Last week, President Donald Trump made the formidable decision to bomb Syria’s suspected chemical sites.

Following a belligerent Twitter thread, Trump used his instincts to decide to launch the missile strikes. In order to send a threatening message to Syrian leaders who are executing Douma citizens, Trump also used social media as his outlet.

Trump warned Syria and other countries that the U.S. is locked and loaded.

“Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria,” said Trump. “Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and smart! You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!”

Soon after the missile launch, Trump justified his actions with a speech claiming that the U.S. is doing everything they can to eliminate ISIS and protect the American people. Like most of Trump’s decisions, this choice sparked controversy in Blanchet.

Junior Joseph Kahn believes that although the situation in Syria is terrible, there are different and more effective ways to help them.

“Assad, their leader, is horrible to his people,” said Kahn. “However, shame on the U.S. for letting Syrians die and not letting them into our country. It’s a vicious paradox that Trump created. The better option would be diplomacy and taking care of the refugees.”

Aside from launching missiles at suspected chemical sites, many believe there were other steps that could have been taken to denounce Assad.

Similarly to Kahn, senior Chase Font dislikes Trump’s decision and believes the U.S. is hypocritical.

“We are hypocritical because the U.S. has taken most regulations away, allowing water to be polluted and stuff,” said Font. “Plus with our EPA director, we’re letting a lot of chemicals in the air and making people sick.”

The variation of support for the launching of missiles across the U.S. is unsettling. However, most seem to agree that the U.S. should interfere with Assad’s killing of his people.

The United States continues to push for Syrian refugee’s safety.