According to a UN human rights chief, U.S. military strikes against boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean allegedly carrying illegal drugs are unacceptable and must cease immediately. The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, called for an investigation into these attacks, citing violations of international human rights law. The spokeswoman for Türk’s office stated that the use of lethal force is only permissible as a last resort against an imminent threat to life, otherwise constituting extrajudicial killings. These strikes, part of a campaign to stop the flow of drugs, have raised concerns about the U.S. military’s growing presence and its potential impact on regional conflicts.
Read More
In a recent statement, former President Donald Trump announced the cessation of funding and all other payments to Colombia. This decision follows accusations from Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who claimed the U.S. was responsible for killing a Colombian national during a drug-trafficking operation. Trump, in response, labeled Petro an “illegal drug dealer” and accused him of supporting drug production despite U.S. financial aid. The dispute centers on a U.S. military strike on a vessel near Colombia, which Petro alleges resulted in the death of a Colombian fisherman.
Read More
Following a U.S. military strike in the Caribbean, Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello condemned the action, refuting President Trump’s claim that those killed were “narcoterrorists.” Questions about the legality of the strike have emerged, particularly after reports that the vessel was turning back before it was attacked. The incident highlights the potential for escalating tensions, given increased U.S. military deployments near Venezuela as part of anti-drug operations, which Caracas views as a threat to its sovereignty. The U.S. has defended its actions, while lawmakers and analysts have raised concerns about the lack of justification and the potential for further destabilization in the region.
Read More
A recent U.S. military strike on a boat in the Caribbean, resulting in the deaths of 11 people, has sparked controversy and raised concerns regarding its legality. High-ranking officials and legal experts have deemed the attack a potential violation of international law, citing the lack of legal justification for using military force against civilians, even if they are suspected of criminal activity. The Trump administration’s actions, including designating certain groups as “narcoterrorists” and firing top military lawyers, have been seen as paving the way for such actions. Despite claims of self-defense and defense of national interests, critics argue that the strike lacked proper authorization and could escalate conflicts in the region.
Read More
Intelligence gathered from intercepted communications between senior Iranian officials suggests the U.S. military strikes on Iran’s nuclear program were less devastating than initially anticipated by the targeted country, according to sources. These private communications included speculation on why the strikes were not as destructive as expected. However, the Trump administration disputes the Iranians’ assessment, claiming the strikes achieved their objectives. Despite the administration’s claims of total obliteration, analysts and some lawmakers disagree, citing remaining capabilities and equipment. The situation remains complex, with ongoing debate about the extent of the damage and the long-term impact on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Read More
Following the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth received praise for not leaking the plans, a standard Democrats quickly mocked. Critics like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ridiculed the praise, comparing it to celebrating basic competence. The strikes, described as an “overwhelming success” by Hegseth, have drawn threats of retaliation from Iran, with UN officials reporting significant damage. This conflict, escalating after Israeli strikes earlier in the month, has led to calls for impeachment.
Read More
U.S. officials are openly admitting they don’t know the current location of Iran’s uranium stockpile. This revelation follows recent military strikes purportedly aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear program. The lack of clarity regarding the uranium’s whereabouts casts serious doubt on the success of the operation. The situation highlights a significant intelligence failure, raising concerns about the planning and execution of the military action.
The uncertainty surrounding the uranium stockpile’s location underscores a critical intelligence gap. This raises questions about the overall effectiveness of the military operation and the reliability of pre-strike intelligence assessments. The inability to definitively account for the uranium suggests the mission may not have achieved its stated objectives.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood