Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, such bloodlust is contrary to longstanding law. There are other counties that tolerate and celebrate the “eye for an eye” justice that you describe.

The poisoning of Americans, including children, in exchange for money warrants lethal action. Change my mind.

I agree with you. And there is ample legal justification for the actions President Trump is taking to protect America:

The Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act of 2008 outlawed the operation of, or travel in, unregistered submersibles and semi-submersibles in international waters with the intent to evade detection. It allows the U.S. to take measures to stop drug boats in international waters, which is what our authorities are doing. It applies also to these so-called “fishing boats” LOADED with 55 gallon plastic drums filled with narcotics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Trafficking_Vessel_Interdiction_Act


Going back further, the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act of 1986 has extra-territorial effect and justifies the U.S. use of force to halt drug smuggling in international waters, including by use of force.

It passed the Senate by a vote of 97-2, and the House by 395-17. Chuck Shumer voted in favor. He’s a total hypocrite to try to complain about it now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Drug_Law_Enforcement_Act

It is illegal to target and kill civilians who pose no clear and present threat the US military. Fishermen and political refugees do not. It is a war crime.

Now has Trump and the US military’s actions had any impact on drug pricing. The prices of illegal drugs in the US has fallen under Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, such bloodlust is contrary to longstanding law. There are other counties that tolerate and celebrate the “eye for an eye” justice that you describe.

The poisoning of Americans, including children, in exchange for money warrants lethal action. Change my mind.

I agree with you. And there is ample legal justification for the actions President Trump is taking to protect America:

The Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act of 2008 outlawed the operation of, or travel in, unregistered submersibles and semi-submersibles in international waters with the intent to evade detection. It allows the U.S. to take measures to stop drug boats in international waters, which is what our authorities are doing. It applies also to these so-called “fishing boats” LOADED with 55 gallon plastic drums filled with narcotics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Trafficking_Vessel_Interdiction_Act


Going back further, the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act of 1986 has extra-territorial effect and justifies the U.S. use of force to halt drug smuggling in international waters, including by use of force.

It passed the Senate by a vote of 97-2, and the House by 395-17. Chuck Shumer voted in favor. He’s a total hypocrite to try to complain about it now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Drug_Law_Enforcement_Act

“Protect America” lol. In addition to getting your facts about the laws wrong, you have also ignored the fact that Trump is pardoning drug kingpins like he’s getting paid. Oh wait, he is.

If only someone could protect America from the stupidity and ignorance of the average Trump supporter.

Anonymous wrote:Venezuela has nothing to do with fentanyl. Their gangs help deliver cocaine from Colombia to Europe. The speed boats take the cocaine and deliver them to larger ships on their way to ports in Europe.

Basically, what the US Navy is doing is making cocaine a trifle more expensive for coke heads in London and Paris.

American foreign policy here has absolutely nothing to do with the fentanyl crisis in the US. If that were a priority, we’d be hitting the Mexican cartels. But we don’t. The fentanyl argument is a ruse for other purposes.

Susie Wiles admitted as much in her VF interview:

It's not about the drugs. It's about regime change.

Venezuela has nothing to do with fentanyl. Their gangs help deliver cocaine from Colombia to Europe. The speed boats take the cocaine and deliver them to larger ships on their way to ports in Europe.

Basically, what the US Navy is doing is making cocaine a trifle more expensive for coke heads in London and Paris.

American foreign policy here has absolutely nothing to do with the fentanyl crisis in the US. If that were a priority, we’d be hitting the Mexican cartels. But we don’t. The fentanyl argument is a ruse for other purposes.

If the issue is Maduro and Venezeula, why has the US bombed scores of boats in the Pacific Ocean, a body of water that Venezeula doesn't touch?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer living in a world where drug runners are hunted relentlessly.

I don’t miss the old world where our country “managed” the drug problem by tolerating it and training us all to accept it as a given and just part of a city’s “urban charm.” Poor enforcement is essentially a subsidy, and we know that whenever we subsidize something then we get more of that thing.

Glad we are attaching a horrific cost to drug running. These people should live in abject terror. Kill them all.

What is your definition of a "drug runner"? does it include people at every end of the chain, down to a 10 year old lookout at the corner? How about the suburban teenager who has addiction and sells some fentanyl to cover the price of the fentanyl they're taking? What about the UMC investor who snorts lines of coke at parties? After all, you don't have a drug enterprise without customers. In the US cities with the highest percentage of cocaine use, more than a fifth of adults have used cocaine. You think some impoverished guy in Venezuela held a gun to their head? By the way, drugs or no drugs, more people in the US still die from alcohol related causes as from illicit drugs. (178k per CDC, and this does NOT include alcohol-related accidents, just booze alone).

Maybe we should go all in on Islamic prohibition and just execute users while we're at it. After all, if extrajudicial killing is a good answer, wouldn't it be even better if we extended it to users?


Phoenix, Arizona (23.3% of the population has used cocaine)
Mesa, Arizona (22.5%)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (22%)
Tulsa, Oklahoma (21.8%)
Omaha, Nebraska (22.2%)
Las Vegas, Nevada (21.9%)
Wichita, Kansas (21.8%)
Fresno, California (21.8%)
Tucson, Arizona (21.8%)
Colorado Springs, Colorado (21.8%)

I guess I see a distinction here. If you are a foreign criminal involved in moving drugs into the United States then you are fair game for the United States military. The US is bound to provide for the common defense. That kind of force should be used correctly and there should be consequences for screw ups.

Once the drugs are here, the approach shifts to a mix of law enforcement and public health approaches. American citizens are afforded privileges that others lack.

People in the US illegally who are convicted of drug charges should be deported and have no reasonable expectation of ever returning to this country.

There is a consensus that these drugs aren't even directed to the US, but to Europe. So, is this part of our NATO agreement or something?
There used to be rules for military engagement. There used to be a modicum of recognition that Congress declares war and has oversight regarding military responses short of a declared war. It took an act of Congress to target 9/11 related terrorism in the absence of a war declaration.

You're simply forgetting that we have a legal framework, starting with the Constitution, for what we do. And Trump is acting outside that framework.

It's really a simple question: Do you prefer a government that carries out its actions in accordance with the law, or acts unlawfully? That pretty much covers the core controversy over Trumpism.

We’ve been illegally attacking people for 80+ years. This isn’t just a Trump thing. He’s just dumb enough to be this brazen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer living in a world where drug runners are hunted relentlessly.

I don’t miss the old world where our country “managed” the drug problem by tolerating it and training us all to accept it as a given and just part of a city’s “urban charm.” Poor enforcement is essentially a subsidy, and we know that whenever we subsidize something then we get more of that thing.

Glad we are attaching a horrific cost to drug running. These people should live in abject terror. Kill them all.

What is your definition of a "drug runner"? does it include people at every end of the chain, down to a 10 year old lookout at the corner? How about the suburban teenager who has addiction and sells some fentanyl to cover the price of the fentanyl they're taking? What about the UMC investor who snorts lines of coke at parties? After all, you don't have a drug enterprise without customers. In the US cities with the highest percentage of cocaine use, more than a fifth of adults have used cocaine. You think some impoverished guy in Venezuela held a gun to their head? By the way, drugs or no drugs, more people in the US still die from alcohol related causes as from illicit drugs. (178k per CDC, and this does NOT include alcohol-related accidents, just booze alone).

Maybe we should go all in on Islamic prohibition and just execute users while we're at it. After all, if extrajudicial killing is a good answer, wouldn't it be even better if we extended it to users?


Phoenix, Arizona (23.3% of the population has used cocaine)
Mesa, Arizona (22.5%)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (22%)
Tulsa, Oklahoma (21.8%)
Omaha, Nebraska (22.2%)
Las Vegas, Nevada (21.9%)
Wichita, Kansas (21.8%)
Fresno, California (21.8%)
Tucson, Arizona (21.8%)
Colorado Springs, Colorado (21.8%)

I guess I see a distinction here. If you are a foreign criminal involved in moving drugs into the United States then you are fair game for the United States military. The US is bound to provide for the common defense. That kind of force should be used correctly and there should be consequences for screw ups.

Once the drugs are here, the approach shifts to a mix of law enforcement and public health approaches. American citizens are afforded privileges that others lack.

People in the US illegally who are convicted of drug charges should be deported and have no reasonable expectation of ever returning to this country.

There is a consensus that these drugs aren't even directed to the US, but to Europe. So, is this part of our NATO agreement or something?
There used to be rules for military engagement. There used to be a modicum of recognition that Congress declares war and has oversight regarding military responses short of a declared war. It took an act of Congress to target 9/11 related terrorism in the absence of a war declaration.

You're simply forgetting that we have a legal framework, starting with the Constitution, for what we do. And Trump is acting outside that framework.

It's really a simple question: Do you prefer a government that carries out its actions in accordance with the law, or acts unlawfully? That pretty much covers the core controversy over Trumpism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, such bloodlust is contrary to longstanding law. There are other counties that tolerate and celebrate the “eye for an eye” justice that you describe.

The poisoning of Americans, including children, in exchange for money warrants lethal action. Change my mind.

I agree with you. And there is ample legal justification for the actions President Trump is taking to protect America:

The Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act of 2008 outlawed the operation of, or travel in, unregistered submersibles and semi-submersibles in international waters with the intent to evade detection. It allows the U.S. to take measures to stop drug boats in international waters, which is what our authorities are doing. It applies also to these so-called “fishing boats” LOADED with 55 gallon plastic drums filled with narcotics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Trafficking_Vessel_Interdiction_Act


Going back further, the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act of 1986 has extra-territorial effect and justifies the U.S. use of force to halt drug smuggling in international waters, including by use of force.

It passed the Senate by a vote of 97-2, and the House by 395-17. Chuck Shumer voted in favor. He’s a total hypocrite to try to complain about it now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Drug_Law_Enforcement_Act

I am SO glad you brought this up. Have you actually read the statutes that resulted? These did not authorize military strikes. These established criminal jurisdiction for the US in international waters and for the US to use CRIMINAL procedures to interdict vessels and arrest perpetrators. The Maritime Drug Enforcement Act also specifies that they may be brought to any federal court (i.e. not restricted to specific districts) for prosecution.

Nice try, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, such bloodlust is contrary to longstanding law. There are other counties that tolerate and celebrate the “eye for an eye” justice that you describe.

The poisoning of Americans, including children, in exchange for money warrants lethal action. Change my mind.

I agree with you. And there is ample legal justification for the actions President Trump is taking to protect America:

The Drug Trafficking Vessel Interdiction Act of 2008 outlawed the operation of, or travel in, unregistered submersibles and semi-submersibles in international waters with the intent to evade detection. It allows the U.S. to take measures to stop drug boats in international waters, which is what our authorities are doing. It applies also to these so-called “fishing boats” LOADED with 55 gallon plastic drums filled with narcotics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Trafficking_Vessel_Interdiction_Act


Going back further, the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act of 1986 has extra-territorial effect and justifies the U.S. use of force to halt drug smuggling in international waters, including by use of force.

It passed the Senate by a vote of 97-2, and the House by 395-17. Chuck Shumer voted in favor. He’s a total hypocrite to try to complain about it now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Drug_Law_Enforcement_Act

Trivia (hint: the answer is … Joe Biden!)

one?

Question 00:02:45-00:02:47 (1 sec)
Juan Orlando Hernandez.

Donald Trump 00:02:47-00:03:10 (23 sec)
Well, I was told, I was, uh, asked by Honduras, many of the people of Honduras, they said it was a Biden setup. I don't mean Biden. Biden didn't know he was alive, but it was the people that surround the Resolute desk, surround Biden when he was there, which was about, uh, very little time. And, uh, the people of Honduras really thought he was set up and it was a terrible thing.

Donald Trump 00:03:10-00:03:23 (12 sec)
Uh, he was the president of the country, and they basically said he was a drug dealer because he was the president of the country. And they said it was a Biden administration set up. And I looked at the facts and I agreed with them.

Question 00:03:23-00:03:26 (3 sec)
What evidence can you share that he was set up and that he wasn't?

Donald Trump 00:03:26-00:03:36 (10 sec)
Well, you take a look. I mean, they could say that, uh, you take any country you want. If somebody sells drugs in that country, that doesn't mean you arrest the president and put him in jail for the rest of his life.

Question 00:03:36-00:03:38 (2 sec)
Mr. President, can I just clarify. Do you think the US --

Donald Trump 00:03:38-00:03:56 (18 sec)
That includes this country, okay, to be honest. I mean, if somebody does something wrong, do you put the president of the country in jail? They said it was a Biden set up. It was a Biden administration set up. And you have a big race going on this week, you know, next week. Uh, I think it's gonna be a very important race.

For instance, I would bet money that this phrase was polled:

“I want to protect the women of this country.”

Look up the video for yourself. Try to find the tell. It smacked me in the face! It’s actually a common thing people do when they are trying to divert attention AWAY from an action they are not comfortable with.

100 percent these boat kills are popular.

Every once in a while Trump has a tell when he reads the sentence his handlers told him to say. I watched it during the campaign last year. It cracks me up. He is actually pretty good at taking notes and a script.

He also repeats key sentences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, such bloodlust is contrary to longstanding law. There are other counties that tolerate and celebrate the “eye for an eye” justice that you describe.

The poisoning of Americans, including children, in exchange for money warrants lethal action. Change my mind.

These are some of the people that Trump has pardoned in his second term who were involved with drug trafficking or facilitating drug trafficking through money laundering.

- Ross Ulbricht: created Silk Road, a dark web marketplace facilitating massive drug sales.
- Larry Hoover: leader of the Gangster Disciples gang involved in nationwide drug trafficking and violence.
- Juan Orlando Hernández: former Honduran president convicted of conspiring to import over 400 tons of cocaine into the US.
- Kentrell DeSean Gaulden (NBA YoungBoy): Pardoned for federal charges tied to drug possession and trafficking context.
- BitMEX Founders (Arthur Hayes, Benjamin Delo, Samuel Reed): Pardoned for anti-money laundering enabling crypto-based drug trafficking.
- Changpeng Zhao: Binance CEO whose platform facilitated drug-related money laundering and trafficking.

Anonymous wrote:I prefer living in a world where drug runners are hunted relentlessly.

I don’t miss the old world where our country “managed” the drug problem by tolerating it and training us all to accept it as a given and just part of a city’s “urban charm.” Poor enforcement is essentially a subsidy, and we know that whenever we subsidize something then we get more of that thing.

Glad we are attaching a horrific cost to drug running. These people should live in abject terror. Kill them all.

This entire argument is unserious when a major drug trafficker is given a pardon after being convicted of trafficking billions with a “b” of dollars worth of drugs into the USA. I don’t know if the fishing boat men were drug runners or not, but we all know that the man who was able to line trumps grubby hands with cash and received a pardon is a kingpin drug trafficker. So miss me with your faux concern about drug enforcement.

And guess what, the American insatiable appetite for drugs fuels the necessity for drug traffickers. As long as people continue to put that crap up their noses and in their veins, the drugs will continue. They are being driven across the border as o type this by some mule that looks like Clint Eastwood or Betty White.