U.S. destroys Venezuelan vessels | Double Tap strike scrutiny

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 27K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
Not sure what counts as just the shots.

I guarantee you that this would be not such an outrage if it was an exception to an otherwise sound policy basis. It is such an outrage because the administration is so keen to deploy the military for the purpose of authoritarian control. When we see supposed drug dealers get killed at high seas, it makes people wonder what they will do to supposed drug dealers here. It makes people wonder if they will start killing Hispanic people left and right (perhaps more subconsciously).

It would not be as much of an outrage if Trump wasn't also carrying out a systematic terror campaign against largely Latin American people (with other nationalities by no means excluded), and if his chief deputy advisor for policy wasn't openly psychopathic. When they are killing Hispanics for sport in the Caribbean, it makes people think that maybe all the deportation stuff is for sport too. Like hunting.

That is to say, it's such an outrage because it's Trumpism at its worst. When we are talking about how illegal this is, we're also talking implicitly about all the lawlessness. This is a case where the lines are so obvious and clear-cut that it's easier to seize on. But what we are really seeing is anger toward all the lawlessness, the destruction of the Republic, the barbarians tearing down all that was good and right in favor of the evil and petty.

So I would suggest that the better analysis is that the anger about the shots, in part because they are situated in the context of many, many more shots, aimed against Americans in any number of ways.
Click to expand...
He is also pardoning high-profile, drug dealing Hispanics, too.

Almost like he has no coherent ideology or something.
 

The two men killed as they floated holding onto their capsized boat in a secondary strike against a suspected drug vessel in early September did not appear to have radio or other communications devices, the top military official overseeing the strike told lawmakers on Thursday, according to three sources with direct knowledge of his congressional briefings.
...
The initial hit on the vessel, believed to be carrying cocaine, killed nine people immediately and split the boat in half, capsizing it and sending a massive smoke plume into the sky, the sources who viewed the video as part of the briefings said. Part of the surveillance video was a zoomed-in, higher-definition view of the two survivors clinging to a still-floating, capsized portion, they said.

For a little under an hour — 41 minutes, according to a separate US official — Bradley and the rest of the US military command center discussed what to do as they watched the men struggle to overturn what was left of their boat, the sources said.

Ultimately, Bradley told lawmakers, he ordered a second strike to destroy the remains of the vessel, killing the two survivors, on the grounds that it appeared that part of the vessel remained afloat because it still held cocaine, according to one of the sources. The survivors could hypothetically have floated to safety, been rescued, and carried on with trafficking the drugs, the logic went.

The other source with direct knowledge of the briefing called that rationale “f**king insane.”
 
Ramrouser said:
Question: was there this much analysis and criticism of Obama’s 1,878 drone strikes (resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths) on this board during Obama’s terms? I mean, there were routine “signature strikes” where groups of military age men were targeted, bombed and killed with lots of collateral damage. Was there talk of his extrajudicial summary executions of combatants and civilians? I don’t recall any Republicans calling anyone in Obama’s administration a war criminal.

There may have been I don’t know. I do know that most conservatives gave Obama a pass on this issue other than Rand.
Click to expand...
Um, you mean like mine from literally yesterday? Like two or three pages back on this very same thread you've been posting on for the last two days as well? That that sort of criticism of Obama's use of drones? SMDH.
 
OK, anybody else not tracking the fact that there is legitimate discussion of two men in the water trying to right a capsized 20 or 30 foot speed boat?

What sort of inanity is this? Seriously, any of you MFers ever try to right a capsized canoe with two men in the water? I have. It's doable, but only barely.

I am here to UNEQUIVICALLY STATE THAT IS IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR TWO MEN IN THE WATER TO RIGHT A CAPSIZED SPEEDBOAT OF BASICALLY ANY SIZE never mind the size needed to transport bales of drugs.

I'll go so far as to say that if two men in the water were stupid enough to try it, the attempt would be indistinguishable from then clinging to it for dear life.
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:

The two men killed as they floated holding onto their capsized boat in a secondary strike against a suspected drug vessel in early September did not appear to have radio or other communications devices, the top military official overseeing the strike told lawmakers on Thursday, according to three sources with direct knowledge of his congressional briefings.
...
The initial hit on the vessel, believed to be carrying cocaine, killed nine people immediately and split the boat in half, capsizing it and sending a massive smoke plume into the sky, the sources who viewed the video as part of the briefings said. Part of the surveillance video was a zoomed-in, higher-definition view of the two survivors clinging to a still-floating, capsized portion, they said.

For a little under an hour — 41 minutes, according to a separate US official — Bradley and the rest of the US military command center discussed what to do as they watched the men struggle to overturn what was left of their boat, the sources said.

