Here are the details of the case:

Following a chemical assault that killed over 80 civilians, including children, the US government decided to target a Syrian military airbase in 2016. The US administration did not receive UN or Syrian government approval to carry out this strike, which was widely criticized as a violation of international law.

The ethically appropriate course of action, according to utilitarianism, is the one that creates the greatest amount of good for the largest number of people. The good at dispute here is the protection of innocent civilians, and the people affected are the Syrians.

The decision to strike Syria was made in the incorrect way, according to a utilitarian analysis. The bombing killed innocent persons and destroyed infrastructure, resulting in more civilian deaths in the future. It also broke international law, setting a hazardous precedent for other countries to launch similar assaults without permission.

-- My Role as Leader

Provide a seven Sentences on What They See as the Role of Leader in Regards to this Case Study. What SHOULD the leader have done, which would have provided a different outcome? In addition, provide Action Steps that the leader could take that what begin to move the situation/organization toward filling the gap. Include 2 or 3 Action Steps that will change the trajectory - the current path -- the current course of action -- of the unethical behavior and the institution that may encourage the unethical behavior.