Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's not correct.My understanding is that the survivors were trying to access another vessel. But as in any military or police operation, munitions firing is carried out to ensure complete safety. I.e. it's not a quota of shots & you're done.
I didn’t say anything about the boat being salvageableWhat remained of the boat was not salvageable, not to mention the two survivors clinging to a capsized portion. What is the purpose of the second hit if not to make sure all on board were dead?
Who said that? What other vessel?My understanding is that the survivors were trying to access another vessel.
Who said that? Where was that said?But as in any military or police operation, munitions firing is carried out to ensure complete safety. I.e. it's not a quota of shots & you're done.
In other words, not salvageable is destroyed for all practical purposes. The ”threat” is gone as the two survivors cannot continue with their mission. They should have been brought on board a ship and detained.I didn’t say anything about the boat being salvageable
In May of '42 the Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryu was eventually sunk at Midway. 39 sailors managed to escape on a lifeboat after most of the crew had been rescued by other Japanese ships. A US plane spotted their boat 14 days later.The order was to intercept and destroy a terrorist boat carrying drugs. First shot did not destroy the boat - the second shot did.
Were the drug runners in a life boat?In May of '42 the Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryu was eventually sunk at Midway. 39 sailors managed to escape on a lifeboat after most of the crew had been rescued by other Japanese ships. A US plane spotted their boat 14 days later.
These men were at war with the US. They were enemy combatants. They had been actively involved in killing very many US servicemen. You're the man in charge of what happens next. You've sunk their ship but these 39 have survived.
Do you gun them down and finish the job?
Not sunk. The mission is to sink the vessel and destroy the load of narcotics on board.In other words, not salvageable is destroyed for all practical purposes. The ”threat” is gone as the two survivors cannot continue with their mission. They should have been brought on board a ship and detained.
The survivors being present muddles the mission though.Not sunk. The mission is to sink the vessel and destroy the load of narcotics on board.
It took a second hit to accomplish.
The Japanese were attacked by US forces because they were at war. They were a threat to American lives and their ship destroyed. Thirty nine survived the attack. Maybe you'd say that the situation with the drug runners was the same (you'd be wrong, but we'll assume that would be your view). So their boat was destroyed and two survived. For over an hour: US airstrike survivors clung to boat wreckage for an hour before second deadly attack, video showsWere the drug runners in a life boat?
We’re the drug runners in a life boat?The Japanese were attacked by US forces because they were at war. They were a threat to American lives and their ship destroyed. Thirty nine survived the attack. Maybe you'd say that the situation with the drug runners was the same (you'd be wrong, but we'll assume that would be your view). So their boat was destroyed and two survived. For over an hour: US airstrike survivors clung to boat wreckage for an hour before second deadly attack, video shows
'Two men who survived a US airstrike on a suspected drug smuggling boat in the Caribbean clung to the wreckage for an hour before they were killed in a second attack, according to a video of the episode shown to senators in Washington.'
So this wasn't even a one-two strike. The boat was destroyed, most occupants were blown up and people watched two men struggling in the sea for over an hour. And then decided to kill them in cold blood. Trying to defend this is unconscionable.
No, the two men we're talking about weren't even in a boat. They were floundering around in the water. Hanging on to a wrecked boat. For an hour, for heaven's sake. People watched them for an hour and then somone decided to kill them.We’re the drug runners in a life boat?
The obvious solution is of course to kill people so fast they have no chance to surrender or have a change of heart. Thus, they die as purely evil narco-terrorists and all is peachy.Do you know if the Obama DoD is the force that made the 'double tap' bombing concept more acceptable for future Presidents to use?
I've been trying to locate Trump DoD critics who have proof that the survivors were surrendering when the 2nd boat strike occurred and killed them. Because if the video shows them refusing to surrender and un-injured; Was that because they had preserved their hatred/their terroirizing mindset toward the USA?
I guess some politicians are imagining that the 2 survivors were treading water while also making decrees to each other to never again try to help destroy USA residents with their narcotic.
Ever heard of the Laconia incident?In May of '42 the Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryu was eventually sunk at Midway. 39 sailors managed to escape on a lifeboat after most of the crew had been rescued by other Japanese ships. A US plane spotted their boat 14 days later.
These men were at war with the US. They were enemy combatants. They had been actively involved in killing very many US servicemen. You're the man in charge of what happens next. You've sunk their ship but these 39 have survived.
Do you gun them down and finish the job?
It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: Killing men who are survivors at sea.We’re the drug runners in a life boat?
Thats intriguing. Although I disagree.From what I've seen so far, I'd say the Navy has enough to proceed with an Article 32 hearing to decide whether the case should go to court-martial. Conduct a proper military investigation. Trump could just pardon him if he's convicted, so no worries.
I came across it earlier when looking for examples of survivors at sea being killed or saved. Depressing.Ever heard of the Laconia incident?
If shipwrecked people aren't meant to be gunned down in cold blood, why are they such easy targets?
Thats intriguing. Although I disagree.
If there is video of any type that show humans doing any type of physical surrendering gestures... then I could could agree with your premise.
But if no humans were trying to surrender to the enemy that sent the armaments they just saw and felt, then that can disqualify Article 32.
I can sympathize with you, and I wish you the best in handling your displeasure. I know elders who felt the same way in 2012, and especially in 2016 when Obama-Biden Afghanistan bombings killed about 100 innocent civilians incl. children and women.It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: Killing men who are survivors at sea.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?