By Matt Underwood Shipwrecked or Not, All These Bombings are Murder. Let’s be clear: this whole situation, the recent attacks, and the resulting deaths, are unequivocally wrong. We’re talking about a significant number of lives lost – 87 people already, and the number keeps climbing. It’s time to call this what it is: murder.
The core issue here is the blatant disregard for due process. The administration claims these were legitimate targets, but they’ve presented no concrete evidence. Even if they had, the proper venue to present that evidence is a court of law, not a missile strike. This isn’t how we handle any crime, let alone something as complex as drug trafficking. And the fact that pardons can be granted to drug runners is even more infuriating.
The attempts to rationalize these killings with legal jargon and semantic games are transparent. Calling the victims “narcoterrorists” doesn’t magically make their deaths legal. At its heart, this is murder, potentially for the purpose of seizing Venezuelan oil, and it risks escalating into a global conflict.
The existing protocols of the US Navy and Coast Guard are adequate for interdicting drug runners. They’ve been doing this for years, and they’re effective. Bombing these boats is a waste of resources, it destroys potential evidence, and it’s likely not even hitting the real problem, the flow of fentanyl. This isn’t a drug war; it’s a play for control of resources.
The fact that this is even happening, and that some seem to shrug it off, is deeply disturbing. The lack of outrage is deafening. We’ve seen similar incidents in the past, like the Kabul drone strike that killed innocent civilians, and that silence is a recurring pattern that needs to be addressed.
There’s a fundamental difference between these actions and legitimate military operations. The Houthis, for example, were actively engaged in armed conflict, posing an imminent threat to life. Drug traffickers, on the other hand, are generally trying to avoid detection. They’re not actively attacking. The principle of *hors de combat* applies here: once someone is shipwrecked, wounded, or surrendering, they are no longer a target. Killing them at that point is not a legitimate act of war. It is a war crime, regardless of their supposed FTO designation.
The argument that we should “trust the intel” falls flat. History is filled with instances where intelligence has failed, leading to horrific tragedies. When the result is 87 dead bodies and no public evidence, blind trust is not a sufficient defense. Just because an Executive Order or Title 10 makes an action domestically legal doesn’t automatically make it legal under international law, nor does it make it immune to moral criticism. Rebranding law enforcement targets as Narco-Terrorists to bypass due process is a dangerous precedent to set.
And the political motivations behind this are undeniable. It’s about personal gain, about consolidating power, and about using the rhetoric of national security to justify actions that are morally reprehensible. These actions have nothing to do with stopping drug trafficking and everything to do with exploiting the situation.
It’s not about being “impartial.” You cannot be indifferent when basic human rights are being violated. You can’t separate the actions from the politics, or from the potential for abuse of power. The idea that this is just another iteration of the drone strikes we’ve seen for decades is inaccurate. Congress did not approve this. There is zero evidence, case, or proof that these strikes are even carrying out their intended result (aside from just cruel, cold blooded murder).
These are extrajudicial killings. They’re a blatant violation of international law. To then go back and bomb shipwreck survivors is a clear example of an illegal order, punishable by death. The hypocrisy is staggering. At its core, it comes down to a fundamental lack of respect for human life and a willingness to sacrifice innocent people for political and economic gain.