The Student News Site of The Morgan School

The Morgan PawPrint

The Student News Site of The Morgan School

The Morgan PawPrint

The Student News Site of The Morgan School

The Morgan PawPrint


The Syrian Missiles

A protester reacts during a rally against the U.S. missile strikes in Syria, Friday, April 7, 2017, in New York. Hundreds of demonstrators took to New York City streets chanting “Hands off Syria!” and “Money for jobs and education, not for war and occupation!” The U.S. fired a barrage of cruise missiles into Syria on Thursday night in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack against civilians earlier in the week. (AP Photo/Andres Kudacki)

Written by Abbey Norton |
Featured image via Andres Kudacki |

At 8:40 pm ET on April 6th, 2017, fifty-nine Tomahawk missiles were fired “from American destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean at Al Shayrat airfield in Syria,” according to the New York Times. Officials claim it is a response to the chemical attack on Syria on Tuesday, April 4th, 2017.

The Facts:

  • The chemical attack is one of the worst chemical bombings in Syria
  • Some civilians have died from the chemical attack
  • Fifty-nine Tomahawk missiles were launched

The Speculations:

  • Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the chemical attacks on his own people.
  • The bombs possibly contained a nerve agent, which are a class of “phosphorous-containing organic chemicals that disrupt the mechanisms by which nerves transfer messages to organs,” according to Wikipedia.
  • The chemical bombing could be fake.

First, the facts must be addressed. According to the Health Department in Idlib Province, sixty-nine people died in the attack, but many others had not yet been identified (New York Times). In response, President Trump launched the Tomahawk missiles without consulting Congress first. Some see this as controversial because a few Congress members are questioning the constitutionality of the issue, according to NPR. Before starting an act of war, the president is supposed to receive congressional authorization.

A new topic is rising on the internet: the chemical attack never happened. This, however, is false; the only news sources reporting this issue are not reputable sources and can be considered fake news. Research into this comes out flat. Feel free to research yourself with the links above.

Whether or not the missiles were unconstitutional, they were still launched. Americans have differing views on the matter, but one interview conducted by CNN shows how some Syrians are feeling about this issue.

Keep in mind this is only one Syrian, but it is still a reputable source.

Many adults tend to leave teenagers out of political conversations, so the PawPrint wants to make these voices heard. To do this, the PawPrint sent out a survey asking students for their opinions on the situation.

Out of 100 students, 36 were in support of the missiles. Freshman Michael Baross said, “I am in support because we finally have a president who will take action and stand up to those who hurt others and wrongfully kill. Trump showed that innocent humans will not be killed under his command. He has already done more than Obama did in 8 years.”

Although most students were in support of the missiles, a few students were not. 34 out of 100 were not in support. Sophomore Daniel Radka said, “I think that a retaliatory strike is an idiotic concept since the U.S. was not attacked. Syrian civilians were attacked. Also, a Tomahawk missile costs over $800,000. That is about 48 million dollars on just the missiles… and the Federal Government can’t support the arts or the EPA???”

30 out of 100 students were not sure how they felt.

The chemical attack was a small topic in the news before the missiles, but only 71 out of 100 students knew about the attack.

Most students think the attack was horrific and inhumane. Junior Wyatt Reu said, “Any kind of attack on innocent civilians is profoundly wrong, and they should not be ignored by the international community. However, I find it hard to believe that Trump issued the attack out of sympathy for the victims. I think the attack was political.”

Other students felt otherwise.

One student believes in the false flag theory. Senior Rick Griswold said it was “staged to get into another war for oil.”
Sophomore David LaRiviere said that the chemical attack is “being oversaturated by corporate media outlets so that more people will be in favor of intervention.”

Sadly, only 17 students had discussions about this issue in class. Teachers could take the chance during class to talk about real-world problems without forcing their opinions onto their students.

The Morgan School is full of differing and strong opinions, which is great to start a discussion. Many of the students here are very informed about political and worldly issues. Talk to your peers to learn about how they feel!

Leave a Comment

Comments (0)

The Morgan PawPrint intends for comments to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Profanity, personal attacks, and inappropriate language will not be posted. Comments are moderated to make certain they adhere to these standards. The Morgan PawPrint does not permit anonymous comments and requires a valid email address. Email addresses will not be displayed.
All The Morgan PawPrint Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *