By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration has conducted ten military strikes against civilian targets in international waters, resulting in 43 reported civilian deaths in the past seven weeks, with the potential for more. President Trump has stated he would bypass Congress in authorizing these strikes, even expanding the operation to land-based targets. This action raises legal questions, as some suggest the White House is ignoring legal limits, with critics calling the actions war crimes. The lack of congressional oversight and the open disregard for legal norms signify a concerning erosion of checks and balances within the American system.
Read the original article here
Trump on the legality of his deadly boat strikes: ‘I think we’re just gonna kill people’ is a chilling statement, and honestly, it’s the kind of thing that makes you pause and really consider the implications. We’re talking about a former President, a figure who had the power to command the full force of the United States military, casually suggesting extrajudicial killings. The idea of just “killing people” who are suspected of bringing drugs into the country, without any due process, is deeply unsettling, and it should be for anyone who values the rule of law. It’s not a casual thing to say; it’s a declaration that sidesteps the very foundations of our legal system.
This isn’t just about drugs; it’s about the fundamental principles of justice. It’s about whether we believe in the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and the idea that the state shouldn’t act as judge, jury, and executioner. The fact that someone with so much authority could make such a statement, even if it’s just off-the-cuff, raises serious questions about their respect for these principles. And, of course, the fact that he may feel untouchable is the most worrying aspect of all.
The context here is crucial. This isn’t just a hypothetical scenario; it’s a policy proposal, albeit one delivered in a disturbingly casual manner. This isn’t just about words; this is about potential actions. If someone in power expresses a desire to kill people without legal proceedings, we have to take that seriously. It’s important to note the dangerous path the US would be headed down by carrying out such extrajudicial killings, as the article points out the US would be in very disreputable company.
Of course, the practical implications are significant. How do you identify these “drug boats?” What constitutes reasonable suspicion? Who makes the judgment call? The potential for abuse is immense. Are we talking about boats that could conceivably reach the US coastline? What about international waters? These are complex legal and logistical questions that would need to be addressed before considering any such thing. Trump’s apparent disregard for the law raises critical questions about whether the US is at risk of heading in the wrong direction when it comes to democracy, rule of law, and basic human rights.
The potential for such a policy to backfire is considerable. Not only is this a huge abuse of power, but it could also easily be twisted and turned to target others. The idea of the US navy acting as judge, jury, and executioner, essentially taking the law into its own hands, is a worrying thought. It sets a dangerous precedent, and it’s something that should concern anyone who values justice and the protection of fundamental rights.
This brings up several questions about his actions and character. Does he understand what’s right and wrong? Does he care? His actions and statements show a lack of respect for the law, human life, and what the country stands for. To be clear, these are serious accusations, and the details surrounding his actions need further examination. Yet, given the context, these are things that should be taken seriously.
It’s disheartening to consider that some might not be phased by these statements. Some people may even condone such actions, which should concern us all. It’s a reminder of the importance of standing up for core principles, even when it’s uncomfortable or unpopular. It’s a warning about the fragility of democracy and the importance of upholding the rule of law. It’s the kind of statement that should be met with outrage and a demand for accountability.