Trump Orders U.S. Military Action Against Terrorist Drug Cartels

#76
#76
LouderVol said:
I want to know how they KNOW this boat was part of a cartel and the people on board were all cartel members?

did they have an informant? We know they didn't board and inspect it. Were any of those 11 people being smuggled/trafficked? have they placed some sort of tracking device on a person involved with the cartel, or some illegal cartel contraband that ended up on that boat?

because I agree that a preemptive death penalty for alleged drug smuggling is outrageous.
Click to expand...

Drug smugglers are now known as terrorist and now treated differently by the US government. They now are tried by the US military just as any designated terrorist group is. For them there is no trial, just death. Basically, my tax dollars are put to better use than in a court system.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Majors, -GiveHim6-, GroverCleveland and 2 others
#77
#77
TVOLS said:
Drug smugglers are now known as terrorist and now treated differently by the US government. They now tried by the US military just as any designated terrorist group is. For them there is no trial, just death. Basically, my tax dollars are put to better use than in a court system.
Click to expand...
How many different types of crime does your new "execution before proven guilty" standard apply to
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, MontyPython, BeardedVol and 1 other person
#78
#78
dalton_vol said:
If you can't have self governance then this is what's going to happen. You can't be a free but immoral culture or country
Click to expand...

This is the exact same thing as saying "you can't be a free country" because a moral culture has never existed and will never exist.
 
#79
#79
TVOLS said:
Drug smugglers are now known as terrorist and now treated differently by the US government. They now are tried by the US military just as any designated terrorist group is. For them there is no trial, just death. Basically, my tax dollars are put to better use than in a court system.
Click to expand...

And now "terrorist" has no meaning.

The government is killing without accountability. There is no reason our navy shouldn't be able to take that boat without killing everybody. If they are actually terrorists, we want to capture them and get intel from them.

It's all fake BS designed to cover-up and distract.

Release the Epstein files.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, MontyPython, LouderVol and 2 others
#81
#81
TVOLS said:
Drug smugglers are now known as terrorist and now treated differently by the US government. They now are tried by the US military just as any designated terrorist group is. For them there is no trial, just death. Basically, my tax dollars are put to better use than in a court system.
Click to expand...

What were the names of the 11 people killed, and how do we know that they were all members of TDA?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython and NashVol11
#85
#85
TVOLS said:
Drug smugglers are now known as terrorist and now treated differently by the US government. They now are tried by the US military just as any designated terrorist group is. For them there is no trial, just death. Basically, my tax dollars are put to better use than in a court system.
Click to expand...
the expansion of terrorist is bs. neither the war on drugs, nor the war on terror were a win for the citizens of this country. I don't see combining them as logical, or making anything better.

what was the military basing this strike on? Congress hasn't declared war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, MontyPython and NashVol11
#87
#87
n_huffhines said:
And now "terrorist" has no meaning.

The government is killing without accountability. There is no reason our navy shouldn't be able to take that boat without killing everybody. If they are actually terrorists, we want to capture them and get intel from them.

It's all fake BS designed to cover-up and distract.

Release the Epstein files.
Click to expand...

Than you should have voted for someone that could get elected. I agree with the Epstein files part.
 
#89
#89
MontyPython said:
Was blowing up that "narco terrorist" boat really necessary?

Was it even legal?

The legality of the U.S. military strike on September 2, 2025, against a vessel allegedly operated by Tren de Aragua in international waters remains highly contested and lacks a clear consensus among legal experts, with significant debate centering on international law principles such as the use of force, proportionality, and jurisdiction on the high seas.

### U.S. Government Justification
The Trump administration framed the action as a legitimate counter-terrorism operation. Key points include:
- Tren de Aragua was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) by the U.S. State Department in February 2025, following an executive order issued on January 20, 2025, that expanded such designations to various cartels. This classification allows the U.S. to target the group under domestic counter-terrorism authorities, potentially including the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), though the AUMF's applicability to non-al-Qaeda-affiliated groups like drug cartels is stretched and has been criticized in past contexts.
- Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the strike as "an act of war against a designated narco-terrorist organization," deferring specific legal questions to the White House counsel. President Trump stated the vessel was transporting illegal narcotics toward the U.S., positioning the strike as preventive action against drug trafficking and terrorism.
- A senior U.S. defense official echoed this, noting the vessel was operated by a "designated narco-terrorist organization." Supporters of the strike argue that, under the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, states can take cooperative measures to suppress drug trafficking at sea, and the terrorist designation provides additional latitude for kinetic action.

