The assumption that their boat was put out of play? Who is arguing that their boat wasn't? Bradley? Tom Cotton?
No that is not your assumption. If it was just that the boat was put out of play then we could not make any other assumptions as to what was happening. But you interjected they were out of play in a particular was as innocents stranded. When we don't know. They could have been salvaging all the drugs and then eventually get help to continue the mission.
What difference does it make if they were trying to gather the packages?
Because it means they intend to gather them and continue the mission. Those very drugs that are gathered could end up on the streets in the US.
Thats what happens when your trying to stop terrorist. Were the terrorist who were bombed in other hits in other situations in peril if they survived. Of course. Thats what happens when you commit terror. Expect to be put in peril. Because you commiting peril on others.
Thats the difference between being in peril out on a days fishing and engaging in terror activities. From what I read they were actually standing on the boat and taking their shirts off and gathering the parcels. So they were not exactly drowning. This happened some time back and the report says there were a number of JAGs there when it happened live and none said it was illegal.
Did they have any means to reach the shore according to Bradley?
I don't know. Your asking questions that have not come out yet. I am sure they would have all sorts of communication including phones on a boat worth 1/4 of a million dollars.
Say it then. Then I'll just say that I wish all narcotics smugglers to be interdicted (that is what I want!).
The problem is what is morally right is a matter of opinion according to secular thinking. So theres no way to determine what is right. Whoever is in power gets to decide.
Bidens government may have been softe on crime and drugs and this was morally wrong and caused harm to many. Trump may be tougher and it seems unfair but saves 10 times as many lives.
Its the good old Trolly ethical dilemma. Either way some die and some live. The more you save is deemed more moral. This is the problem with relative morality.
Which situations do you want to compare?
I just gave one above. If say 100 die oin drug boats but it stops 80% of the trade and saves say 10,000 people. Or we continue the same policy that has allowed it to get out of hand and we lose those 10,000 and maybe it increases to an additional 10,000 as it gets worse.
Which is more moral.
They have a right to radio for help, otherwise they would likely have been hurt or even died from exposure.
So if they have a right to radio for help how do you know it was not to get another boat to collect all the drugs and then continue the mission.
That wasn't what I was asking, in this post
Trump dispenses with trials, orders military strike on alleged Venezuelan drug-trafficking boat (Now up to 2, 3, 4...)
You alluded that those that complain cannot do that because we who complain in some way allowed something much worse to happen (unclear how). So before I complain about this, what much worse thing do you think I should complain about? I wish the US took better care about those that struggle with addiction. Is this what you're after?
You could start with the lack of action in stopping the drug trade. It has increased under Biden. You could also condemn the Dems soft policies that have allowed crime and rugs to flourish thus allowing both sides of the problem to grow and kill many people and destroy families and communities.
This not onlt has to be doine but done with the same level of passion and vitriole as made against Trump and his administration. That is attack them, misrepresent the Dems and call them out at the same level with headlines and all to be consistent. No excuse making like they have for other stuff like fraud. Just call out their own for all the immoral stuff done re the drug problem and crimne associted.,
Just pretend that it was the dems who helped cultivate both the drug smuggling and active use on the streets which is responsible for killing 1,000s. Because this is what the Rep will be accusing the Dems of doing.
Firing at a capsized boat is always wrong.
Actually no in combating terrorism. Biden and Obama participated and gave go aheads for attacks on terrorist that involved 2nd hits at finishing the job. Heck Obama gave the ok to go into Bin Ladens compound and kill every single person in the house. Including women and children.
Vehicles hit in terror coveys have been hit multiple times while terrorists are still running around. This is how combating in a war like situation happens with terrorist. Its easy to play moralist from the sidelines and an armchair.
(check 1 minute and 25 seconds in the video below). Might there be more information coming, sure. If the films show that they righted the boat and got it going again then the second strike was justified, but so far no one has even claimed that they righted the boat and got it going again.
It does not matter if they don't right the boat. Just trying to right the boat and getting the cargo is still actively engaged in trying to continue.
I hate all this. It sounds like all the other conspiracies and claims and counter claims. People come up with all these spectualtions up until the actual facts are released.
They were calling Trumps assassin a radical Right supporter or that Trump did not get hit with a bullet. All sorts of silly claims. Just let the facts come out.
I also noticed they have made another hit on another drug boat. So this is not stopping them from stopping these drug boats. They seem to believe they have a legal right and no one has challenged this yet. So they must have some pretty good intel and legal advice.
