ChiGoose Posted September 5 Posted September 5 40 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I think you're hung up on the process and not focusing on the goal which is results. The goal is to stop the flow of drugs. For 40+ years we played a game of pretend. The government pretends its working and the public pretends to believe it. Meanwhile, the drugs and money keep flowing. So let's apply some logic. That wasn't a fishing boat. The film shows a vessel with 3 big outboards capable of generating high speeds. That's not a general attribute of a boat designed to fish. Our Navy guys with experience at sea can figure this out. You want to question their judgment or their actions? Go ahead. And then there's reality and results. I'll wager running drugs in high speed water craft is off the table going forward. As far as legal authority? Who cares? Sue us. Bring charges to the International Court. The US Navy can do pretty much whatever they want to here. Or anywhere. Who's going to stop them? The Venezuelan military isn't going to stop them. Our military could destroy their entire offensive capacity in what might be a day or two. Maybe that gives the go signal to dissidents to overthrow Maduro? Another positive. And the Cartels? If they engage, or likely when they engage, and kill American service personnel or execute terror attacks on US soil the response will be an overwhelming show of force that will green light operations to take them all out. Another target should be taking out all the bankers, financiers, and middlemen moving money around for the cartels. That includes any Chinese gangs running money laundering operations in the US, Canada, and Mexico. It makes no sense to build the military capability of full spectrum dominance and then be afraid to use it when necessary. And in this battle against the cartels its necessary. Its not about due process, or the constitution, or some judge issuing injunctions. Its a military operation bound by specific rules of engagement and apparently one of those rules is that its acceptable to take out a high speed power boat running drugs. Unless anyone wants to suggest they were out on a sightseeing tour there's nothing more here. Having a process is how you protect people from a government run amok. HSBC was caught laundering Mexican cartel money, should we use our military against them? Maybe drone strike 66 Hudson Blvd in NYC? Should we blow up Chinese nationals? How do we think China would react to that? If we have this mighty military, should we launch incursions into Mexico? How would Mexico react to being invaded? How would other countries react to such an action? Seems like a lot of ways to get us into a hot war from the person claiming to be the peace president. Many of the guns used by the cartels are supplied from within the US. Should we start bombing gun stores where they are purchased? Maybe we have a liberal president in the future, would they be justified in shutting down any gun store that sold guns that were smuggled to the cartels? Is our mighty Navy incapable of interdicting a speed boat? If these were cartel smugglers, it should have been child's play to bring them in, charge them, and prove it in a court. You all seem to believe the boat was certainly carrying drugs, so the evidence would be overwhelming. I'm all for going after the cartels, but these actions seem to be directed more at getting the MAGA crowds horny than actually resolving any of the issues. All while expanding federal government powers, something conservatives used to pretend to care about.
BillsFanNC Posted September 5 Posted September 5 2 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Look at you making up scenarios to try and make it seem like blowing up narco terrorists is bad. How pathetic. The King is a master of bloviating hand waving that sounds great to other bloviating attorneys, but in the end its all base level TDS.
Wolfgang Posted September 5 Posted September 5 58 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I think you're hung up on the process and not focusing on the goal which is results. The goal is to stop the flow of drugs. For 40+ years we played a game of pretend. The government pretends its working and the public pretends to believe it. Meanwhile, the drugs and money keep flowing. So let's apply some logic. That wasn't a fishing boat. The film shows a vessel with 3 big outboards capable of generating high speeds. That's not a general attribute of a boat designed to fish. Our Navy guys with experience at sea can figure this out. You want to question their judgment or their actions? Go ahead. And then there's reality and results. I'll wager running drugs in high speed water craft is off the table going forward. As far as legal authority? Who cares? Sue us. Bring charges to the International Court. The US Navy can do pretty much whatever they want to here. Or anywhere. Who's going to stop them? The Venezuelan military isn't going to stop them. Our military could destroy their entire offensive capacity in what might be a day or two. Maybe that gives the go signal to dissidents to overthrow Maduro? Another positive. And the Cartels? If they engage, or likely when they engage, and kill American service personnel or execute terror attacks on US soil the response will be an overwhelming show of force that will green light operations to take them all out. Another target should be taking out all the bankers, financiers, and middlemen moving money around for the cartels. That includes any Chinese gangs running money laundering operations in the US, Canada, and Mexico. It makes no sense to build the military capability of full spectrum dominance and then be afraid to use it when necessary. And in this battle against the cartels its necessary. Its not about due process, or the constitution, or some judge issuing injunctions. Its a military operation bound by specific rules of engagement and apparently one of those rules is that its acceptable to take out a high speed power boat running drugs. Unless anyone wants to suggest they were out on a sightseeing tour there's nothing more here. The usual suspects here love talking about problems... They just don't want those problems solved... If they were solved, what would they talk about?
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 5 Posted September 5 10 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Having a process is how you protect people from a government run amok. HSBC was caught laundering Mexican cartel money, should we use our military against them? Maybe drone strike 66 Hudson Blvd in NYC? Should we blow up Chinese nationals? How do we think China would react to that? If we have this mighty military, should we launch incursions into Mexico? How would Mexico react to being invaded? How would other countries react to such an action? Seems like a lot of ways to get us into a hot war from the person claiming to be the peace president. Many of the guns used by the cartels are supplied from within the US. Should we start bombing gun stores where they are purchased? Maybe we have a liberal president in the future, would they be justified in shutting down any gun store that sold guns that were smuggled to the cartels? Is our mighty Navy incapable of interdicting a speed boat? If these were cartel smugglers, it should have been child's play to bring them in, charge them, and prove it in a court. You all seem to believe the boat was certainly carrying drugs, so the evidence would be overwhelming. I'm all for going after the cartels, but these actions seem to be directed more at getting the MAGA crowds horny than actually resolving any of the issues. All while expanding federal government powers, something conservatives used to pretend to care about. Sinking further!!!!! If you were really about going after the cartels, you wouldn't be bitching.
BillsFanNC Posted September 5 Posted September 5 (edited) Sending swat teams to arrest J6 trespassers and those who pray in front of abortion clinics homes? Go government! Vaporizing narcoterrorists intent on bringing more deadly fentanyl into the US? Hey now, let's think about what our government is up to. Hey King...Go *****.c yourself. Edited September 5 by BillsFanNC 1
ChiGoose Posted September 5 Posted September 5 "3. [MAGA] also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of [MAGA]... to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official [MAGA] intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values."
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 5 Posted September 5 8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: "3. [MAGA] also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of [MAGA]... to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official [MAGA] intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values." Are you subterranean yet? 1
JDHillFan Posted September 5 Posted September 5 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: "3. [MAGA] also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of [MAGA]... to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official [MAGA] intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values." Did someone say emasculation? Does that include post-election self-emasculation of this sort? ⬇️ On 11/6/2024 at 7:50 PM, ChiGoose said: An entire thread dedicated to reveling in fellow Americans being sad and disappointed. Pretty gross. A lot of people here just telling on themselves. Even knowing that you had your feelings hurt, this was truly pitiful. Everyone other than you is awful though. 1
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 5 Posted September 5 7 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Ever watch an accident in slow motion? 1
JDHillFan Posted September 5 Posted September 5 14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: What were you thinking when you posted that spectacular bit of whining? Good lord. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted September 5 Posted September 5 3 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Having a process is how you protect people from a government run amok. HSBC was caught laundering Mexican cartel money, should we use our military against them? Maybe drone strike 66 Hudson Blvd in NYC? Should we blow up Chinese nationals? How do we think China would react to that? If we have this mighty military, should we launch incursions into Mexico? How would Mexico react to being invaded? How would other countries react to such an action? Seems like a lot of ways to get us into a hot war from the person claiming to be the peace president. Many of the guns used by the cartels are supplied from within the US. Should we start bombing gun stores where they are purchased? Maybe we have a liberal president in the future, would they be justified in shutting down any gun store that sold guns that were smuggled to the cartels? Is our mighty Navy incapable of interdicting a speed boat? If these were cartel smugglers, it should have been child's play to bring them in, charge them, and prove it in a court. You all seem to believe the boat was certainly carrying drugs, so the evidence would be overwhelming. I'm all for going after the cartels, but these actions seem to be directed more at getting the MAGA crowds horny than actually resolving any of the issues. All while expanding federal government powers, something conservatives used to pretend to care about. Obviously, we need to differentiate between the approach to the situation of handling domestic events and military encounters. I'm more than happy to agree to and concede that point. And