On a day to day basis, I agree, but in terms of publicly sending the message, I bet a missile works a lot better. Considering how long the border has been effectively undefended, there’s probably some major deterrence value in occasionally making a super splashy kill like this.
If you think a 3 motor boat has 11 people in it, plus any considerable amount of drugs and enough gas for 1500 miles open water trek, I have a bunch of bridges to sell you.
Pyrrhic would be if we had expended too many resources to accomplish it again. At worst you could say this is a token victory, but I care much more about the optics and implications of the White House publicly posting footage of military intervention against cartel drug smuggling on Twitter than I do about whether this specific incident is a massive bust or “merely” one shot. We all know military intervention exactly like this, along with the implied message of “we will fucking explode you, even if you think you’re just one boat beneath our notice”—and in this sense, it may actually be better and more effective that this is “just” one small boat—is the only thing that can really stop the flood of drugs and migrants, and yet it would have been unthinkable even just a year ago that we’d actually deploy the military to do this.
This is a fantastic thing to see, and one has to twist themselves into silly knots of doomerism to not appreciate it. Don’t bitch about an objectively positive action just because it is the beginning and not the finale.
but I care much more about the optics and implications of the White House publicly posting footage
This is likely the intent too. We are at like 3x the self-deportations than direct ones as a result of the optics and fear the White House has been pumping out about it, so this is likely another continuation of that successful tactic.
The point of publicizing things like this is that if you make it clear you’re willing to kill drug smugglers and invaders, a lot of them won’t even try because they don’t want to be killed. Obviously, we can’t launch missiles at thousands of boats. But we won’t have to.
This is great and all but I'm just raising the fact that this is the military being used on criminals. (Yes I know the retort is that it's to defend borders and I support it, but it's not completely a good thing)
It's a stretch to say there'll be drone strikes in the next decade on US soil for domestic criminals, but you can't argue that it's not on the same slippery slope.
This is the military being used on foreign invaders, or the people that materially support them. Just because they aren't uniformed soldiers doesn't mean they don't pose an existential threat to the United States.
I'm not saying that this couldn't be a step on the road to "drone strikes against US citizens on US soil", but it doesn't inevitably lead to that (though I'd say we're already on that slope, this is an attempt to push the oulder back up the hill, not shove it further down.)
It's a stretch to say there'll be drone strikes in the next decade on US soil for domestic criminals, but you can't argue that it's not on the same slippery slope.
If the voters support the repeal of Posse Comitatus to even make this possible, then they would deserve to suffer the consequences of it. If we ever do get to that point, it means we are on the brink of civil war and will have bigger problems to deal with anyway.
Posse comitatus is just a powerless piece of paper. Otherwise Eisenhower wouldn't have been able to send in the 101st airborne to force integrated schools at bayonet point. Which is not a metaphor, by the way. Also there was Bush I sending in the Marines during the 1992 LA riots and Clinton sending in Delta Force to help kill American civilians at Waco.
Neat, now do it to every illegal. Including the 60,000,000 already here.
They'll use it on us all just you wait. Looking at precrime tech like 'Gideon' and 'Gotham'. The prison planet is locking down, methinks.
Trump using military force effectively to prevent more drugs and crime in the US is a good thing.
Also making shitlibs cry.
He shoulda nuked CIA and a buncha foreign embassies for that but killing their contractors is a good first step.
The days of bursts of warning shots, followed by venting the engines with a .50 are over.
Right now people in the UK are DREAMING this could happen in the channel!
But yeah, only way to stop those drugs routes is to keep drone striking until they run out of bodies.
Just recommission your coastal pillboxes.
This is what our military should be doing.
Not entirely. Some went up into the atmosphere too.
Didn't the smuggler know they are not supposed to get blasted on their own stock?
So when do we start doing this to every invader approaching our border?
On a day to day basis, I agree, but in terms of publicly sending the message, I bet a missile works a lot better. Considering how long the border has been effectively undefended, there’s probably some major deterrence value in occasionally making a super splashy kill like this.
If you think a 3 motor boat has 11 people in it, plus any considerable amount of drugs and enough gas for 1500 miles open water trek, I have a bunch of bridges to sell you.
They don't have to. The main drug routes out of Venezuela go through Haiti and Honduras. A couple hundred miles each way.
Venezuela isn't even the biggest player. Most of the volume moves on the Pacific side. The main obstacle is the Darien Gap.
So, pyrrhic victory then?
Pyrrhic would be if we had expended too many resources to accomplish it again. At worst you could say this is a token victory, but I care much more about the optics and implications of the White House publicly posting footage of military intervention against cartel drug smuggling on Twitter than I do about whether this specific incident is a massive bust or “merely” one shot. We all know military intervention exactly like this, along with the implied message of “we will fucking explode you, even if you think you’re just one boat beneath our notice”—and in this sense, it may actually be better and more effective that this is “just” one small boat—is the only thing that can really stop the flood of drugs and migrants, and yet it would have been unthinkable even just a year ago that we’d actually deploy the military to do this.
This is a fantastic thing to see, and one has to twist themselves into silly knots of doomerism to not appreciate it. Don’t bitch about an objectively positive action just because it is the beginning and not the finale.
This is likely the intent too. We are at like 3x the self-deportations than direct ones as a result of the optics and fear the White House has been pumping out about it, so this is likely another continuation of that successful tactic.
How much does that missile cost? And how much per hour is the operation of the ship that fired it?
All people killed were real narco-terrorist?
They are fixing the supply problem, what about the demand?
The point of publicizing things like this is that if you make it clear you’re willing to kill drug smugglers and invaders, a lot of them won’t even try because they don’t want to be killed. Obviously, we can’t launch missiles at thousands of boats. But we won’t have to.
yeah, let's not kill them cause it might be too expensive. even a bullet is worth more than their lifes
Missiles have expiration dates, might as well use them.
Probably only had to go a couple hundred miles and transfer the drugs.
Using the US military to defend US interests? What's next, military occupation of crime-ridden US cities?
This is great and all but I'm just raising the fact that this is the military being used on criminals. (Yes I know the retort is that it's to defend borders and I support it, but it's not completely a good thing)
It's a stretch to say there'll be drone strikes in the next decade on US soil for domestic criminals, but you can't argue that it's not on the same slippery slope.
This is the military being used on foreign invaders, or the people that materially support them. Just because they aren't uniformed soldiers doesn't mean they don't pose an existential threat to the United States.
I'm not saying that this couldn't be a step on the road to "drone strikes against US citizens on US soil", but it doesn't inevitably lead to that (though I'd say we're already on that slope, this is an attempt to push the oulder back up the hill, not shove it further down.)
It already happened back in 2016.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/robot-bomb-kill-dallas-suspect-appears-time-tactic/story?id=40441517
That's actually the story I was thinking of but didn't have time to look it up.
If the voters support the repeal of Posse Comitatus to even make this possible, then they would deserve to suffer the consequences of it. If we ever do get to that point, it means we are on the brink of civil war and will have bigger problems to deal with anyway.
Posse comitatus is just a powerless piece of paper. Otherwise Eisenhower wouldn't have been able to send in the 101st airborne to force integrated schools at bayonet point. Which is not a metaphor, by the way. Also there was Bush I sending in the Marines during the 1992 LA riots and Clinton sending in Delta Force to help kill American civilians at Waco.