back
19 comments
Personally I think governments shouldn't just be able to order people killed, but that's just a European view.

(really the difference between the constitutional law approach which only protects US citizens and the human rights approach of ECHR which protects humans)

This is exactly why Europe needs the US. Europeans don't realize the world is a dangerous place because the US deals with it. Europeans don't have to get their hands dirty and they can continue to believe in their moral superiority.

Was Europe planning to do anything about ISIS? Not really. Syria? Iraq? The USSR? Russia? Serbia? Not really. They let Dad take care of it while they whined and played in their sandbox.

In the end Europe will rot and collapse from within, the way the Ottoman Empire did.

Is the Middle East better thanks to US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, support of Israel? Did the US deter Russia from invading Ukraine?

I'm not seeing how blowing up boats is helping anything.

As with Iran, did the "doing things" about it make the situation worse or better?
I understand why they do it.

Every pound that makes it to America has the potential to kill thousands of Americans.

But the way they try to solve this problem looks kinda dumb to me. This will just go as well as the three-week special operation in Iran.

The people they kill are innocent, until proven guilty in front of a court.

That is a core principle that we believe in if we are law-abiding citizens.

Those Fishermen never had the chance to defend themselves in front of a court. Their crime was being born in the wrong place. I find that not sufficient to sentence them to death.

Also you need to win the people over or they are going to fuck you. You don’t win the people over, you get Vietnam or Afghanistan.

How do you win the people over, if everyone in the village those fishermen lived in knows you murdered their friends? People who simply had no choice to say no to the cartels for the sake of their families, who are now widows and orphans.

Those poor Fishermen are really stuck between a rock and a hard place.

What is most likely going to happen now is, those widows will turn to the cartels who now offer them food and support.

Now those women say fuck the Americans. I will sit with my children on these drug boats until the day I die, to kill as many of them as possible. I am going to celebrate every American dying of an overdose. What do I have to lose? They already killed my husband, they can kill me as well.

And that’s how the cartels will get women and children on these boats, and now what? It’s checkmate.

A single video gets out how CIA covert operations kill innocent women and children on those boats, the cartels win.

Those attacks are nothing more than stupid PR stunts and the CIA using these poor souls as guinea pigs for their drone shenanigans.

It neither solves the cartels’ logistics nor the main problem. Americans fucking love their drugs.

And as long as there is a lucrative black market, there will be people supplying it.

Paywall: http://archive.today/WU7gE
I mean we all knew the US is bombing innocent fisher man outside their jurisdiction. That is exactly what central European media seemed to agree on.

We still miss the "why" and how there are no consequences so far

Why did Russia complain about the rights of the Russian minority in Ukraine?

Why did Austria send Serbia an Ultimatum in 1914?

Why did Japanese officers blow up their own railway in Manchuria in 1931?

Why was Spain blamed for an accidental explosion on the USS Maine in 1898?

Frogs being boiled—public has gotten used to it, even numb.
Like the doc Hypernormalization.. the leaders have gradually become actors (post JFK; Reagan was literally) putting on a show for the media and not doing anything meaningful because too many people have lost (or ignored) the ability to measure, understand, question, or identify the actions and words that differentiate between effective and ineffective leaders. This extends from a lack of viable mechanisms to effect accountability for poor performance. High office needs more seriousness, rigor, and a firm code of ethics with consequences for violating them.
But what if that fisherman possibly thought about the existence of illegal narcotics while on the boat, fishing? That's grounds for getting murdered, right?
Is it? Where I am from you don't get murdered for anything usually.

I know little about American customs tho

What if a son of a senator or a president had drugs, would he be bombed too?
Hunter Biden is still around so, no.
“We all know” is no meaningful proof though
My fishermen also ride around in speedboats rocking $120,000 worth of engines filled to the brim with mysterious blue packages.
Yours might, these fisherman did not:

  The eight missing Ecuadorian nationals were aboard a 52-foot longline fishing boat called the Fiorella. The men on two boats that were struck in March, the Negra Francisca Duarte II and the Don Maca, all survived.
Cool fisherman you have there. Guess that's more than enough reason to just bomb them.

I do not claim to understand american logic. I don't want to either.

Even so, why is that a reason to bomb them? Is this just the war on drugs taken to a new level? Like prohibition, it doesn't work, but it's costly, destroys a lot of lives, and helps create highly profitable criminal organizations.