sure there are many different scenarios and approaches to intercede on the speedboat. But the commander on site needs to assess the situation and the risks while arriving at a decision of how to act. As I can do hypothetical too, let's say he decided to give the occupants of the boat the "white glove" treatment and launch a boat or two to intercept the cartel crew. And as a result the operation goes south and 3 or 4 of his crew get killed? Marines, Seals, or some other crew members making up the boarding party. Now there are 3 or 4 families demanding answers and inquires by the Navy about the decision to put the crew at risk. And ask why alternative methods of acting were not taken. The commander needs to do what's needed to achieve the mission but he also has a major obligation and duty to his crew. And not putting their lives at risk of harm to demonstrate compassion to the enemy where there's close to 100% certainty they're heavily armed is something to be avoided. If its me my priority is to achieve the objectives of the mission and make sure every one of my guys ends the day alive. If that means scratching about a dozen dirt bags instead of taking unnecessary risks with the lives of American servicemen then that's what it is going to be. That's pretty much all I have to say on this topic. 1
sherpa Posted September 6 Posted September 6 22 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Obviously, we need to differentiate between the approach to the situation of handling domestic events and military encounters. I'm more than happy to agree to and concede that point. And sure there are many different scenarios and approaches to intercede on the speedboat. But the commander on site needs to assess the situation and the risks while arriving at a decision of how to act. As I can do hypothetical too, let's say he decided to give the occupants of the boat the "white glove" treatment and launch a boat or two to intercept the cartel crew. And as a result the operation goes south and 3 or 4 of his crew get killed? Marines, Seals, or some other crew members making up the boarding party. Now there are 3 or 4 families demanding answers and inquires by the Navy about the decision to put the crew at risk. And ask why alternative methods of acting were not taken. The commander needs to do what's needed to achieve the mission but he also has a major obligation and duty to his crew. And not putting their lives at risk of harm to demonstrate compassion to the enemy where there's close to 100% certainty they're heavily armed is something to be avoided. If its me my priority is to achieve the objectives of the mission and make sure every one of my guys ends the day alive. If that means scratching about a dozen dirt bags instead of taking unnecessary risks with the lives of American servicemen then that's what it is going to be. That's pretty much all I have to say on this topic. I get what your point is here, but I would add... There was no risk to the US Naval forces. The issue is how much confidence the US had that this was actually, as claimed, a boat full of drugs headed for the US. I am still confused how such a small craft could make it to the US from Venezuela, a long way away, so I suspect it was headed to a drop off point for further transport. Either way, it was likely a hellfire missile from a drone, and that is approved at the highest gov authority, not from an on scene commander.
All_Pro_Bills Posted September 6 Posted September 6 41 minutes ago, sherpa said: I get what your point is here, but I would add... There was no risk to the US Naval forces. The issue is how much confidence the US had that this was actually, as claimed, a boat full of drugs headed for the US. I am still confused how such a small craft could make it to the US from Venezuela, a long way away, so I suspect it was headed to a drop off point for further transport. Either way, it was likely a hellfire missile from a drone, and that is approved at the highest gov authority, not from an on scene commander. Not to get picky but after the explosion the hull of the boat from what i saw looked intact. I would expect a hellfire would obliterate the target but I'm no expert.
Roundybout Posted September 6 Posted September 6 2 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: Yeah, we’re gonna have to put a LOT of people in jail when Dems take power again.
sherpa Posted September 6 Posted September 6 23 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Not to get picky but after the explosion the hull of the boat from what i saw looked intact. I would expect a hellfire would obliterate the target but I'm no expert. Hellfire has a very small warhead, about 20 pounds. That's the issue with drone stuff. They can't carry much. Anyway, it was enough to destroy this boat.
gobills404 Posted September 6 Posted September 6 4 hours ago, Roundybout said: Yeah, we’re gonna have to put a LOT of people in jail when Dems take power again. Y’all already tried that lol how’s that working out for you 🫵😂 1
Wolfgang Posted September 6 Posted September 6 On 9/5/2025 at 11:46 AM, ChiGoose said: "3. [MAGA] also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of [MAGA]... to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official [MAGA] intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values." Fascinating... Meanwhile... 1
Recommended Posts