Granted, it is a few dozen bungled policies ago, but remember when we were blowing up fishing boats in the Caribbean as part of the administration’s Operation Dude Bro antidrug strategy? Well, the results are in, and they are sadly predictable. From The Washington Post:

In a recent assessment reviewed by The Washington Post, DEA analysts found the strikes had failed to affect the supply or price of cocaine in the United States and had led traffickers to diversify beyond go-fast boats and to avoid international waters, opting instead for larger boats and hemming close to coastlines, where U.S. forces are less likely to open fire. In a closed-door briefing last month, Pentagon officials told lawmakers the strikes in international waters off South and Central America had not reduced its purity.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 4 points 15 hours ago

aw pissyboy just wanted to play soldier after talking it so much on fox

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago*

    "lawful" assassinations, fun explosions and colonial theft make trump, hegseth, and the israeli leadership look "strong" which wins elections. Next step will be to use those methods domestically under the rationales that have worked out. They will use the same sledgehammer for every problem. This was not really about law enforcement.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    It was also about forcing armed forces officers to resign who wouldn't bomb unidentified small boats (and double tap to kill survivors).

    This weeds out officers who won't fire on Americans when it is necessary to complete Trump's coup.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 15 hours ago

    It weeds out officers who won't fire on thin pretexts. But it doesn't do anything to improve the logistics or the communications or the intelligence or your engineering. Most of your army isn't trigger pullers. That's a very small part of the overall job.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 191 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Oh they achieved their goal.
    They killed brown people. That's the goal of most of the policies this administration has undertaken.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago

    OK, I'll be that one person downvoting you. It wasn't about killing brown people. They don't give a fuck about brown people. It is all about power and the graft and so on and those brown people are just expendable.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    It was always about a campaign of terror and the charade of “doing something“.

    For over 45 years, the “war on drugs“ was lost before it began. Drugs won. Why? Because everyone loves drugs. And the only way to win the “war on drugs“ is to reduce or eliminate the reasons why people want to use drugs in the first place: because they’re fucking miserable. Happy people don’t use drugs. Well, not the bad drugs. Happy people like smoking weed, but weed isn’t really one of the “bad drugs”. Anyway…

    No, no… All of this was performative bullshit to make the “strong men” look strong when, in fact, they all knew it wouldn’t really accomplish anything other than making the American public think that they were actually accomplishing something. Which, of course, they weren’t. Nothing, aside from, of course, the stochastic terror they have been perpetrating upon everyone. and murdering brown people, which the Nazis in the current administration, love, regardless of the purpose or end result.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 79 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    Turns Out We Blew Up All Those Boats MURDERED ALL THOSE PEOPLE in the Caribbean for Nothing

    FTFY, Esquire!

    This regime is so far beyond the pale monstrous that it's hard even for people trying to criticize it to avoid accidentally carrying water for it though understatement. Hell, even "beyond the pale monstrous" isn't as emphatic as I should've been!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 71 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    It's not for nothing. Hegseth got wank fodder from it.

    The WaPo also seems to imply that the people murdered were actually smugglers, which is very much unproven.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    It didn't matter if they were smugglers or not, they were just trying to scare ones that were into not doing it, with war crimes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 day ago* (3 children)

    I think that's generous. I think the actual driving emotion behind this was Trump's desire to feel powerful. Murdering people while knowing that their loved ones would never be able to return the favour to you seems to do that for him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 25 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Americans snort way more coke weekly than what could fit on those boats combined anyway.

    But was there ever any proof these weren't just actual fishing boats?

    And did they even bother to say they found drugs on the venezuelan oil tanker they seized at that time?

    What they did though is proceed to attack Venezuela for its oil.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    I'm fairly confident they just wanted to kill poor brown people for fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 15 hours ago*

    Waging a terror campaign on the Venezuelan coast had a number of second-order effects, not the least of which was to destabilize the central government and strong-arm neighboring states into complying with US foreign policy.

    You can get a lot of what you want by pointing a gun at someone's head and barking orders.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 1 day ago

    But was there ever any proof these weren’t just actual fishing boats?

    The proof would have been capturing a boat full of cocaine. Hard to do that when it's blown to bits and scattered across the bottom of the ocean.

    Even if we knew the boats were full of cocaine, the penalty for smuggling drugs into the US is not death. And even if the penalty was death, it would (or rather, should) not be a summary execution without a trial.

    These are clearly illegal orders, and everyone participating in these strikes needs to be removed and tried for their crimes, starting with Hegseth, and going all the way down to the man who pushed the button to fire the missile.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 1 day ago*

    You can't win. There are too many shipping containers, boats, planes, automobiles, an endless stream of commerce with a thousand different points of opportunity.

