4 ms·

How do you know they are drug traffickers? This administration doesn't exactly have a track record of honesty, competence, and acting in good faith.

by rurp 1y ago

lazide 1y ago
Does it actually matter? So far, no one with a government who is both willing and able to make a fuss about it has been involved. This is what realpolitik is.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Does it actually matter? Yes. The precedent being established would let e.g. China or Russia pot a yacht on the high seas for reasons which only work under their own laws.
  - lazide 1y ago
    What makes you think they wouldn’t already, if they had a reason? [https://cepa.org/article/bombs-on-board-the-strange-streak-of-russian-ship-explosions/ https://cepa.org/article/bombs-on-board-the-strange-streak-o...]
toomim 1y ago
I've spotted a partisan perspective.
FridayoLeary 1y ago
[flagged]
lingrush4 1y ago
You being unable to trust the government is not evidence of wrongdoing. The military has never had to share its intelligence with civilians and it's not going to start now just to ease your mind. Literally nobody is demanding Ukraine prove its targets are actually part of the Russian military before striking them.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  Historically we get the assurance at least from other branches of government and understand that various oversights are in place, not just whims of the executive.
- rurp 1y ago
  This simply isn't true. Getting the populace on board is a standard and important part of democracies initiating military action. Bush and his team spent endless amounts of time briefing Congress and the public on their justifications for the Iraq war for example. Ukraine has gone to extensive lengths to only target military and, more recently, energy infrastructure in Russia. They aren't blowing up random civilian vehicles or ships, and have a clear incentive to show that they aren't doing that. Fighting drug smuggling is a flimsy pretext for why the US is blowing up random ships, although it's apparently one some people are willing to believe. Take the same actions but change up the countries and the reactions would be very different. This is about Trump doing yet another tough guy show of force against a much weaker country he feels safe enough bullying.
  - 20after4 1y ago
    > Bush and his team spent endless amounts of time briefing Congress and the public on their justifications for the Iraq war Correction: they spent endless amounts of time lying to congress and the UN about their concocted, pretextual justification for the Iraq war.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > Correction: they spent endless amounts of time lying to congress and the UN about their concocted, pretextual justification for the Iraq war One, legitimately unclear to what degree Bush et al believed the nonsense. Two, they bothered to engage. That's OP's point.
  - senderista 1y ago
    Uh, Ukraine (GUR) deliberately blew up a random civilian who was unwittingly transporting explosives for them across the Kerch Bridge. As well as whoever happened to be nearby (fortunately it was early morning so traffic was light). They also randomly shell residential areas in the Belgorod region and Donetsk city using low-accuracy tube artillery and Grad rockets (including cluster munitions and butterfly mines). The fact that Russia is guilty of much worse does not mean these are not war crimes.
hunterpayne 1y ago
Because they aren't flying a flag of the country in which their boat is registered. All boats do this. Not doing this is like flying a plane without filing a flight plan. Technically when you don't fly a flag you are considered a pirate. Clearly they aren't pirates but they are smugglers. There is no other reason why you wouldn't fly a specific national flag. You can complain about the rules of engagement and that is fine. However, posts like yours aren't exactly rooted in honesty, competence or good faith.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Technically when you don't fly a flag you are considered a pirate Source? Piracy's definition under UNCLOS seems pretty tight [1]. [1] https://www.un.org/depts/los/piracy/piracy_legal_framework.htm https://www.un.org/depts/los/piracy/piracy_legal_framework.h...
- Zironic 1y ago
  Only ships are required to fly flags. Not boats. Consider how silly it would become if every dingy and lifeboat needed to be registered as a ship. https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/marine-law/294870-unclos-provisions-on-ship-flag-and-nationality https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/marine-law/294870-unclos-...
terminalshort 1y ago
[flagged]
- op00to 1y ago
  Prove it.
  - gottorf 1y ago
    Some rando on the internet isn't going to be able to prove or disprove this. You believe what you want based on what evidence is available to you. Myself, the imagery I've seen of the multiple very expensive and very powerful outboard motors on these boats is enough for me to believe that these are not in fact honest fishermen. It's totally incongruous.
    - crustaceansoup 1y ago
      We don't have images / videos of all strikes. We don't have anything from the strike that the Colombian president claims was on a fishing boat, for one. If you really want to go far enough with it, given the administration's general lack of trustworthiness, we don't even have confirmation that all the videos we've been given correspond to the strikes we've been told they correspond to.

How do you know they are drug traffickers? This administration doesn't exactly have a track record of honesty, competence, and acting in good faith.

by rurp 1y ago

How do you know they are drug traffickers? This administration doesn't exactly have a track record of honesty, competence, and acting in good faith.

lazide 1y ago

Does it actually matter? So far, no one with a government who is both willing and able to make a fuss about it has been involved. This is what realpolitik is.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Does it actually matter? Yes. The precedent being established would let e.g. China or Russia pot a yacht on the high seas for reasons which only work under their own laws.
- lazide 1y ago
  What makes you think they wouldn’t already, if they had a reason? [https://cepa.org/article/bombs-on-board-the-strange-streak-of-russian-ship-explosions/ https://cepa.org/article/bombs-on-board-the-strange-streak-o...]

toomim 1y ago

I've spotted a partisan perspective.

FridayoLeary 1y ago

[flagged]

lingrush4 1y ago

You being unable to trust the government is not evidence of wrongdoing. The military has never had to share its intelligence with civilians and it's not going to start now just to ease your mind. Literally nobody is demanding Ukraine prove its targets are actually part of the Russian military before striking them.

AlecSchueler 1y ago
Historically we get the assurance at least from other branches of government and understand that various oversights are in place, not just whims of the executive.
rurp 1y ago
This simply isn't true. Getting the populace on board is a standard and important part of democracies initiating military action. Bush and his team spent endless amounts of time briefing Congress and the public on their justifications for the Iraq war for example. Ukraine has gone to extensive lengths to only target military and, more recently, energy infrastructure in Russia. They aren't blowing up random civilian vehicles or ships, and have a clear incentive to show that they aren't doing that. Fighting drug smuggling is a flimsy pretext for why the US is blowing up random ships, although it's apparently one some people are willing to believe. Take the same actions but change up the countries and the reactions would be very different. This is about Trump doing yet another tough guy show of force against a much weaker country he feels safe enough bullying.
- 20after4 1y ago
  > Bush and his team spent endless amounts of time briefing Congress and the public on their justifications for the Iraq war Correction: they spent endless amounts of time lying to congress and the UN about their concocted, pretextual justification for the Iraq war.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Correction: they spent endless amounts of time lying to congress and the UN about their concocted, pretextual justification for the Iraq war One, legitimately unclear to what degree Bush et al believed the nonsense. Two, they bothered to engage. That's OP's point.
- senderista 1y ago
  Uh, Ukraine (GUR) deliberately blew up a random civilian who was unwittingly transporting explosives for them across the Kerch Bridge. As well as whoever happened to be nearby (fortunately it was early morning so traffic was light). They also randomly shell residential areas in the Belgorod region and Donetsk city using low-accuracy tube artillery and Grad rockets (including cluster munitions and butterfly mines). The fact that Russia is guilty of much worse does not mean these are not war crimes.

hunterpayne 1y ago

Because they aren't flying a flag of the country in which their boat is registered. All boats do this. Not doing this is like flying a plane without filing a flight plan. Technically when you don't fly a flag you are considered a pirate. Clearly they aren't pirates but they are smugglers. There is no other reason why you wouldn't fly a specific national flag. You can complain about the rules of engagement and that is fine. However, posts like yours aren't exactly rooted in honesty, competence or good faith.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Technically when you don't fly a flag you are considered a pirate Source? Piracy's definition under UNCLOS seems pretty tight [1]. [1] https://www.un.org/depts/los/piracy/piracy_legal_framework.htm https://www.un.org/depts/los/piracy/piracy_legal_framework.h...
Zironic 1y ago
Only ships are required to fly flags. Not boats. Consider how silly it would become if every dingy and lifeboat needed to be registered as a ship. https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/marine-law/294870-unclos-provisions-on-ship-flag-and-nationality https://www.marinepublic.com/blogs/marine-law/294870-unclos-...

terminalshort 1y ago

[flagged]

op00to 1y ago
Prove it.
- gottorf 1y ago
  Some rando on the internet isn't going to be able to prove or disprove this. You believe what you want based on what evidence is available to you. Myself, the imagery I've seen of the multiple very expensive and very powerful outboard motors on these boats is enough for me to believe that these are not in fact honest fishermen. It's totally incongruous.
  - crustaceansoup 1y ago
    We don't have images / videos of all strikes. We don't have anything from the strike that the Colombian president claims was on a fishing boat, for one. If you really want to go far enough with it, given the administration's general lack of trustworthiness, we don't even have confirmation that all the videos we've been given correspond to the strikes we've been told they correspond to.