### Criticisms and Legal Concerns
Critics, including international law experts and human rights organizations, argue the strike likely violated international law, particularly since it involved lethal force without an imminent threat or due process. Notable points include:
- The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) governs activities in international waters, allowing boarding and inspection of vessels suspected of certain crimes (e.g., piracy or statelessness), but drug trafficking requires flag-state consent for intervention. Sinking a vessel with a missile strike exceeds standard interdiction protocols, which typically involve warnings, disabling shots, or arrests rather than destruction.
- Adam Isacson, a defense and security expert at the Washington Office on Latin America, called the use of lethal force against a civilian vessel a potential "war crime" if not in self-defense, emphasizing that suspicion of drug smuggling does not justify a "death sentence" and that alternatives like warning shots should have been used.
- Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a lawyer with the American Immigration Council, questioned the domestic legal basis, noting drug trafficking is not a capital offense and asking what U.S. law authorizes "premeditated assassination" of suspects, suggesting interception and arrest upon entering U.S. waters as a lawful alternative.
- Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, the use of force is prohibited except in cases of self-defense (Article 51) or with UN Security Council authorization. Transporting drugs does not constitute an "armed attack" qualifying for self-defense, and no UNSC approval was sought. Venezuela has protested U.S. military deployments in the region and called for UN intervention, though no specific response to this strike was immediately reported.
- A declassified U.S. intelligence report contradicts some justifications by stating Maduro's government likely does not cooperate with or direct Tren de Aragua, undermining claims of state-sponsored terrorism.

### Broader Context and Reactions
- The incident occurred amid escalated U.S.-Venezuela tensions, with U.S. warships deployed to the Caribbean in late August 2025 and prior designations of Venezuelan entities like the Cartel of the Suns as terrorist groups. Former U.S. Navy Admiral James Stavridis described it as "gunboat diplomacy" possibly aimed at pressuring Venezuela beyond drug interdiction.
- Venezuela denied the footage's authenticity and has not issued a direct response to the strike, but officials like President Maduro have accused the U.S. of seeking regime change.
- No international body has ruled on the matter as of September 3, 2025, but the lack of immediate evidence (e.g., recovered narcotics or vessel flag details) fuels skepticism. Conservative outlets and Trump supporters view it as a necessary hardline measure against cartels, while progressive and human rights groups see it as an unlawful escalation.

In summary, while the U.S. asserts the strike was legal under its terrorist designation and counter-narcotics frameworks, many experts substantiate claims that it breaches international law due to excessive force and lack of self-defense justification. Ultimate determination would require investigation by bodies like the International Court of Justice or UN, but no such process has begun.
Click to expand...
Bawahaha
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
#90
#90
NashVol11 said:
How many different types of crime does your new "execution before proven guilty" standard apply to
Click to expand...

Technically, no crime needs to be committed. I told the forum a few days after he took office that I wouldn't want to be operating across the border with human or drug smuggling - this might even pertain to lawyers operating with USAID money on the other side of the border. 🤷‍♂️
 
#91
#91
MontyPython said:
Was blowing up that "narco terrorist" boat really necessary?

Was it even legal?

The legality of the U.S. military strike on September 2, 2025, against a vessel allegedly operated by Tren de Aragua in international waters remains highly contested and lacks a clear consensus among legal experts, with significant debate centering on international law principles such as the use of force, proportionality, and jurisdiction on the high seas.

### U.S. Government Justification
The Trump administration framed the action as a legitimate counter-terrorism operation. Key points include:
- Tren de Aragua was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) by the U.S. State Department in February 2025, following an executive order issued on January 20, 2025, that expanded such designations to various cartels. This classification allows the U.S. to target the group under domestic counter-terrorism authorities, potentially including the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), though the AUMF's applicability to non-al-Qaeda-affiliated groups like drug cartels is stretched and has been criticized in past contexts.
- Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the strike as "an act of war against a designated narco-terrorist organization," deferring specific legal questions to the White House counsel. President Trump stated the vessel was transporting illegal narcotics toward the U.S., positioning the strike as preventive action against drug trafficking and terrorism.
- A senior U.S. defense official echoed this, noting the vessel was operated by a "designated narco-terrorist organization." Supporters of the strike argue that, under the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, states can take cooperative measures to suppress drug trafficking at sea, and the terrorist designation provides additional latitude for kinetic action.

### Criticisms and Legal Concerns
Critics, including international law experts and human rights organizations, argue the strike likely violated international law, particularly since it involved lethal force without an imminent threat or due process. Notable points include:
- The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) governs activities in international waters, allowing boarding and inspection of vessels suspected of certain crimes (e.g., piracy or statelessness), but drug trafficking requires flag-state consent for intervention. Sinking a vessel with a missile strike exceeds standard interdiction protocols, which typically involve warnings, disabling shots, or arrests rather than destruction.
- Adam Isacson, a defense and security expert at the Washington Office on Latin America, called the use of lethal force against a civilian vessel a potential "war crime" if not in self-defense, emphasizing that suspicion of drug smuggling does not justify a "death sentence" and that alternatives like warning shots should have been used.
- Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a lawyer with the American Immigration Council, questioned the domestic legal basis, noting drug trafficking is not a capital offense and asking what U.S. law authorizes "premeditated assassination" of suspects, suggesting interception and arrest upon entering U.S. waters as a lawful alternative.
- Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, the use of force is prohibited except in cases of self-defense (Article 51) or with UN Security Council authorization. Transporting drugs does not constitute an "armed attack" qualifying for self-defense, and no UNSC approval was sought. Venezuela has protested U.S. military deployments in the region and called for UN intervention, though no specific response to this strike was immediately reported.
- A declassified U.S. intelligence report contradicts some justifications by stating Maduro's government likely does not cooperate with or direct Tren de Aragua, undermining claims of state-sponsored terrorism.

