Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
“The U.S. military killed 11 people on Tuesday in a strike on a vessel from Venezuela allegedly carrying illegal narcotics, President Donald Trump said, in the first known operation since his administration's recent deployment of warships to the southern Caribbean…
“He added that the U.S. military had identified the crew as members of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, which the U.S. designated a terrorist group in February. He repeated allegations that Tren de Aragua is being controlled by Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro, accusations that Caracas denies.” Reuters
The left criticizes the strike, arguing that it lacked legal authorization.
“Why didn’t the U.S. Navy simply intercept it, arrest the smugglers, and then provide evidence of drugs on board? That’s the standard procedure… ‘Here the president appears to be invoking his amorphous constitutional authority to kill low-level drug couriers on the high seas, with no due process, arrest or trial.’… With everyone on board dead and the vessel itself sunk, there’s no way to prove or disprove the White House’s claims…
“As demonstrated by its record with ‘administrative error’ resulting in mistaken renditions of non-criminal immigrants to CECOT in El Salvador, as well as its ‘strike first, ask questions later’ mistakes in Yemen, where it claimed to have killed militants but instead struck a tribal gathering celebrating the end of Ramadan, this regime has not earned the benefit of the doubt.”
Jay Kuo, Status Kuo
“The Coast Guard has a series of successful Maritime Law Enforcement Agreements… They commit U.S. authorities to respecting fundamental due process rights of criminal suspects. Such rights obviously do not include summary execution at sea. Bypassing these bilateral and international treaties to dramatically blow up a ship not only violates law, but it will, I believe, further undermine trust and confidence in these or any other agreements the U.S. makes.”
Mary Ellen O'Connell, Salon
“History shows how quickly moments like this can escalate. The Maine in 1898, U.S. troops in the Dominican Republic in 1965, Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989 — each framed as defensive, each ending in military intervention. This week’s strike carries the same risk, wrapped in similar justifications…
“This week’s strike was an act of war. To pretend otherwise is to ignore history and to blind ourselves to what the United States has done time and again in Latin America and the Caribbean… For a president who has promised to ‘pursue our manifest destiny,’ this is part of a larger script already in motion… This worldview, shaped by a 19th-century ideology that also fueled the war against Spain 127 years ago, treats the Western Hemisphere as territory still to be controlled.”
Julio Ricardo Varela, MSNBC
“It is an enormous leap to portray these drug traffickers as organized terrorist organizations akin to al-Qaeda. Nor does labeling these groups ‘terrorists’ alone authorize the use of military force, or trigger the military rules of engagement that apply in armed conflict. But it appears to be an attempt to do just that. Never before has drug trafficking been treated as terrorism, and there is a danger that with this rhetorical move, the Trump administration is attempting to open a new ‘forever war.’”
Mark Nevitt, Just Security
The right generally supports the strike, arguing that drug cartels are a serious danger to the US.
The right generally supports the strike, arguing that drug cartels are a serious danger to the US.
“Tren de Aragua is a legally designated foreign terrorist organization responsible for killing hundreds of innocent civilians across Latin America and on U.S. soil… Via its U.S. operations, Tren de Aragua engages in relentless violent intimidation against American citizens and residents. Indeed, the grotesque quality of this intimidation became a political issue during the 2024 presidential election when Trump pointed out Tren de Aragua’s seizure of various apartment complexes in Colorado…
“Trump has now made abundantly clear that he regards drug cartels as posing a preeminent threat to the nation. Those who participate in this evil enterprise have now been put on overdue notice. No longer is there a choice between a high probability of vast earnings and a low risk of long prison sentences. Now they must fear surprise elimination. The president deserves praise for taking action.”
Editorial Board, Washington Examiner
“The destruction of that speedboat took place in international waters--it had left Venezuelan waters and had not entered those of any other country. The inhabitants of that boat, as members of Tren de Aragua, were not under the jurisdiction of any particular country, and as terrorists, they were legitimate targets. So Trump took them out…
“Obama used his presidential powers to designate people terrorists all the time--including American citizens--and drone strike them so often that he bragged that he was good at killing people… 100,000 Americans a year die from drug overdoses, and treating smugglers like ordinary shoplifters has led to a crisis. I think we all know that if Biden or Obama had done something similar, all of these people would be applauding.”
David Strom, Hot Air
Some argue, “There is no doubt that Tren de Aragua and its activities have harmed the United States. Its peddling of drugs and its violent, thuggish conduct should be unacceptable. A heavy hand is warranted in interdicting this group and suppressing its activities. But the problem of Tren de Aragua is, as it stands, a law enforcement problem; it is not undertaking an armed attack on the United States of America by any conventional definition…
“There is a difference constitutionally, legally, and morally in drawing the sword to kill one’s enemies on the field of battle and using force, when necessary, to apprehend criminals or put a stop to their activities… If the president believes that Nicolás Maduro’s Venezuela is attacking the United States indirectly via a narco-terrorist proxy, he should ask Congress to authorize the use of military force to put an end to this danger.”
The Editors, National Review
