Colombia's president says boat struck by US was carrying Colombians(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Colombia's president says boat struck by US was carrying Colombians
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c89dz920p0do
24 comments
The recent US strikes on vessels in the Caribbean appear to violate Maritime Law and international human rights standards. Given the US Navy’s global reach and legal expertise, ignorance is not a plausible defense. These actions suggest the administration may be testing the limits of executive power on the open sea - an authoritarian power grab cloaked in counter-narcotics rhetoric.
I know nothing about why the administration is doing this. It feels though like a rather flaccid show of power — like the school bully trying to show how tough they are by beating up a Kindergartener or something.
Using your authority to order others killed is a very sobering responsibility. And I guess I don't see the graveness I would expect in the administration's actions.
Using your authority to order others killed is a very sobering responsibility. And I guess I don't see the graveness I would expect in the administration's actions.
There are many, many corners of the internet with people actively celebrating every boat bombing. Evidence of a crime isn't necessary. Beyond just the boat bombings, we're in an era where you can see HD footage of actual people crying, begging for their lives, and being blown up by governments. Half the world loves seeing it so long as it's preceded with a disclaimer, true or not, that "these are (people who are against you in some way)".
It's a modern day Roman colosseum event. Human lives are throwaway entertainment, and the more you kill, the more your political base gets fired up and outright overjoyed. From a political standpoint, there's no longer any consequence for killing small time nobodies with no name. It's only beneficial for a politician. And this phenomenon is spreading to more and more countries.
But those same people who are celebrating these killings, the same people who are ordering killings for their political gain, will say "It's time we come together to condemn political violence" when a small guy strikes someone else. It's interesting.
It's a modern day Roman colosseum event. Human lives are throwaway entertainment, and the more you kill, the more your political base gets fired up and outright overjoyed. From a political standpoint, there's no longer any consequence for killing small time nobodies with no name. It's only beneficial for a politician. And this phenomenon is spreading to more and more countries.
But those same people who are celebrating these killings, the same people who are ordering killings for their political gain, will say "It's time we come together to condemn political violence" when a small guy strikes someone else. It's interesting.
The reason why is very clear: Stephen Miller hates brown people (charitably he just hates illegal immigrants, but the reality is clear).
There were reports of Miller asking whether the administration could simply blow up boats that were presumably bringing illegal immigrants to the US during the first Trump admin. Now they are doing it but with the cover of "these are drug traffickers."
There were reports of Miller asking whether the administration could simply blow up boats that were presumably bringing illegal immigrants to the US during the first Trump admin. Now they are doing it but with the cover of "these are drug traffickers."
I really want to know what's going on inside the military.
Of course I'm not naive enough to expect anybody outside of a few noble souls to actually disobey orders when push comes to shove, but for years people in and around the military have assured me that officers do training to prepare for rejecting illegal orders, and so I shouldn't worry.
And these orders seem pretty prima facie blatantly illegal.
Of course I'm not naive enough to expect anybody outside of a few noble souls to actually disobey orders when push comes to shove, but for years people in and around the military have assured me that officers do training to prepare for rejecting illegal orders, and so I shouldn't worry.
And these orders seem pretty prima facie blatantly illegal.
jgsser(2)
Or the simpler answer: there’s a drug problem in the US and people want solutions.
The republicans make a show of solving it by “blowing up boats carrying drugs”. Democrats make a show of solving it with their own ideas
The republican base likes blowing up drug boats
The republicans make a show of solving it by “blowing up boats carrying drugs”. Democrats make a show of solving it with their own ideas
The republican base likes blowing up drug boats
They like blowing up boats. There is no evidence that any drugs or "terrorists" were involved, and there never will be because any potential evidence exploded. The government didn't even pretend to provide any evidence because they know their base doesn't care.
The war on drugs has not worked even with military intervention. I must be repeating something proven over and over again on HN.
Drug users need to be helped if we want to stop the problem.
Drug users need to be helped if we want to stop the problem.
The Republican base likes breaking the law? That's rather ironic coming from the party professing to be the party of Law and Order. Here's where some "show me, don't tell me" can be applied.
> Democrats make a show of solving it with their own ideas
I really can't see how it's possible to think this, even with recent history[0].
[0] https://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/countries-obama-...
I really can't see how it's possible to think this, even with recent history[0].
[0] https://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/countries-obama-...
Why not both? Things can have multiple reasons and then later second order effects on top of that. Either way the law should stay outside of what narrative you choose to follow.