### Broader Context and Reactions
- The incident occurred amid escalated U.S.-Venezuela tensions, with U.S. warships deployed to the Caribbean in late August 2025 and prior designations of Venezuelan entities like the Cartel of the Suns as terrorist groups. Former U.S. Navy Admiral James Stavridis described it as "gunboat diplomacy" possibly aimed at pressuring Venezuela beyond drug interdiction.
- Venezuela denied the footage's authenticity and has not issued a direct response to the strike, but officials like President Maduro have accused the U.S. of seeking regime change.
- No international body has ruled on the matter as of September 3, 2025, but the lack of immediate evidence (e.g., recovered narcotics or vessel flag details) fuels skepticism. Conservative outlets and Trump supporters view it as a necessary hardline measure against cartels, while progressive and human rights groups see it as an unlawful escalation.

In summary, while the U.S. asserts the strike was legal under its terrorist designation and counter-narcotics frameworks, many experts substantiate claims that it breaches international law due to excessive force and lack of self-defense justification. Ultimate determination would require investigation by bodies like the International Court of Justice or UN, but no such process has begun.
Click to expand...
They should have blown the damn thing up and just kept their mouths shut. But Trump can’t resist the bragging

This of course presumes they had good intel and they weren’t killing an aid worker again like they did in 2021
 
#92
#92
LouderVol said:
I want to know how they KNOW this boat was part of a cartel and the people on board were all cartel members?

did they have an informant? We know they didn't board and inspect it. Were any of those 11 people being smuggled/trafficked? have they placed some sort of tracking device on a person involved with the cartel, or some illegal cartel contraband that ended up on that boat?

because I agree that a preemptive death penalty for alleged drug smuggling is outrageous.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the military has the ability to see you grabbing the misses backside on your patio if they so desired.
I imagine they have the surveillance capabilities to see these things happening in advance of departure. This boats probably been tracked on several occasions
 
#93
#93
Zues1 said:
I'm pretty sure the military has the ability to see you grabbing the misses backside on your patio if they so desired.
I imagine they have the surveillance capabilities to see these things happening in advance of departure. This boats probably been tracked on several occasions
Click to expand...
As someone who designs these kinds of optical surveillance systems I have always wished our range and resolution capability was as good as Hollywood purports it to be. Couple that with high humidity tropical mid latitude atmosphere and range falls off quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737, hog88, LouderVol and 1 other person
#94
#94
NorthDallas40 said:
As someone who designs these kinds of optical surveillance systems I have always wished our range and resolution capability was as good as Hollywood purports it to be. Couple that with high humidity tropical mid latitude atmosphere and range falls off quickly.
Click to expand...
Welp that settles. We probably just blew up a fishing charter boat ...🤣
 
  • Like
Reactions: VAVol85, GroverCleveland and LSU-SIU
#97
#97
Zues1 said:
Welp that settles. We probably just blew up a fishing charter boat ...🤣
Click to expand...
Well we blew up what you saw in the video. That’s it. There isn’t some other secret squirrel sensor that can read a book over the shoulder of someone on the boat.

That was also infrared video. Most likely midwave. At least what I watched was. If they have any visible camera video it’s going to suffer from atmospherics
 
#98
#98
NorthDallas40 said:
Well we blew up what you saw in the video. That’s it. There isn’t some other secret squirrel sensor that can read a book over the shoulder of someone on the boat.

That was also infrared video. Most likely midwave. At least what I watched was. If they have any visible camera video it’s going to suffer from atmospherics
Click to expand...
So no drug smugglers were harmed....got it
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
#99
#99
Zues1 said:
So no drug smugglers were harmed....got it
Click to expand...
Not what I said at all. Learn to read I guess.

And from looking at that longer video clip I am pretty sure I even know what sensor was used based on the blocked out areas where sensor symbology would be. Did they happen so say if this was an MQ-9 strike? Or was that video attached to an MQ-9?
 
#100
#100
NashVol11 said:
Oh sure, might as well just replace our justice system with "innocent until the kind of boat that was used 'pretty much says' you're guilty"
Click to expand...

If they are across the border, a good portion of the "justice system" really doesn't exist. Heck, even if you were American under Obama, Biden and Hillary it was suspect, let alone suspected of being a foreigner.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top