Far offshore? Ideally yes. But on the 30km voyage from San Juan de Unare to Trinidad? I hardly expect a small fishing boat to be flying an ensign in that scenario
I would expect anyone with something to hide would ensure their boat is setup for fishing. It isn't hard to do and makes a great cover. There are a few other legal activities you can use as cover, fishing is just the most obvious.
I have no idea if they really were doing anything but it is the obvious cover if they were.
Footage of the boats to date show they aren't trying to spoof legitimate fishing vessels. They are IMHO very clearly dope haulers and anyone saying otherwise is either extremely credulous or not being honest with everyone. Fishermen don't use boats that are painted to camouflage themselves and have a bank of powerful performance engines.
The dopers probably have realized that the deception angle doesn't work and just wastes payload space, so you're better off trying not to be seen at all. I suspect what happens IRL is that boats are boarded with men with dogs and the ruse falls apart, so the doper leadership decided to stop bothering with all the subterfuge and just try to (sometimes literally) run under the radar, maximizing cargo space so the runs that get through realize the most revenue.
The issue most people have is not about the murder of drug smugglers, it’s the lack of a trial. It’s the lack of real evidence being shown to the public. It’s the fact there actually might be innocents on those boats. It’s completely normal for people in 2025 to expect we arrest and not just kill people randomly.
The USA was respected because it believed in those ethos…because it was better then a bunch of angry murderers.
I'm not against the death penalty if the person is really guilty. Problem is no all-powerful God is in the courts and so there is always doubt - a few people have been proven innocent after many years and we have no way of knowing if there are more or not at any given time.
If you think those are fishing boats you don't know very much about fishing. Those are dope haulers. The question of whether dope haulers deserve a .mil missile is separate from establishing exactly what those boats are and exactly what they are doing — something I think anyone with half a brain inwardly knows even if they maintain otherwise in public forums like this one.
What you think is going on in other people's brains, partial or not, is inaccurate. This is generally true for pretty much everyone, but especially in a case like yours where you seem utterly convinced that you know.
I do not know what is on those boats, and neither do you. Neither of us will ever find out, because they were sunk before any actual facts could be verified. This is precisely why we have due process.
In the scheme of things, I am much more worried about a well-armed force committing extrajudicial killings than I am "some dudes who might have drugs". The fact that you seem very concerned about the latter and are totes cool with the former is... concerning, to say the least.
I do appreciate you posting your sources, so thanks for that.
I hope you have half as much care and concern for the victims of the drugs smuggled into this country as you do for drug smugglers, alleged or not.
> This is precisely why we have due process
> a well-armed force committing extrajudicial killings
What process is due foreign drug smugglers operating outside of U.S. jurisdiction? It's a military operation. Did you want Osama bin Laden to receive his day in court, as well, instead of being shot in his sleep by a well-armed force?
"Due process" has been perverted in recent years in the Anglosphere to mean "infinite process, with no end result". Process for process's sake, because a lot of people's livelihoods depend on participating in and perpetuating that process; and zero recourse for taxpayers who want some semblance of results for their tax dollars.
Think about that statement. How are you defining 'victim' in this case? From what I can see, 'victim' here roughly equates to 'willing purchaser of goods'.
I believe in Freedom as a fundamental right - 'freedom' in this context being 'whatever you want to do that doesn't unduly impact anyone else'. If you want to shoot yourself in the foot, well, it's your foot - have fun with that. This concept that the 'Drug War' is something that we've ever done for the benefit of our people is laughable.
Even running on the assumption that 'drugs're bad, mmkay?', there are still holes big enough to drive a truckload of opioids and vodka through (both legal substances that have each put more folks in the ground than all controlled substances combined [0][1]). So if we are protecting the poor helpless confused masses from themselves, why is it that we have decided to let them kill themselves with those particular things? What makes the legal stuff special? The concept is ridiculous at it's face.
> It's a military operation.
I must have missed the declaration of war congress approved on 'unknown and unaffiliated watercraft'.
> Anglosphere
wut.
> taxpayers who want some semblance of results for their tax dollars
As a taxpayer, I am unhappy with these results. I would like to return them, please.
