more firm and straightforward in  their military actions. This past week and the military actions of the country during that timespan has embodied the military toughness and action that Trump supporters have been waiting for and that those opposing Trump had been frightened of.

First, on April 6, the United States military launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles on a Syrian government war base, following direct orders from President Trump himself. This comes following multiple reports that the Syrian government, led by Bashar al-Assad, conducted a chemical attack on its own civilians the previous week.

The attack has brought upon joy and acceptance from many Republicans, while it has caused mass distress in the minds of Democrats and Independents. On the Republican side, many politicians and others with conservative ideals are ecstatic that Trump’s administration and the military have taken advantage of our unmatched military resources and finally shown through the “American muscle” that our government will not tolerate those sorts of chemical attacks on innocent civilians no matter which country they take place in.

For the Democrats and Independents, many questions were raised on whether Trump’s missile attack order was legal, whether the missile attack itself  was logical and whether it was fiscally responsible to use such a massive amount of resources for that single purpose. First of all, President Trump never consulted Congress before carrying out orders for the attack, something that is generally frowned upon and if it were to start a war would be illegal as well.

Many Democrats and Independents also argue whether the attack itself was logical. Trump decided to fire 59 Tomahawk missiles against a country that technically has not attacked us or made any political advances toward our country at all, yet we decided to launch an unmatched number of missiles into their country. Another part of the attack that was very illogical is that of Russia, our ally, had some of its military stationed in the airbase as well, which could have created a complete nightmare scenario if one of their men were to get injured or killed, as Russia is one of the United States’ most important allies.

Also, one has to think whether the ends really justify the means. The 59 Tomahawk missiles that were fired towards that Syrian airbase used a very big amount of our resources, both weapons-wise and in the use of our military personnel. However, through all those 59 missile attacks only six people died, bringing up the question of whether all those military resources and personnel were really necessary in order to fulfill our purpose.

Overall, I personally do not think that our missile attack on Syria was justified nor responsible, socially or fiscally. I agree that we should not tolerate chemical attacks on civilians of any type, but I also do not think that it should be our country’s duty to be the world’s policeman. However, no matter what one’s political beliefs or opinions are, I think it is very obvious that we did not need every single one of those 59 Tomahawk missiles to do the fairly low amount of damage that we were aiming for. I also think it was very foolish to launch an attack on an airbase which contained many of our military allies.

I think the attack was extremely effective in showing off the power and strength of our military, but I believe the amount of resources and risk that we used on this mission were exceedingly more than we needed to fulfill that desired effect.