The problem with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) is that he’s a firm believer in this Constitution Nostra. In a way, he’s like the Constitution Goblin that sits on our shoulder whispering, “Show me where in the Constitution it says you can do that”.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) claimed President Donald Trump’s military strikes against suspected drug boats were not legal.
Host Kristen Welker said, “President Trump has authorized military strikes against suspected drug boats in the Caribbean, as you know, so far more than 20 people, senator, have been killed in six different strikes. Do you believe that these strikes against these suspected drug boats are legal?”
Paul said, “No, they go against all of our tradition. When you kill someone if you’re not in war, and not in a declared war you really need to know someone’s name, at least. You have to accuse them of something and you have to present evidence. All of these people have been blown up without us knowing their name and without evidence of a crime. For decades and if not centuries when you stop people at sea in international waters or in your own waters you announce that you’re going to board the ship and you’re looking for contraband, smuggling or drugs. This happens every day off of Miami, but we know from Coast Guard statistics that about 25% of the time the Coast Guard boards a ship there are no drugs. So if our policy now is to blow up every ship we suspect or accuse of drug running, that would be a bizarre world in which 25% of the people might be innocent.”
And I agree with him.
In the first place, these are not Venezuelan Navy ships that our boys are sending off to that Big Drydock In The Sky; they’re privately-owned. And yes, they may have been sponsored by that godless Commie VenPres Maduro, but we don’t really know that, do we?
Me, I’d rather have the Navy board a ship when intercepted, and if they find evidence of drugs — like, sacks of cocaine powder in the hold — they should thank the ship’s crew politely, get off the ship… and then blow it the shit out of the water.
I don’t agree with this part of ol’ Rand’s little diatribe, though:
“The other thing about these speed boats is they’re 2,000 miles away from us. If they have drugs they’re probably peddling drugs to one of the islands of Trinidad or Tobago off Venezuela.”
Don’t care where the destination of the drugs may be: la coca is illegal in pretty much every country on earth — oh, and by the way, just because the drugs may be headed for Trinidad or Tobago, that doesn’t mean that those islands are their final destination: they might just be a stop over, en route to the U.S. (and probably are, being just part of the distribution network).
I also suspect that the “25%” of the time statistic is because the drug runners see the USN or USCG ships coming, and dump the contraband overboard — which is fine because whatever, the drugs aren’t going to reach their destination.
I know why The Donald is doing this: it’s to create a negative incentive for drug smuggling, a way to persuade these assholes to find another way to earn a living. It might work; but it’s not legal.
And we’re not (yet) at war with Venezuela, last time I looked, and given the craven nature of Congress as it stands right now, I doubt very much whether they’d give the go-ahead to nuke Caracas, tempting though that prospect might be.
It’s a tough problem, but I’m not sure that bombing ships out in the middle of the ocean is the correct one. Rand Paul doesn’t; and I think in this case, he has the right of it.
I am prepared to hear opinions to the contrary, of course.
I’m big on the presumption of innocence and very much against the death penalty so I’m very much with you and Senator Paul on the first part.
I come at from a slightly different point of view. As a former Navy officer SWO, I don’t mind blowing up the drug runners, but I am concerned that the next Democrat administration may go after those doing the blowing up. We need some kind of legal framework to protect the.
There is nothing inherently impossible about a declaration of war against non state actors, but I doubt it will happen. My solution would be to amend our piracy laws to cover drug trafficking on the high seas as well. There is plenty of precedent to attack pirates at sea and I believe piracy and drug running are conceptually similar.
When you are in a 50 ft “Fast Boat” in the open ocean, 200 miles from shore traveling at 30+ knots with no Radar or AIS and you departed from an unpopulated river on the south American coast, and you are not responding to request for ID on the radio, then it is clear you are smuggling something. Probably drugs since smuggling Guns or Booze INTO the US is not profitable.
DJT has declared that makes you an allowable Target for interdiction. If you don’t want to stop, we will stop you. I have no problem with that.
Same holds true if you are in a semi-submersible traveling at 6 knots.
If you are going to smuggle drugs go back to the proven method. Fill a shipping container.
Yeah, we have the manpower and the ships to directly interdict.
Put a shot across their bow, and if they don’t slow down THEN use them for target practice.
Seizing the ships will put more USCG and Navy personnel at risk but I agree with a law enforcement approach more than military intervention. War has become more sterile with drones and warplanes doing the work while U.S. service members operate at safer distances. That being said, You can’t know for sure if the ships are carrying unless they’re boarded. Once confirmed, the ships should be sunk. I don’t recommend incarcerating any smugglers to live on U.S. taxpayers dime whilst awaiting a trial. Simply wait for their ship to sink and return them to where they were apprehended. If they make it out of international waters, I hope they relay the perils of their career choices to their fellow countrymen.
I don’t give two shits about the fate of Venezuelan drug smugglers, alleged or otherwise. In fact I don’t give two shits about Venezuela, Gaza, Islam, Iran, any of them. They could all spontaneously catch fire this afternoon, and I wouldn’t piss on one of them, to put it out.
But this type of behavior from our .gov (whilst satisfying) is really concerning for all the reasons we probably feel because sadly we won’t always even have the nominal control we have now.
Sen Paul is 100% right on this, as is Massie and others. This is a bad precedent to start cheering.
I’m old enough where I saw the shit I cheered in the 80’s, 90’s, 00’s etc to get the “enemies” start getting used on the friendlies, because we didn’t agree that certain .gov behavior was off-limits. If we’re not careful we will get hung with the rope we weave.
I found this article by a retired Naval officer to be very informative. Recommended.
https://cdrsalamander.substack.com/p/a-drug-war-goes-hot
(You can read for free, just click past the “please subscribe” button)