this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2025
124 points (98.4% liked)

World News

49927 readers
4170 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Brian Finucane, a former State Department lawyer who is a specialist in counterterrorism issues and the laws of war, said that given the evidence that has emerged, the government’s statements, and after discussions with other national security lawyers in the week since the strike, he has formed stronger conclusions about the legality of the attack.

“I’m much more inclined to think this was just flat-out murder. And I’ve bent over backwards to be generous to the government in my interpretations,” he told The Intercept. “There are circumstances in which the U.S. can use lethal force but that is in the context of an armed conflict, against a lawful target — an enemy combatant. The Trump administration has not even bothered to make that argument. They have not argued that the United States is in an armed conflict governed by the law of war. They have not argued, much less substantiated, that the target of this attack was a lawful target.”

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thallamabond@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago (2 children)

As far as I'm concerned this was/is a vulgar display of power.

You seriously telling me the United States military can't arrest a couple guys in a speedboat?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Arrest them for what, even?

This was no different than a terrorist attack against the people of Venezuela.

[–] thallamabond@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If in fact this was a speed boat full of drugs, would not The prudent thing be to follow them let them get to their destination, and perhaps bust the person who's buying the drugs? It was stated they were on their way to the United States.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

If in fact this was a speed boat full of drugs

They were illegally smoking a bowl together off the coast of Venezuela, so...

would not The prudent thing be to follow them let them get to their destination, and perhaps bust the person who’s buying the drugs?

Why is the US military trying to rough up some pot heads 1300 miles south of the border?

It was stated they were on their way to the United States.

In a speedboat that was parked spitting distance from the equator?

[–] runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7t-_m16y25o a decent review of what happened and all the different things the government claimed about the boat.

[–] bigfondue@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

The Coast Guard usually takes care of drug trafficking, since they have law enforcement duties