    Every "victory" is Pyrrhic, the tighter you grip the more it will slip out of your fingers. You're trying to treat a "disease" by controlling only one symptom, not the cause itself.

    If you "succeed" in one facet, another will become much worse. For example, the war against opiates is what created the Fentanyl market. Good job, idiots.

    Just let it go. Sell it all over the counter and control the quality to reduce overdose. Addicts are better off without you throwing them in dungeons. Leave it alone.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 day ago

    It wasn't for nothing. It was to make low IQ mouth breathers think they were doing something. Aggression is always a positive for conservative voters. And the Republican party always needs ways to make it look like they're doing something of value for the American people while robbing them blind.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago (12 children)

    "We" did not do anything. The US federal government's actions are so far removed from the will of the people that we might as well considered separate entities at this point.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 27 points 1 day ago* (4 children)

    The problem is that to most Republican voters, the fact that this didn't actually impact drug supply isn't really all that important. What matters to them is that - theoretically - "bad people" got killed. They're more interested in punishing people they see as evil than they are in actually improving the world. Even the ones who won't openly admit - or even admit to themselves - that they just like seeing brown people get killed will still defend this as an ultimately good action because it satisfies their twisted notion of justice. The meting out of punishment is what matters to them, far more than whatever social good that punishment is actually supposed to achieve.

    It's the same reason why they have so little interest in welfare policies even when those policies are demonstrably cheaper than the alternative. They won't give shelter and money to homeless people even when it's shown to reduce crime, for example, because the most important thing to them is that no one should ever be given something that they "don't deserve." They're less interested in reducing crime than they are in seeing the poor suffer for whatever imagined sins made them poor.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I think the logic here is that if we punish/eliminate the "bad people" then the world will improve. But we can't just enact policies to help people because if we try to do good things, the "bad people" will just ruin it for everyone. So it all circles back to punish/eliminate the "bad people". And when that inevitably doesnt work, its cause there's still more "bad people", we just have to find them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    Since Reagan they have been pushing a "War on Drugs". For those people "Since we are at war killing people is perfectly fine."

    Cops shooting an unarmed drug dealer in the back is okay with them. So is using the military randomly kill people in other countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 8 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    No? Really?

    /s for the clueless.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    As a non expert, I would assume disrupting supply routes would decrease purity. If what you did made them use slower boats and take different routes there would have been less supply and same demand right? Aka more reasons for people to cut it until supply got back up.

    So really this tells me it's more likely that they didn't disrupt any supply of cocaine, and may have hit normal civilians or someone with marijuana as I remember someone reported bags of weed washing up on a beach..

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 day ago

    Those weren't drug boats. The cartels aren't stupid, they know boats are one of the easiest ways to get intercepted. They build fucking submarines for smuggling drugs, if boats were enough you think they would go to all that effort?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco-submarine

    Also as the other guy said you don't cram 6 people on a boat full of drugs. Why would you need the extra people? Are the sharks gonna rob you so you need extra guards? If you're afraid some rival cartel is gonna intercept you probably want the boat to be lighter so it goes faster and escapes them so less people are better in that case too.

    All this means is that most likely those boats were just fishermen or civilians on recreational rides. Oh, and another thing. You don't get the death penalty in the US for drug smuggling so why would those people be killed even if they were drug smugglers?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 day ago

    You dont cram double digit people on a speedboat to smuggle drugs.

    Because the weight of all those people could instead be more drugs, and that's a bunch of people to keep their mouths closed and take a payment.

    They were just blowing up anything that was coming to America, because they don't want anyone from south America coming up north for any reason.

    The "theyre drug smugglers" was likely never believed by anyone. It was about showing everyone that they'll claim you're a smuggler and kill you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago

    It's almost like your strategy for the "wAr On dRuGs" isn't very useful

  • source
  • When the biggest coke heads are in the highest levels of government, the war on drugs is as rigged as a carnival.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    He blew up all those boats, and he STILL wanted to touch a peepee!

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago

    "remember when we..."

    Homie, they are still doing it. They never stopped. The media just moved on.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    I mean the whole thing was optics anyway right?

    "Trump's so tough on crime he launches missiles at it" kinda stuff. It's stupid but his supporters think it makes their side strong. They're even more about it if the "criminal" is brown.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 6 points 1 day ago

    Didn’t it instead exacerbate the crisis in Cuba that is also the fault of the US?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›