When you’ve lost NewsMax
-
We’ve been killing people we deemed threats with impunity for 25 years. The only difference here is it’s Trump.
@Mik said in When you’ve lost NewsMax:
We’ve been killing people we deemed threats with impunity for 25 years. The only difference here is it’s Trump.
If this was a true ‘no quarter’ order it would be something that has not happened (from top down at least) since the Indian wars.
-
If if if. if they laughed about it. If it was evil. If if if.
"You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell
-
Not really. The difference here is that Trump has deployed a USN carrier group to undertake what otherwise would be a Coast Guard action in conjunction with law enforcement.
@Renauda said in When you’ve lost NewsMax:
Not really. The difference here is that Trump has deployed a USN carrier group to undertake what otherwise would be a Coast Guard action in conjunction with law enforcement.
US armed forces have been involved in these killings over much of the world. We've had far worse collateral damage than drug smugglers.
"You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell
-
-
@Mik said in When you’ve lost NewsMax:
If if if. if they laughed about it. If it was evil. If if if.
Yeah our country has certainly been involved in shady ops forever. They are clandestine and remain that way for a reason. That being said, IF (!) this was a case where our military blew up a boat of drug traffickers (which already wrong, usually the coast guard or someone stops, arrests, and keeps the loot) and then later gives an order to blow up 2 survivors... that is beyond the pale. Then again, I've said we have decade-level scandals every week with this administration.
-
@Renauda said in When you’ve lost NewsMax:
Not really. The difference here is that Trump has deployed a USN carrier group to undertake what otherwise would be a Coast Guard action in conjunction with law enforcement.
US armed forces have been involved in these killings over much of the world. We've had far worse collateral damage than drug smugglers.
We've had far worse collateral damage than drug smugglers.
I was under the impression that the drug smugglers themselves were the primary target, not their means of transport. Personally, I am indifferent as to how the US goes about dealing with these offshore criminals caught in international or US waters. I would however suggest that the current hubris not extend to dropping a Seal team univited into a neighbouring friendly’s sovereign territory as was once suggested on this very forum this past year. (https://nodebb.the-new-coffee-room.club/post/325659) Not saying it would happen, but given the unpredictable swagger of the current regime in Washington, such a scenario cannot be entirely ruled out.
-
@xenon said in When you’ve lost NewsMax:
I thought we already tried the war on drugs.
We did. The drugs won.
-
I'm sure the USA has done much worse to "unarmed survivors" of drug trafficking in the jungles of Columbia. Usually it's done covertly, for a reason. Although I am basing most of my knowledge off of Tom Clancy novels. That being said, there is a reason that is done covertly... whereas if you have the military ordering strikes (captured by video) on unarmed(?) survivors instead of offering quarter, that is an international crime.
