5 ms·

How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged dru

How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity. I'm convinced at some point in the future U.S. citizens will have to learn what war means.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? To be fair, closing airspace before engaging in air operations is an international courtesy. It reduces the chances of downing civilian airliners. (In a similar vein, announcing closures and then not following through is incredibly damaging.) > alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity They are war crimes. If you're concerned about it, call your representative and tell them you care about the American military committing war crimes. There is currently momentum on the issue [1]. [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-venezuela-strikes-00671160 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-...
- coffinbirth 11mo ago
  It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. There is no declaration of war and no approval of Congress. The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war Is this true? Legitimate question. (Under U.S. law, I do believe they are war crimes given they're an abuse of war powers, whether exercised legally or not.) > ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity No, it did not. A "former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC)" told the BBC "US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats would be treated under international law as crimes against humanity" [1]. I haven't seen the ICC take an official position on any of this, which is expected, since it's a judicial body that grinds deliberately. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo
    - c420 11mo ago
      "War crimes can only be committed during times of armed conflict, either international or non-international, as understood under international humanitarian law. While it is necessary that the crime in question was committed during an armed conflict, this is in itself not sufficient: the crime must be sufficiently linked to the armed conflict. This so-called nexus requirement is satisfied if the armed conflict played a substantial role in the perpetrator’s decision to commit the crime, his or her ability to commit it, or the manner in which the crime was committed. In order to define an act as a war crime, this act must, besides having nexus to an armed conflict, be a serious violation of international humanitarian law and entail individual criminal responsibility." https://www.rulac.org/legal-framework/international-criminal-law#collapse2accord https://www.rulac.org/legal-framework/international-criminal...
      - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        What part of warplanes blowing shit up isn't armed conflict?
        c420 11mo ago
        I'm certainly not defending what is happening. I don't believe that criminal organizations meet the standard for an armed group that international law stipulates as required for an armed conflict. International law doesn’t work on intuition; it works on context and definitions.
    - estearum 11mo ago
      People seem to think there’s some clever little gap between war crime law, US domestic law, and human rights law that mean a government can just kill people who pose no immediate threat and without any establishment of guilt. There is not. The Trump admin wants to say they’re invaders therefore we don’t need Congressional authorization, but they’re actually irregulars therefore we don’t need to follow Geneva, but they’re actually terrorists therefore… All of it is nonsense.
      - 11mo ago
  - lazide 11mo ago
    None of it matters while he has a functional US military protecting him.
  - dragonwriter 11mo ago
    > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. Any time a state uses armed force against another state (and sometimes against other entities), there is a war in which there can be war crimes. > There is no declaration of war War is war whether or not it is formally declared. (And the Trump Administration has described that it is fighting a war against Venezuela for months, though it has characterized Venezuela as the aggressor.) This was, among other things, the explicit premise of the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act months ago. > and no approval of Congress. That might arguably make any war also a violation of domestic law, but from the standpoint of international law it isn’t particularly a meaningful argument against their being a war. > The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity. No, an individual who used to be a prosecutor with the ICC, acting as a private individual, described them that way.
defrost 11mo ago
Part of the mechanism to make this possible is dropping the full weight of the DOJ and other three letter agencies down hard on anybody who dares to point out the illegality of many of the actions here. eg: Pentagon Is Investigating a Member Of Congress Who Criticized Trump ~ https://talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things-stand/pentagon-is-investigating-a-member-of-congress-who-criticized-trump https://talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things-stand/pentagon-is... is essentially direct retribution against elected members, former military members who merely state that serving troops are required to follow the law and the constitution first as a priority. This wastes the time, money, and resources of those prepared to state the emperor has no clothes and serves as a dire warning to any other that might think to stand up.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 11mo ago
> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? It is a de facto declaration of war, focussed (on its face, it has other propaganda and diplomatic purposes) on informing civilians of the imminent actions and associated risks so that they can conduct themselves accordingly.
metalcrow 11mo ago
> How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity. It's _been_ accepted for years, if not decades now. Ever since the US started drone striking people without trial, or via trial in absentia, this has been the new normal. It being against international law is meaningless if no one care what the international law is, and especially if other countries are also breaking the law in the exact same way.
trymas 11mo ago
> How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges… While drug trafficker convicted of trafficking 400 tons of cocaine get full presidential pardon.
matheusmoreira 11mo ago
> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? Threat of violence. Nobody is dumb enough to test the patience of the country with Eagles and Raptors. > How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? It's really simple. Drug traffickers are so rich and organized they are in fact parallel governments. They are parasite governments inside the "official" ones. They have territory. They have armies. They have laws. They have tribunals. They even have goddamn taxes. It's middle ages tier barbarity. It's like a secession but without actually seceding. Trump's administration is simply engaging a belligerent government that refuses to respect its laws and treaties and insists on engaging in covert infiltration and drug sale operations on US soil. Nuking drug boats out of existence is the correct course of action. > I'm convinced at some point in the future U.S. citizens will have to learn what war means. It's because of Trump that they don't have to learn what war means. They should be thanking Trump and his troops for their service. In my country police can't engage in a single operation against the continent spanning organized drug gangs without judges busting their balls every single step of the way while at the same time releasing drug traffickers from prison and even giving back their seized drug money. How do you think it feels to wake up one day and read a newspaper saying the drug gangs dominate a quarter of your country's territory? There's speculation that the drug gangs control judges, politicians. Can you fathom what it must be like to take in this information when you're married and planning to have children? Americans should be worshipping Trump right now. They have no idea how privileged they are. Some of us are not so lucky. Some of us live in countries where at any point in time organized crime gangs can come to your house and spray paint a message saying you have 24 hours to leave or be killed. They've emptied entire towns this way. Americans will never experience that and they should thank god for it. They have professional soldiers waging literal war against these barbarians so they don't have to.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago

> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? To be fair, closing airspace before engaging in air operations is an international courtesy. It reduces the chances of downing civilian airliners. (In a similar vein, announcing closures and then not following through is incredibly damaging.) > alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity They are war crimes. If you're concerned about it, call your representative and tell them you care about the American military committing war crimes. There is currently momentum on the issue [1]. [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-venezuela-strikes-00671160 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-...

coffinbirth 11mo ago
It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. There is no declaration of war and no approval of Congress. The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war Is this true? Legitimate question. (Under U.S. law, I do believe they are war crimes given they're an abuse of war powers, whether exercised legally or not.) > ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity No, it did not. A "former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC)" told the BBC "US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats would be treated under international law as crimes against humanity" [1]. I haven't seen the ICC take an official position on any of this, which is expected, since it's a judicial body that grinds deliberately. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo
  - c420 11mo ago
    "War crimes can only be committed during times of armed conflict, either international or non-international, as understood under international humanitarian law. While it is necessary that the crime in question was committed during an armed conflict, this is in itself not sufficient: the crime must be sufficiently linked to the armed conflict. This so-called nexus requirement is satisfied if the armed conflict played a substantial role in the perpetrator’s decision to commit the crime, his or her ability to commit it, or the manner in which the crime was committed. In order to define an act as a war crime, this act must, besides having nexus to an armed conflict, be a serious violation of international humanitarian law and entail individual criminal responsibility." https://www.rulac.org/legal-framework/international-criminal-law#collapse2accord https://www.rulac.org/legal-framework/international-criminal...
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      What part of warplanes blowing shit up isn't armed conflict?
      - c420 11mo ago
        I'm certainly not defending what is happening. I don't believe that criminal organizations meet the standard for an armed group that international law stipulates as required for an armed conflict. International law doesn’t work on intuition; it works on context and definitions.
  - estearum 11mo ago
    People seem to think there’s some clever little gap between war crime law, US domestic law, and human rights law that mean a government can just kill people who pose no immediate threat and without any establishment of guilt. There is not. The Trump admin wants to say they’re invaders therefore we don’t need Congressional authorization, but they’re actually irregulars therefore we don’t need to follow Geneva, but they’re actually terrorists therefore… All of it is nonsense.
    - 11mo ago
- lazide 11mo ago
  None of it matters while he has a functional US military protecting him.
- dragonwriter 11mo ago
  > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. Any time a state uses armed force against another state (and sometimes against other entities), there is a war in which there can be war crimes. > There is no declaration of war War is war whether or not it is formally declared. (And the Trump Administration has described that it is fighting a war against Venezuela for months, though it has characterized Venezuela as the aggressor.) This was, among other things, the explicit premise of the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act months ago. > and no approval of Congress. That might arguably make any war also a violation of domestic law, but from the standpoint of international law it isn’t particularly a meaningful argument against their being a war. > The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity. No, an individual who used to be a prosecutor with the ICC, acting as a private individual, described them that way.

defrost 11mo ago

Part of the mechanism to make this possible is dropping the full weight of the DOJ and other three letter agencies down hard on anybody who dares to point out the illegality of many of the actions here. eg: Pentagon Is Investigating a Member Of Congress Who Criticized Trump ~ https://talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things-stand/pentagon-is-investigating-a-member-of-congress-who-criticized-trump https://talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things-stand/pentagon-is... is essentially direct retribution against elected members, former military members who merely state that serving troops are required to follow the law and the constitution first as a priority. This wastes the time, money, and resources of those prepared to state the emperor has no clothes and serves as a dire warning to any other that might think to stand up.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 11mo ago

> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? It is a de facto declaration of war, focussed (on its face, it has other propaganda and diplomatic purposes) on informing civilians of the imminent actions and associated risks so that they can conduct themselves accordingly.

metalcrow 11mo ago

> How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity. It's _been_ accepted for years, if not decades now. Ever since the US started drone striking people without trial, or via trial in absentia, this has been the new normal. It being against international law is meaningless if no one care what the international law is, and especially if other countries are also breaking the law in the exact same way.

trymas 11mo ago

> How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges… While drug trafficker convicted of trafficking 400 tons of cocaine get full presidential pardon.

matheusmoreira 11mo ago

> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? Threat of violence. Nobody is dumb enough to test the patience of the country with Eagles and Raptors. > How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? It's really simple. Drug traffickers are so rich and organized they are in fact parallel governments. They are parasite governments inside the "official" ones. They have territory. They have armies. They have laws. They have tribunals. They even have goddamn taxes. It's middle ages tier barbarity. It's like a secession but without actually seceding. Trump's administration is simply engaging a belligerent government that refuses to respect its laws and treaties and insists on engaging in covert infiltration and drug sale operations on US soil. Nuking drug boats out of existence is the correct course of action. > I'm convinced at some point in the future U.S. citizens will have to learn what war means. It's because of Trump that they don't have to learn what war means. They should be thanking Trump and his troops for their service. In my country police can't engage in a single operation against the continent spanning organized drug gangs without judges busting their balls every single step of the way while at the same time releasing drug traffickers from prison and even giving back their seized drug money. How do you think it feels to wake up one day and read a newspaper saying the drug gangs dominate a quarter of your country's territory? There's speculation that the drug gangs control judges, politicians. Can you fathom what it must be like to take in this information when you're married and planning to have children? Americans should be worshipping Trump right now. They have no idea how privileged they are. Some of us are not so lucky. Some of us live in countries where at any point in time organized crime gangs can come to your house and spray paint a message saying you have 24 hours to leave or be killed. They've emptied entire towns this way. Americans will never experience that and they should thank god for it. They have professional soldiers waging literal war against these barbarians so they don't have to.