Trump dispenses with trials, orders military strike on alleged Venezuelan drug-trafficking boat (Now up to 2)

[DaisyDay]

A Venezuelan boat that the U.S. military destroyed in the Caribbean last week had altered its course and appeared to have turned around before the attack started because the people onboard had apparently spotted a military aircraft stalking it, according to American officials familiar with the matter.

The military repeatedly hit the vessel before it sank, the officials added, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. President Trump has said he authorized the strike and claimed the boat was carrying drugs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/us/trump-drug-boat-venezuela-strike.html

https://join.theintercept.com/donate/now/?source=web_intercept_20250310_Main-Menu-CTA_support-us&referrer_post_id=498709&referrer_url=https://theintercept.com/2025/09/10/u-s-attacked-boat-near-venezuela-multiple-times-to-kill-survivors/&originating_referrer=https://theintercept.com/

People on board the boat off the coast of Venezuela that the U.S. military destroyed last Tuesday were said to have survived an initial strike, according to two American officials familiar with the matter. They were then killed shortly after in a follow-up attack.

The boat was under U.S. surveillance for a significant period of time. Those on board apparently spotted the U.S. aerial assets and altered the vessel’s course. U.S. officials said the boat appeared to have turned back toward shore, after which it was subjected to multiple strikes. Three sources, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the boat was attacked by one or more drones.

U.S. Attacked Boat Near Venezuela Multiple Times to Kill Survivors

American officials said the repeat drone strikes were carried out by Special Operations Command, and more attacks could come soon.

theintercept.com

If this is true, how is it not a war crime?

 

[Desk trauma]

If this is true, how is it not a war crime?

War crimes are for those who are not in power.

 

[RDKirk]

If this is true, how is it not a war crime?

If this were an actual war and if those were actual combatants, it would not be a war crime to strike them if they are retreating.
It would only be a war crime if they have actually dropped their weapons and surrendered.

 

[iluvatar5150]

A Venezuelan boat that the U.S. military destroyed in the Caribbean last week had altered its course and appeared to have turned around before the attack started because the people onboard had apparently spotted a military aircraft stalking it, according to American officials familiar with the matter.

The military repeatedly hit the vessel before it sank, the officials added, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. President Trump has said he authorized the strike and claimed the boat was carrying drugs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/us/trump-drug-boat-venezuela-strike.html

https://join.theintercept.com/donate/now/?source=web_intercept_20250310_Main-Menu-CTA_support-us&referrer_post_id=498709&referrer_url=https://theintercept.com/2025/09/10/u-s-attacked-boat-near-venezuela-multiple-times-to-kill-survivors/&originating_referrer=https://theintercept.com/

People on board the boat off the coast of Venezuela that the U.S. military destroyed last Tuesday were said to have survived an initial strike, according to two American officials familiar with the matter. They were then killed shortly after in a follow-up attack.

The boat was under U.S. surveillance for a significant period of time. Those on board apparently spotted the U.S. aerial assets and altered the vessel’s course. U.S. officials said the boat appeared to have turned back toward shore, after which it was subjected to multiple strikes. Three sources, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the boat was attacked by one or more drones.

U.S. Attacked Boat Near Venezuela Multiple Times to Kill Survivors

American officials said the repeat drone strikes were carried out by Special Operations Command, and more attacks could come soon.

theintercept.com

the video:

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.

truthsocial.com

That is a small boat, so right off the bat, Trump was obviously lying about it heading to the US. That boat couldn't have made it to the US without multiple stops.

 

[DaisyDay]

If this were an actual war and if those were actual combatants, it would not be a war crime to strike them if they are retreating.
It would only be a war crime if they have actually dropped their weapons and surrendered.

And since there is not an actual war and those were not actual combatants?

 

[RDKirk]

And since there is not an actual war and those were not actual combatants?

You asked whether it was a war crime. It's not and would not have been a war crime.

 

[Colo Millz]

the video:

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.

truthsocial.com

That is a small boat, so right off the bat, Trump was obviously lying about it heading to the US. That boat couldn't have made it to the US without multiple stops.

Rubio said it was probably headed to Trinidad.

 

[DaisyDay]

You asked whether it was a war crime. It's not and would not have been a war crime.

Isn't the US Armed Forces attacking foreign civilians an act of war? Why wouldn't an unprovoked act of war be a war crime? I don't know military law which is why I'm asking.

 

[RDKirk]

Isn't the US Armed Forces attacking foreign civilians an act of war? Why wouldn't an unprovoked act of war be a war crime? I don't know military law which is why I'm asking.

If attacking foreign civilians is an act of war, then doing it is not a war crime.

