6 ms·
> There’s no proof that that’s actually what they’re doing. They should present some. What do you think they're doing? And what kind of proof would you expect?
by burningChrome 11mo ago
> There’s no proof that that’s actually what they’re doing. They should present some.
What do you think they're doing? And what kind of proof would you expect?
- margalabargala 11mo agoBlowing up boats is what they're doing. Proof would be if rather than blowing up the boats, they, say, intercepted them, searched them, and actually found drugs.
- jkubicek 11mo agoIf these people were truly enemy combatants, you would think we would (at the very least) round up the survivors and conduct trials in the us instead of just letting them go. https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/18/politics/caribbean-boat-strike-survivors https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/18/politics/caribbean-boat-strik...
- lmm 11mo ago> If these people were truly enemy combatants, you would think we would (at the very least) round up the survivors and conduct trials in the us instead of just letting them go. What? The whole point of the "enemy combatant" designation is to say that they're not criminals and not PoWs either. I don't like it but it was the standard position under Bush, Obama, and Biden, there's nothing new here.
- reddozen 11mo agoEnemy combatants to...what? When has congress declared war? Using your military to assassinate another countries civilians is a literal war crime under customary international humanitarian law.
- grosswait 11mo agoCrimes (alleged) on the high seas have a very long history of being prosecuted under their own set of rules. Look into it, you may be surprised what is “normal”
- apical_dendrite 11mo agoWhat I believe you're referring to is piracy, not drug smuggling. The term is Hostis humani generis - or enemy of mankind. There is a very long tradition of treating pirates as outside of all laws because pirates would murder and pillage in one jurisdiction or on the high seas and then sail away to another jurisdiction. So all nations had a duty to confront pirates. That is not to say that summary execution was considered normal - it happened, but typically pirates were captured and afforded some due process. In the modern era this logic has been extended to terrorism and certain crimes against humanity like torture. It has NOT been extended to encompass drug trafficking. If you're smuggling drugs from Venezuela to Trinidad, you really don't want to be detected, so you're not going to stop any random ship that you see and murder the crew and steal the cargo. The whole concept of the pirate as someone who is waging war on humanity with extreme violence and can't be effectively dealt with by the nation that is effected doesn't really apply neatly to this situation. You could make the argument that because drugs are dangerous, and drugs can be transported anywhere, that drug traffickers are effectively enemies of humanity who are doing extreme violence in the same vein as terrorists and pirates. But that would be a novel argument, not, in any way, "normal".
- RobotToaster 11mo agoBlowing up innocent fisherman to provoke retaliation, that will be used as justification for invasion.
- sojournerc 11mo agoSo your theory is that a dominant military force is using a missile that costs at least 5 figures on random fisherman, with no intel or reason for targeting... Forgive me for thinking that it might be a bit more nuanced than that.
- metabagel 11mo agoIt's very much not nuanced. The purpose is intimidation and a show of political and military strength. Missile attacks on apparently helpless watercraft serve that purpose quite nicely.
- RobotToaster 11mo agoYes. The same military used a 6 figure missile to shoot down a children's balloon https://www.npr.org/2023/02/18/1158048921/pico-balloon-k9yo https://www.npr.org/2023/02/18/1158048921/pico-balloon-k9yo
- billfor 11mo agoTo be more specific, it shot down a balloon from a hobby balloon club, which is built similar to a child’s balloon insofar as it has the same material. On the heels of the Chinese balloon incursion it might be understandable why they would shoot down a high altitude balloon.
- wewtyflakes 11mo agoI would love, love, love to live in a world where your skepticism was warranted.
- rco8786 11mo ago100% yes. A 5 figure missile out of a ONE TRILLION dollar military budget.
- 8note 11mo agoas a simplest thing, i would expect them to abduct the survivors and bring them to the US to face some trial, rather than putting them on a boat back home as a general best practice, id expect them to send a patrol boat to go board and confiscate the drugs, then show off said drugs. its not hard to collect the evidence of drugs, since the drugs will be on the boat/sub, and with the size of the deployment, there's more than enough capacity to just sail over to it, rather than destroying it with missiles.