It would help if we could see the receipts.
> The republican base likes blowing up drug boats
and likes war crimes.
and likes war crimes.
US is being attacked by drug cartel run countries like Venezuela and Columbia, to the detriment of 54,000 fentanyl deaths in US in 2024 alone. Why shouldn't US respond in kind?
Also, you can tell these axis of evil countries are really panicking; each perspective country is failing as we speak.
Syria kicked out its dictator which fled to Russia
Iran had its nuclear facility blown up
Cuba is collapsing with no power
Venezuela is now being stopped from trafficking via sea
China just had 50% crash in its real estate in tier 1 cities in October.
Russia's had 38% capacity of its oil refineries knocked out as of October, which is now being emergency supplied by Belarus
Also, you can tell these axis of evil countries are really panicking; each perspective country is failing as we speak.
Syria kicked out its dictator which fled to Russia
Iran had its nuclear facility blown up
Cuba is collapsing with no power
Venezuela is now being stopped from trafficking via sea
China just had 50% crash in its real estate in tier 1 cities in October.
Russia's had 38% capacity of its oil refineries knocked out as of October, which is now being emergency supplied by Belarus
> Why shouldn't US respond in kind?
Because what the US is doing is against international law, and they know it. US sovereignty extends 12 nautical miles from its coastline. Within that boundary, the US has full authority to enforce its laws however it sees fit.
Beyond those 12 miles, you're in international waters, where maritime law applies - and maritime law, like U.S. law, requires due process. You can't simply claim someone is breaking the law, execute them without trial, and then destroy the evidence that could prove guilt or innocence.
That’s called an extrajudicial execution, and it exceeds the constitutional powers of the President of the United States.
Trump is claiming - without presenting evidence - that this is a matter of national defense and therefore falls under his authority as Commander in Chief. But Congress has not authorized war, and drug trafficking does not constitute an armed attack under international law.
Because what the US is doing is against international law, and they know it. US sovereignty extends 12 nautical miles from its coastline. Within that boundary, the US has full authority to enforce its laws however it sees fit.
Beyond those 12 miles, you're in international waters, where maritime law applies - and maritime law, like U.S. law, requires due process. You can't simply claim someone is breaking the law, execute them without trial, and then destroy the evidence that could prove guilt or innocence.
That’s called an extrajudicial execution, and it exceeds the constitutional powers of the President of the United States.
Trump is claiming - without presenting evidence - that this is a matter of national defense and therefore falls under his authority as Commander in Chief. But Congress has not authorized war, and drug trafficking does not constitute an armed attack under international law.
Here's a list of senators that just voted last night to let this continue (the NAYs are in favor of the strikes): https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1...
I think this issue is intellectually interesting because it is so indefensible that the administration has not even tried to defend it. As far as I can see they have not offered any evidence against the people they're killing or any legal justification whatsoever. They seem to just enjoy killing these people and they know nobody can stop them.
I think this issue is intellectually interesting because it is so indefensible that the administration has not even tried to defend it. As far as I can see they have not offered any evidence against the people they're killing or any legal justification whatsoever. They seem to just enjoy killing these people and they know nobody can stop them.
Surprise, this is Stephen Miller’s doing: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/29/stephen-mill...
His wet dream is to indiscriminately bomb brown refugees in international waters, and he’s finally getting it: https://archive.is/QBh3p
How thin a line between a serial killer and a far-right politician.
His wet dream is to indiscriminately bomb brown refugees in international waters, and he’s finally getting it: https://archive.is/QBh3p
How thin a line between a serial killer and a far-right politician.
There will be war crimes tribunals and court marshals. This is inevitable when the other party gets back into power, and totally justified because they are clearly and explicitly breaking US law, maritime law, and international law. My only question is: what makes them think they will not go to jail for these crimes? The only plausible answer is that they believe they will never be held accountable for their actions, because the other party will never be allowed to have power again. This is very concerning for the future of the United States, folks.
The U.S. government will never submit to any foreign entity and no U.S. president will ever allow the imprisonment of a former president out of self preservation. This is why Trump and his people are acting so aggressively; the worst that will ever happen is they’ll be removed from office.
Well Trump was not even eligible to run for President as he is a 34-count criminal. But that aside, his people can be held accountable for the breaking of federal and state laws all over this country. This will inevitably happen; these people will be held accountable. Our Governors need to get together; our Mayors and our local politicians need to react to this. It needs to be adamant, coordinated, and forceful.