Ultimately, Bradley told lawmakers, he ordered a second strike to destroy the remains of the vessel, killing the two survivors, on the grounds that it appeared that part of the vessel remained afloat because it still held cocaine, according to one of the sources. The survivors could hypothetically have floated to safety, been rescued, and carried on with trafficking the drugs, the logic went.

The other source with direct knowledge of the briefing called that rationale “f**king insane.”
Click to expand...
🤬
 
Ramrouser said:
According to the Daily Mail, Admiral Bradley is testifying to this to Congress as we speak (Raddatz has good sources). Bradley was conducting the mission and He concluded that the two survivors were radioing for back up and attempting to salvage the cargo. Thus, the battle was not completed. You'll now have to call one of the most respected Admirals in the Navy a liar and a hack for covering up for Trump and Hegseth.
Click to expand...
Checking up on these two premises for the conclusion the two survivors were still in the "battle."

1) "Radioing for backup" - reporting tonight is that Bradley testified that the survivors did not appear to have radio or other communication devices and they "were in no position to make a distress call."

2) "Attempting to salvage cargo" - reporting is that video of the strikes shows the portion of the split-in-half boat still afloat was capsized, which would make salvaging cargo... difficult?
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
Checking up on these two premises for the conclusion the two survivors were still in the "battle."

1) "Radioing for backup" - reporting tonight is that Bradley testified that the survivors did not appear to have radio or other communication devices and they "were in no position to make a distress call."

2) "Attempting to salvage cargo" - reporting is that video of the strikes shows the portion of the split-in-half boat still afloat was capsized, which would make salvaging cargo... difficult?
Click to expand...
Fog of War........Terrorists....Our plane pliots two miles away were under threat....probably 20,000 Americans saved
Maybe they bomb buildings in Chicago next...drug dealer terrorists
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
Checking up on these two premises for the conclusion the two survivors were still in the "battle."

1) "Radioing for backup" - reporting tonight is that Bradley testified that the survivors did not appear to have radio or other communication devices and they "were in no position to make a distress call."

2) "Attempting to salvage cargo" - reporting is that video of the strikes shows the portion of the split-in-half boat still afloat was capsized, which would make salvaging cargo... difficult?
Click to expand...
Ram is perpetually unburdened by what has been.
 
Ramrouser said:
Question: was there this much analysis and criticism of Obama’s 1,878 drone strikes (resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths) on this board during Obama’s terms? I mean, there were routine “signature strikes” where groups of military age men were targeted, bombed and killed with lots of collateral damage. Was there talk of his extrajudicial summary executions of combatants and civilians? I don’t recall any Republicans calling anyone in Obama’s administration a war criminal.

There may have been I don’t know. I do know that most conservatives gave Obama a pass on this issue other than Rand.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of drone strikes in the Obama admin. supported air strikes and were in Afghanistan, where we were mired for 20 years, including all of Trump 1.0 who negotiated and gave away the farm in Camp David to the terrorist Taliban. Some in Pakistan where OBL was hiding, including taking him out. Yemen Houthis - sound familiar Signalgate and Somalaian terrorists were also targeted...these were all in WOT theaters approved by Congress.

One of my brother served in Afghanistan. They weren't f*cking around. Just after he completed his tour, one of his units was ambushed in the field near Kandahar. 100% casualty rate.


www.thebureauinvestigates.com

Obama’s covert drone war in numbers: ten times more strikes than Bush

The use of drones aligned with Obama’s ambition to keep up the war against al Qaeda while extricating the US military from intractable ground wars, but…
www.thebureauinvestigates.com www.thebureauinvestigates.com

Rights Groups Urge President Obama to Address Concerns, New Questions on Drone Strikes

The Open Society Foundations joined leading human and civil rights organizations to ask President Obama to address new questions and long-standing concerns regarding drone strikes.
www.opensocietyfoundations.org www.opensocietyfoundations.org


chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://works.swarthmore.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=swarthmoreirjournal

We're not taking about an outboard motor speedboat headed for fishing cruise or selling some ganja or a little white powder in Granada. Just more BS to throw a smokescreen around the BBB, evaporating health care, the Epstein files, Trump tariffs, 36% approval rate, etc.

If you're arguing that increasing use of drones presents some ethical and legal complications, and that Congress should be been more specific in their authorization, that's fine.

Trump 2.0 has completely bypassed Articles I and III of the US Constitution, so spare us the crocodile tears. And yes, Obama did receive blowback for using drones more than W...but we know that you are just parroting Mini Mike and FNC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top