It would be interesting if war involved only soldiers on the designated battlefield, but that's never been the case.

 

[DaisyDay]

If attacking foreign civilians is an act of war, then doing it is not a war crime.

Why not? Why can't it be both? This is asked in sincere ignorance.

It would be interesting if war involved only soldiers on the designated battlefield, but that's never been the case.

A rule more honored in the breach?

 

[RDKirk]

Why not? Why can't it be both? This is asked in sincere ignorance.

Like all international law, "war crime" is a matter of what a few nations came to agreement upon, and generally those nations come to such agreements only because they are closely matched in war-fighting capabilities so that war between them is more likely to result in a treaty than a clear victor.

A rule more honored in the breach?

I spent a little time with ChatGPT to see if we could come up with a case that a war was settled without direct combat civilian casualties.

There were some historical cases:

Battle of Cannae (216 BCE, Second Punic War) Combatants: Rome vs. Carthage

Battle of Gaugamela (331 BCE, Alexander the Great vs. Darius III) Combatants: Macedonians vs. Persians

Franco-Prussian War – Battle of Sedan (1870) Combatants: Prussia vs. France

In these cases, the particular battles that settle the wars did not involve direct civilian casualties. That's not to mention, however, the occupation and pillaging that preceded or followed those battles.

 

[rambot]

If this is true, how is it not a war crime?

America doesn't commit war crimes.


lulz!

 

[rambot]

Like all international law, "war crime" is a matter of what a few nations came to agreement upon, and generally those nations come to such agreements only because they are closely matched in war-fighting capabilities so that war between them is more likely to result in a treaty than a clear victor.


I spent a little time with ChatGPT to see if we could come up with a case that a war was settled without direct combat civilian casualties.

There were some historical cases:

Battle of Cannae (216 BCE, Second Punic War) Combatants: Rome vs. Carthage

Battle of Gaugamela (331 BCE, Alexander the Great vs. Darius III) Combatants: Macedonians vs. Persians

Franco-Prussian War – Battle of Sedan (1870) Combatants: Prussia vs. France

In these cases, the particular battles that settle the wars did not involve direct civilian casualties. That's not to mention, however, the occupation and pillaging that preceded or followed those battles.

WAsn't the Emu war also?

 

[wing2000]

Rubio said it was probably headed to Trinidad.

....which is very close to Venezuela. The U.S. coast line is over 1,300 miles.

 

[Yttrium]

This kind of operation is best done covertly. Like, with a Mission Impossible style team or something. Maybe subs and attack dolphins.

I realize that the Trump administration wants to be showy and make a statement, but it amounts to assassination, which will encourage other countries to do the same. I suppose that (making it look like we're) taking the high ground is impossible for the Trump administration.

 

[Pommer]

If attacking foreign civilians is an act of war, then doing it is not a war crime.

Performing an “act of war” upon people with whom we are not at war, is at least a major faux-pas, no?

Or are we so Good and Just, that anyone we attack obviously “had it coming”?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

If this is true, how is it not a war crime?

I blame it on Trump, since he gave the order. Sadly in the end, everyone else will be punished. Or it will be hushed up or ignored.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Yes, It's looking like Trump is guilty of first degree murder. On everyone that was killed on this ship.

 

[RDKirk]

Performing an “act of war” upon people with whom we are not at war, is at least a major faux-pas, no?

Or are we so Good and Just, that anyone we attack obviously “had it coming”?

"War crime" is a very specific thing, like "treason" and "espionage." Civilians (including Trump) tend to think they're wide-open offenses, but they're actually very narrow.

"Act of war" is more political and is practically anything a politician says it is. “International law” is more a matter of custom and convenience than binding enforcement. Nations define their own “red lines,” and “act of war” is in the eye of the beholder. In the 1930s it could be considered an "act of war" for one nation to track the naval activities of another nation, and Roosevelt had to keep secret the fact that US intelligence was tracking German naval activities.

 

[Say it aint so]

"War crime" is a very specific thing, like "treason" and "espionage." Civilians (including Trump) tend to think they're wide-open offenses, but they're actually very narrow.

"Act of war" is more political and is practically anything a politician says it is. “International law” is more a matter of custom and convenience than binding enforcement. Nations define their own “red lines,” and “act of war” is in the eye of the beholder. In the 1930s it could be considered an "act of war" for one nation to track the naval activities of another nation, and Roosevelt had to keep secret the fact that US intelligence was tracking German naval activities.

The Geneva Conventions

Grave breaches as defined in the Geneva Conventions include the following acts if committed against protected persons or property (as applicable):

• Willful killing;