- vjvjvjvjghv 11mo ago"rather than putting them on a boat back home" Is this what's happening?
- EasyMark 11mo agoThe survivors? Yes they have sent some home, didn't arrest them and toss back in jail. In what universe does that make sense?
- nwatson 11mo agoThe goal is kinetics and beautiful fireworks for the folks back home. "Acting now" is much easier than methodical interdiction, investigation, and potential justice. The home audience won't tolerate anything smacking of evidence and proof, that's too bookish and takes time.
- expedition32 11mo agoThe folks back home are addicted to meth. Is anyone doing anything about that?
- Xylakant 11mo agoNo, no one at the highest policy/government levels is doing anything about that. It would require treating drug addiction as a health care issue, with a plan to solve the underlying root causes, support and care for the affected and substantial funding on the ground level for support networks and other institutions that actually work in the space. Housing programs and drug decriminalization may also be worthwhile evaluating. But that’s hard, unglamorous work, out of the limelight with people that are sick, addicted, grimy. No spectacular fireworks. (Sorry for the rant)
- michaelmrose 11mo agoThey are trying to distract from multiple crisis at home including the relationship of the president with a disgraced pedophile and alleged misdeeds. I would expect them to provide the proof that served as justification for the strike and an explatation as to why a strike rather than interdiction was lawful and justifiable. Eg an intelligence source suggested this very boat was being being used by Bob the blow on such and such a date Bob was responsible for ordering the murder of 4 FBI agents and due to assets available it would have been a huge risk to our people and it might be difficult or impossible to local bob any time in the near future. If need be this justification may be given secretly to a bipartisan group of lawmakers who assert vague but important findings like we believe that the strikes are justified and didn't kill innocent people.
- dyauspitr 11mo agoShooting at all boats indiscriminately to induce a general feeling of fear partially so drug smugglers think twice and partially to provoke Venezuela who Trump politically disagrees with. Sucks for the 60 odd random peoples’ families that died though.
- expedition32 11mo ago[flagged]
- nielsbot 11mo agoAgain, no proof they're drug smugglers. You want to take the administration at their word with no proof? That's naive and foolish!
- dyauspitr 11mo agoYes, you’re agreeing with me.
- downrightmike 11mo agoSame thing they are doing everywhere else they can, shitting their diapers and punching everyone in the nose with shit hands. They are pushing everything they can domestically and foreign to create a spark of war.
- mukmuk 11mo agoOur country has a long and sickening history of interdiction theater e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Peru_Cessna_185_shootdown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Peru_Cessna_185_shootdown
- EasyMark 11mo agoI expect them to show some evidence -at the very least- to Congressional members of both parties, and I mean hard evidence. And also an analysis why this is better than just arresting them since they obviously aren't launching missiles back. They haven't even provided minimal evidence, and have been partisan in the sharing of it with only their preferred members of Congress, what little they've shown so far.
- notyourwork 11mo agoSo I can blow up my neighbors house and say it was for drugs. You’re good with that level of proof?
- steve_adams_86 11mo agoBut I mean, it had to be drugs... Why would you lie?
- gxnxcxcx 11mo agoIn the appropriate line of work you can already shoot their dog and seize their TV, and that's when things go peachy enough.
- jmulho 11mo agoI think the people in the boats are coming to the America to eat our pets.
- moogly 11mo agoWar crimes.
- perihelions 11mo ago> "What do you think they're doing?" I think they murdered an innocent man, Alejandro Carranza, a Colombian fisherman. The President of Colombia himself personally advocated on his behalf; it's been all over international news. Does this stuff not diffuse into your echo chamber? https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-10-22/colombias-ties-to-vessels-struck-by-trump-a-missing-fisherman-a-submarine-and-an-eln-boat.html https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-10-22/colombia... > "On the same Saturday, Petro declared that U.S. officials “committed murder and violated sovereignty in territorial waters,” stating that the fisherman identified by RTVC as Alejandro Carranza had no connection to drug trafficking. In subsequent posts, the Colombian president has repeatedly emphasized that Carranza was a “humble fisherman.”"