> Due process" has been perverted in recent years in the Anglosphere to mean "infinite process, with no end result
Seems preferable to fascist thugs illegally assaulting or arresting random people on the streets. Extrajudicial killing inside U.S. soil are probably not far off either. Unfortunately people like you will be cheering that as well..
Or you truly see no issue with governments having the right to arbitrarily execute people with no oversight whatsoever?
I'm responding directly to a post on using subterfuge to pretend to be fishermen, and further addressing the oft-stated opinion that fishing boats are being targeted.
They aren't bothering pretending to be fishermen, and also stating my personal opinion that most people saying they are fishing boats know they're not (and thus are being dishonest). Those are separate points than fighting drug trafficking with missile strikes.
You know what? Fair point. I can't necessarily talk for anyone else, but I will say that I have a tendency to be extra critical where state power is being abused. I served, and in my Army, we knew to our bones that our mandate was to protect the American people from foreign threat of violence, not as a police force. Not then and not ever. Posse comitatus wasn't the law of the land - it was a commandment from the highest authority.
So I suppose I jumped on with a little more haste than a sharing of opinions warrants. Sorry about that - this stuff gets me very hot under the collar.
If I step back and take another look at it, well - I'm still not ready to make a judgement as to what those boats were doing. There's not enough information - even taking the profiling argument into account. There are people who live as digital nomads on the sea just because they like to. Those boats might have been smuggling something other than drugs, like people (who might have any number of reasons to be on it - from human trafficking to refugees). There may be reasons that people have for taking a boat of that shape out that I am unaware of. Irrespective of the use of force, there is simply not enough data to come to a reasonably certain conclusion.
My time in service was spent as part of an IO unit - we would never have advised action on the data that's available here. The Risk factors are simply too broad and too deep.
I don't know much about those boats, but I know they did not have fishing gear on board. Nor were they a luxury yacht. By process of elimination we can assume they are hauling cargo. Most cargo is concerned about fuel efficiency and so would not have that much power for the size of boat (most cargo is on large ships so much bigger engines, but for the size smaller and slower).
I don't know what they were doing, but they didn't match the typical profile of legal things people do. No sign of fishing, no sign of luxury, no sign of water skies...
Due process would still be good, but we know a lot already without that.
I suspect that if Venezuela, or any other country, started killing Americans in international waters because they suspected they were committing a crime you guys will be singing another song. Due process would be absolutely necessary.
I don't know much about these cases but is anyone from that country coming forward to media and saying their spouse was killed on the ship? Is there anyone who is claiming it was a mistake from that country?
I looked at the video, there was no fishing equipment on board. You are not going to drop a line over the side of the board when you are ocean fishing. You either have a large rod that wasn't on the boat, or you have a net with winches and other equipment needed to handle a large net. Nobody's boat looks like that if they are planning on fishing. (they also didn't have any evidence of space to stow some of the equipment).
Who said kill everyone? I was responding to a post about using subterfuge to pretend to be a fisherman. Deception is a personal and professional interest of mine so I responded.
Determining what the boats are and what they are doing is a separate (but related) topic than determining whether or not they deserve being blown up. Some people who are reading these words hold that these are fishermen, not traffickers, and I feel that is either a dishonest statement or those people aren't very clueful.
The problem is that Venn diagram of those two categories is very much overlapping.
Fish aren't biting and the mortgage payment is due? Many fisherman in that scenario will move a little cargo without asking too many questions (here in the US and Europe too). And narcotraffickers aren't exactly known for being experienced seamen. For the most part they hire and/or coerce civilian captains to move their cargo.
I'm not necessarily disputing that the boats could have been moving drugs, I'm disputing that the crew would be hardened criminals, and not mostly down-on-their-luck civilians with few other options to make a living (in the midst of Venezuela's economic collapse).
Killing all drug haulers/dealers is ok, I fully support what they do in China and most of East Asia. The amount of society damage from drugs warrants it.
Even if we accept all are guilty based on nothing killing 66 smugglers isn't going to meaningfully reduce harm or even the drug supply. You are arguing for abandoning the rule of law and inevitable unjustifiable murder when mistakes are made for... nothing
It does not fucking matter. Even if there are drugs on the boat.
You can't kill people who present no immediate threat to anyone without due process. It's a human rights travesty.
What stops them from declaring you or me from being drug smugglers and drone striking us? You won't be able to dispute the accusation after, that's for sure.
