Five Paragraph Outline
Title- The title “The Riddle of Trumps Syria Attack” really got my brain going. I had a couple thoughts when I read this title the first being, “what did he do this time?”. This is because the word “riddle” sent me down the thought process of he must have done something questionable or his actions were completely out of left field. The title gave a sense of mystery to the article.
Hook – The hook sentence “what really motivated the president’s strike against Syria?” pushed the point of the title and deepened my curiosity.
At the very beginning of this article I got the sense that the author Frank Bruni is not a fan of Trump or his administration. He started his article with a quote from Blake Hounshell, an author that wrote a story for the Politico and Bruni quoted “dizzying turnabout” which is Hounshell referring to Trumps recent decision to bomb the airport in Syria that launched the nerve gas bomb. Bruni also quoted Hounshell’s title “Trump’s Syria Whiplash” and that immediately indicated to me that both authors are not a fan of Trump. Further evidence of Bruni not liking Trump was his usage of words and sarcasm such as “God forbid they come here” referring to Syrian refugees. Bruni then goes on to present the reader with two questions “Why did he do this now? And, beyond that, who exactly is he?” which kept my interest in the article. Through the first piece of the article Bruni is presenting his opinion of our president based on choices and actions Trump has made though his presidency, and he uses other articles to backup his claims about Trump. Bruni never comes straight forward and says the missile strike was wrong. My interpretation of Bruni’s article is more or less an article based on questioning the cause and effect, bad or good. Bruni also talks what other possible motives Trump could have had for the missile strike including trying to changes the public’s view of Trumps relationship with Putin which before the missile strike seemed “Putin-Trump kissy-face” as Bruni put it.
Another theory Bruni talked about was the strike was an opportunity for Trump to flex his muscles and show the world what type of president he is going to be. Bruni goes on from that point and begins to answer the question he asked earlier “Who is this president?”. He continues to question Trumps qualification for the presidency and how Trump has been running his administration so far. Bruni finishes the paragraph by criticizing Trumps general attitude through his campaign and his presidency in a negative light. At this point Bruni has answered both the questions he asked at the beginning of the article in his thesis. Toward the end of the article Bruni does give the reader a slight glimmer of light for a second with the sentence “A positive interpretation of these latest developments is that Trump is someone who’s willing to adjust to a deeper, fresher understanding of events, to pivot in accordance with circumstances, to learn and to evolve” I thought that was a very good point, but the light was short lived. Right after having a positive sentence Bruni makes another good hit against Trump by talking the inner “warfare” as Bruni put it, between Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner. I believe Bruni’s motive behind the “warfare” comment was to show more evidence that Trump lacks good judgement. Bruni ends up finishing the article by saying that Trump is a flip-flop president and his opinions change by the hour. Bruni also mentions another New York Times article that talks about the Bannon vs. Kushner situation. The last blow to Trump that Bruni’s leaves at the end of the article is that Trump is like a “wet piece of clay” that anyone can mold.
Bruni Stood by his opinion through out the entire article, in my opinion, and I think he made some good points about president Trump. Many of his opinions I believe as well. When it comes to the five paragraph outline I believe Bruni did a good job. He had a good title, a nice hook, he answered both the questions he asked at the beginning of the article, and his thesis was full of quotes and other articles information to back up his claims. Plus his concluding statement was very bold and he left the reader thinking, which I love. However, I also thought his article was very one sided and I believe that someone who is pro-Trump may get angry reading Bruni’s article, but who knows maybe this article would make some of the more open minded Trump supports think about the actions of our president.