Good analysis.
Also I apologize, I forgot to put "OT" in the subject line. And in other weirdness: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/20/ecuador-says-it-has-no-evidence-tha t-survivor-of-us-strike-in-caribbean-committed-any-crime-00616041 Strikes me strange that we released the 2 survivors to their home countries and that Ecuador immediately let theirs go. WTF? And this was a semi-submersible which tends to support the drug smuggling assumption, Caribbean fishermen and recreational boaters don't use such things AFAIK. Seems like the purpose is so Hegseth can post videos of blowing people up James Bond style, but if we actually catch them it's catch-and-release? I can't square that with the justification these are terrorists and/or enemy combatants at war with the US. Are we assuming that a near death experience will turn them into good guys? From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Adam Moffett Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 4:24 PM To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] now we're blowing up boats in the Pacific Yes, and that's the primary argument against this practice. If we have solid intel that they're carrying drugs, and we know where they are, then as soon as they enter our territorial waters we can board the boat and arrest them. The Coast Guard doesn't need a warrant or even a specific reason to board a boat. Some of those boats are faster than Cutters, but I don't have solid info on how often they actually escape when they're already being tracked. It's hard to imagine they really get away often because the Coast Guard also has helicopters, and they're allowed to continue a pursuit into international waters (and onto land) as long as the pursuit started in US waters. Regardless of how often they really get away, it's not normal to blow up someone's boat as a law enforcement action. We also don't execute drug traffickers, and even when the state executes someone there's a trial first. but..... * post-911 we treat foreign terrorist organizations as enemy combatants * the executive branch gets to decide who counts as an FTO. The sec of state, sec of treasury, and attorney general all have to agree, but they also all have the same boss. * Nobody can really stop the executive branch from declaring an FTO. * Congress could pass a bill to override someone's listing as an FTO, but to date they've never done it. * The courts could overturn an FTO listing, but for a lot of reasons it's almost impossible. So effectively the President and/or their cabinet has a completely legal pathway to authorize military force against just about anyone, and there's very little anyone can do about it. It's not that I have sympathy for drug smugglers, it's that all we can do is take someone's word for it that it was a drug smuggler. If anyone is totally comfortable with that then I'm curious what your rationale is. _____ From: AF <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > on behalf of Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2025 3:00 PM To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [AFMUG] now we're blowing up boats in the Pacific <https://x.com/SecWar/status/1981049943306752361> https://x.com/SecWar/status/1981049943306752361 I thought the Coast Guard was able to intercept boats and board them, arrest people and confiscate cargo. I seem to remember they specifically acquired high speed boats that were a match for anything a drug runner might have.
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
