Hegseth must be held accountable at some point. The legality of the boat strikes is still undergoing a rigorous debate (Hegseth fired his lead JAG officer because he didn't like his opinion) and demanded Admiral Holsey retire early because the Admiral was convinced the planned boat strikes were unlawful and wouldn't do it (this is why the 2 SEP attack wasn't carried out by SouthCom)
How one-sided does the opposite legal opinion need to be in order to hold Hegseth accountable? Advice of counsel is a very strong defense in many cases. Even if Some lawyers would disagree with the lawyer’s opinion 4 out of 5 times, is that a reason to hold the principal accountable? This is a question that is constantly being asked in 100’s of contexts. I personally have no issue with firing a lawyer, that does not mean the succeeding lawyer is incorrect.
So I guess the lesson learned from this is ordeal is to use a big enough bomb from now on to ensure there are no survivors.
They apparently couldn’t get any Pentagon lawyer to say the strikes were legal so they went to the Cracker Jack lawyers at the OLC who abolished the President and Hegseth. Why is it still classified? The law isn’t classified.Hegseth must be held accountable at some point. The legality of the boat strikes is still undergoing a rigorous debate (Hegseth fired his lead JAG officer because he didn't like his opinion) and demanded Admiral Holsey retire early because the Admiral was convinced the planned boat strikes were unlawful and wouldn't do it (this is why the 2 SEP attack wasn't carried out by SouthCom)
How one-sided does the opposite legal opinion need to be in order to hold Hegseth accountable? Advice of counsel is a very strong defense in many cases. Even if Some lawyers would disagree with the lawyer’s opinion 4 out of 5 times, is that a reason to hold the principal accountable? This is a question that is constantly being asked in 100’s of contexts. I personally have no issue with firing a lawyer, that does not mean the succeeding lawyer is incorrect.
You sure you know what "insipid" means? Hint: it isn't a synonym for ignorant or stupid.Not sure they'll do much, but yes, this is a big deal. We can't have the executive declaring war on his own. Not how our system works.https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1996328927191765104?s=20
We're evidently at war. Someone should let congress know.
Laughable!
O'blameless droned American citizens.
O'biden and his blood-soaked warpigs have lost and given away $Billions (if not $Trillions).
Bush had his fingers in everything..
..'we can't have the executive declaring war on his own...'
Since when?
What an insipid remark...
- Insipid: Usually describes things (writing, conversations, food) that are bland, tasteless, or uninteresting, lacking spirit or character.
- Stupid: Describes people or actions that are foolish, unintelligent, or slow-witted, a cognitive failing
As for the Constitutional requirement of Congress, blame Madison and Hamilton and try reading Article I, Sec. 8 and Federalist #69.
Looks like you owe an apology to all involved.If orders were given in the Chain of command from CinC to operation commander to kill any survivors from the initial attack, is that a crime? Yes or no?
removed link
Bipartisan effort to release the videos.
You seem to be Okay with sacrificing them [granddaughters].
You and others seem to be willfully ignoring many simple facts.
1) Venezuela does not manufacture or distribute fentanyl.
2) These boats do not distribute drugs of ANY SORT to the United States, but rather to Europe.
3) These small boats are simply incapable of reaching ANY distribution points to get drugs to the USA.
4) The evidence of a crime against the USA is never presented.
5) The issue of criminality is avoided by a declaration of war, not by Congress, but by kingly decree.
6) Even the video of the 2nd strike is being withheld from the public.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
You seem to be Okay with sacrificing them [granddaughters].
You and others seem to be willfully ignoring many simple facts.
1) Venezuela does not manufacture or distribute fentanyl.
2) These boats do not distribute drugs of ANY SORT to the United States, but rather to Europe.
3) These small boats are simply incapable of reaching ANY distribution points to get drugs to the USA.
4) The evidence of a crime against the USA is never presented.
5) The issue of criminality is avoided by a declaration of war, not by Congress, but by kingly decree.
6) Even the video of the 2nd strike is being withheld from the public.
7) I'm a willing participant in the death of young people in the world because I set back and make excuses.
Your turn now as long as your sofa bike didn't destroy your cervix today.
If men were any more stupid, we would have breed for the extinction of women. Proof yet again that WE are the best thing they have going for them.
You seem to be Okay with sacrificing them [granddaughters].
You and others seem to be willfully ignoring many simple facts.
1) Venezuela does not manufacture or distribute fentanyl.
2) These boats do not distribute drugs of ANY SORT to the United States, but rather to Europe.
3) These small boats are simply incapable of reaching ANY distribution points to get drugs to the USA.
4) The evidence of a crime against the USA is never presented.
5) The issue of criminality is avoided by a declaration of war, not by Congress, but by kingly decree.
6) Even the video of the 2nd strike is being withheld from the public.
You have absolutely no clue what drugs are going where, nor do people in the press, or possibly even the people blowing up the boats. Either way, I’d like to thank them for making the world a better place. Looks like you’re a shill for all drug companies though, prescription & illicit…
For those that didn't bother reading any of the links or sublinks, here's the relevant excerpt from the Department of Defense Law of War Manual:
Members of the armed forces must refuse to comply with clearly illegal orders to commit law of
war violations. In addition, orders should not be construed to authorize implicitly violations of
law of war.
18.3.2.1 Clearly Illegal Orders to Commit Law of War Violations. The
requirement to refuse to comply with orders to commit law of war violations applies to orders to
perform conduct that is clearly illegal or orders that the subordinate knows, in fact, are illegal.
For example, orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal.27 Similarly, orders to
also be clearly illegal.28 On the other hand, the duty not to comply with orders that are clearly
illegal would be limited in its application when the subordinate is not competent to evaluate
whether the rule has been violated.29
I’d like to thank them for making the world a better place.
I'd gladly do that as well, once evidence is provided as to exactly what we know about the alleged crimes committed by the people being killed without arrest, apprehension, questioning, and trial. Summary execution of merely "suspected" criminals seems to jump a few ethical steps.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
I’d like to thank them for making the world a better place.
Did Trump pardoning the guy (Juan Orlando Hernández) found responsible in court for trafficking over 400 tons of cocaine to the USA (yes, that's right, over 400 TONS) make the world a better place? Inquiring minds want to know.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IN12621
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Congress wants to force replace of the entire 2 September strike video.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/10/house-passes-ndaa-boat-strike-videos-00685641?cid=apn
Racking up the kills. Blew up four more boats and killed all but one person. Mexico saved the shipwrecked individual. I've heard some claim blowing them up is more effective than our traditional methods and that's false.
- Traditional Interdiction (e.g., Coast Guard boarding, port inspections): This method involves tracking, intercepting, boarding vessels, seizing drugs, and arresting crews for prosecution. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Coast Guard seize vast quantities of drugs this way. For example, one U.S. Coast Guard cutter seized 38 tons of drugs in a single two-month patrol, and the service as a whole set a record for cocaine seizures in a single year using this approach. This method also yields valuable intelligence from the captured crews, which aids in targeting cartels and trafficking networks.
- Military Strikes ("Blowing them up"): This is a more recent and controversial shift in policy that began under the Trump administration, where the military has used force to destroy suspected drug boats, sometimes killing those on board. Experts and veterans of the drug war argue this lethal approach is less effective than traditional means for several reasons:
- The quantities destroyed in these strikes are a tiny fraction of the total drugs seized through other methods.
- It removes the opportunity to gather intelligence from captured suspects.
- Drug organizations simply adapt their routes and methods to account for such losses, which have limited to no deterrent effect on the overall drug trade.
- Each missile strike is often more costly than the street value of the drugs on the vessel. [1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]
Latest Post: 2026 Indiana Basketball Portal Shopping List Our newest member: Amy Walsh Recent Posts Unread Posts
