Love Those Narcos

 The Trump Administration nas in 2025 sunk  numerous narco  boats on both Atlantic and sometimes Pacfic  oceans. This is after narcotics dealers were  attempting to smuggle using high speed boats from Venezuela and other places, were designed terrorist organizations - making them legal targets  for military strikes without warning.

From the BBC here:

"In total, there have been more than 30 strikes on vessels as part of the Trump administration's "war on drugs" with more than 110 people killed since the US carried out its first attack on a boat in international waters on 2 September. 

That first attack has come under particular scrutiny from lawmakers in Washington since it emerged that US forces struck the targeted boat twice.

Two people who had survived the first strike and were clinging to the hull of their boat were killed in the second. Some lawmakers expressed concern that the "double-tap" strike breached the rules of engagement."

However the  narco boat in question was a target that was ordered sunk.  Since it was not sunk, it was legal to be  struck again, survivors clinging to it or not. Indeed, were the narco operators of the boat trained naval men, the last thing they would have done is cling to an overturned target hull because that was liable for more destruction.

According to the insinuations of the "legal experts" --  of course unnamed or -- countless Nazi and Japanese naval targets in WW2 should not have been destroyed  because they had survivors slinging to the unsunken boats or ships. The crippled and  listing Bismarck, with a few thousand sailors on it, should have been left alone to find it's way back to a safe port. The famous order "Sink the Bismarck" would in 20254 have been "illegal"?

WII submarines were forced to surface due to damage by depth charges and then sunk while crews were exposed on deck. Notable examples include German U‑boats such as U‑175 (1943) and U‑185 (1943), and Japanese submarines like I‑52 (1944). This too would be all wrong using the reasoning of legal "experts". The submarine  should have been allowed  allowed  to carry on, if they could. 

The BBC contrasts a new strike by the US Coastguard December 30th 2025 of 3 narco boats and says Coastguard is looking  for up to 8 survivors who abandoned the boats for the water. This was and is standard naval practise too in numerous wars, because the boats have been sunk, one rescues if one can, survivors. A drone, which struck the contentious  Septrember narco boat, is unable.

Take German U‑175 (April 1943). Forced to surface by depth charges .Submarine crippled and sunk by US Coast Guard cutter Spencer. Survivors abandoned ship and were picked up by Allied escorts. Or Japanese I‑361 (May 1945) was attacked by US destroyer escort USS Reeves near Okinawa. Submarine surfaced fatally damaged, crew abandoned ship.Survivors rescued and taken prisoner by Allied forces. One can assure the "legal experts" who do not know stem from stern about the rules of naval warfare are well versed in political lawfare against the Trump administration.