>>1461727
More bullshit. Here's three issues:

>“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially designated narcoterrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war. With respect to the strikes in question on Sept. 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” Leavitt said.
>“Adm. Bradley worked well within his authority and the law to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated,” she continued. “This administration has designated these narcoterrorists as foreign terrorist organizations. The president has the right to take them out if they are threatening the United States of America, if they are bringing illegal narcotics that are killing our citizens at a record rate, which is what they are doing.”

No where in that quote does it say Hegseth ordered the second strike. That's bullshit #1 from OP.

2nd point, if you actually listen to the video:
>"Admiral bradley was the one who gave that order for a second strike."
That's two.

And three:
"And he was well within his authority to do so."
This was a legitimate target. Not a war crime.

Furthermore, as much as I hate whataboutism I have to do it in this case, where was the outrage about war crimes when Biden blew up a bunch of kids in Afghanistan to try to save face after his embarrassing evac got 13 soldiers killed? Where was the phrase "war crime" said back then?

>>1461727
Bullshit, there's no way the coast guard and CIA would let a whole boat of cocaine go up in flames when it could be disappearing up their noses.

>>1461728
>This was a legitimate target. Not a war crime.
No quarter is a war crime retard. First one is debatably legitimate. Double tapping a shipwreck is a war crime.

>>1461732
>No quarter is a war crime retard.
Did Hegseth say no quarter, retard?

>Double tapping a shipwreck is a war crime.
Wrong you stupid fuck. Look up operation Praying Mantis and then go back in time and tell Reagan and everyone below they committed war crimes.

>>1461728
That's some Baghdad Bob-level damage control. You should be Trump's lawyer.
>No where in that quote does it say Hegseth ordered the second strike.
Yes it does, it says "Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,”

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially designated narcoterrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war." doesn't absolve them of shit. How the fuck would they know in the first place? Trump is a real estate conman (and alleged rapist) and Hegseth is a failed alcoholic Fox News weekend host who had desk duty in Iraq and Afghanistan as a national guard major. Shooting a civilian who is treading water after blowing up his boat is not only a war crime, it also violates the laws of the seas. Relying on the principle of "it's not illegal if the President does it" is the only thing saving their asses right now, and if some Senators like Rand Paul have their way they will be brought up on war crimes charges.

>2nd point, if you actually listen to the video:
>>"Admiral bradley was the one who gave that order for a second strike."
Yeah after Hegseth ordered him to, after Trump ordered Hegseth to.

>b-bbut Biden
Pathetic. Not even worth addressing and nowhere near the same as shooting a guy in the water.

>>1461733
>Did Hegseth say no quarter, retard?
He did when he ordered the second strike to finish off (murder) the guy in the water, yes.

>>1461734
>Yes it does, it says "Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,”
That's not him saying give no quarter you stupid fuck. If I'm a general and I tell you to blow up a building, that's not the same thing as me saying to light anyone up who crawls out of it.

>doesn't absolve them of shit.
It does when Trump declares cartels to be terrorist groups.
>How the fuck would they know in the first place?
Usually someone in intel tells them.

>Yeah after Hegseth ordered him to, after Trump ordered Hegseth to.
So Hegseth was watching a video of the boat getting blown up and told him, "yknow what.. go around for another pass."? Because otherwise you don't have jack shit besides a vague "kill them all" that could of been him quoting Patton for what it's worth.

>Pathetic. Not even worth addressing and nowhere near the same as shooting a guy in the water.
You're right. Blowing up a shitload of children to try to save face is nowhere near Hegseth giving the green light to stop drug runners who keep trying to smuggle past us.

>He did when he ordered the second strike to finish off (murder) the guy in the water, yes.
Okay now show me an ACTUAL quote where he said to finish the guy off with a second pass. You can't.

>>1461733
>operation Praying Mantis
The Joshan's crew was rescued, you disingenuous fuckwad. Avoiding accusations, even false accusations, of gunning down survivors was a specific concern during that operation.

>>1461736
Did they continue to fire on a sinking ship? Yes or no.

The answer is yes by the way, so your dumbass take of
>durrr Double tapping a shipwreck is a war crime durr
is fucking wrong.

>>1461737
>Did they continue to fire on a sinking ship?
No. The ship wasn't sinking. It was disabled.

And more importantly for this comparison, abandoned.

>>1461737
Also, you think the war crime people are bitching about was that they sank the ship and not that they murdered the unarmed non-combatants in distress?

What is your flavor of brain damage?

>>1461735
>That's not him saying give no quarter you stupid fuck.
So you're asserting he didn't know what he was firing at when he ordered the second strike?

>>1461735
>It does when Trump declares cartels to be terrorist groups.
Jesus christ you want a king, not a president.
>Usually someone in intel tells them.
There wasn't any intel.

>you don't have jack shit
lol tell it to Rand Paul

>muh children
Collateral damage isn't the same as blatantly murdering a guy.

>show me an ACTUAL quote
Ahh you're resorting to sealioning already. Absolutely pathetic.

>>1461738
>>1461740
First off I'm not talking about the Joshan. I'm talking about the Sahand, that was already sinking - the fucking A-6 Intruders fucking radioed in and said that it was sinking - and yet Delta group still rolled up and fired on it just to make sure that yeah it's definitely going to sink. So once again you're fucking wrong about it being a war crime to double tap a sinking ship.

>>1461741
>So you're asserting he didn't know what he was firing at when he ordered the second strike?
I'm sorry I'm still waiting on a direct quote where Hegseth said "Hit 'em again."

>>1461742
>Jesus christ you want a king, not a president.
Jesus Christ you want to suck dicks and not be intelligent ever.
>There wasn't any intel.
[citation needed]

>lol tell it to Rand Paul
I'll say it again: You don't have shit.

>Collateral damage isn't the same as blatantly murdering a guy.
So 'it was an accident' makes it better?

>Ahh you're resorting to sealioning already. Absolutely pathetic.
No I'm calling you a fucking liar. Because you can't show shit and you never will. Now fuck off back to plebbit with your bullshit sealioning, faggot.

>>1461743
They didn't swing back to shoot at survivors in the water. The ship limped away and then its magazines lit up almost an hour after the final strike.

>>1461745
>They didn't swing back to shoot at survivors in the water.
So? You didn't say that that was a war crime. You said:
>Double tapping a shipwreck is a war crime.
This is fucking wrong. You are an idiot.

>>1461744
>I'm sorry I'm still waiting on a direct quote where Hegseth said "Hit 'em again."
>Yeah he approved of it. Yeah this was their entire intent. But uh, you don't have a recording of him saying to do the thing they ended up doing so uh, basically no war crimes

>>1461747
>Hegseth ordered a second strike!
>Where?
>Uhhhh... Well he said kill them all and give no quarter. Also we had no intel on the boats. Trust me, I know a guy in the Air Force who said so.

>>1461748
>>Uhhhh... Well he said kill them all and give no quarter
You do understand that's what they did and a war crime, right? The White House isn't denying this.

>>1461749
What I don't understand is why you keep saying Hegseth ordered a second strike but then can't show me a quote of him ordering a second strike.

Actually scratch that, I already know the reason is you're a disingenuous piece of shit that's quoting more bullshit you heard from social media. We have the actual fucking quote right here:
>"Admiral bradley was the one who gave that order for a second strike."
>"And he was well within his authority to do so."

The end. End of line. Line ends here. Everything below the line is more bullshit.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

>>1461749
It's only a warcrime if you can be punished. Nobody sane is objecting to drug boats being destroyed.

>>1461750
Not him but you should really learn to google things and stop pretending to be ignorant of what the entire press is currently reporting.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/11/28/hegseth-ordered-second-strike-kill-caribbean-boat-survivors-report.html
>Hegseth Ordered Second Strike to Kill Caribbean Boat Survivors: Report

>>1461728
So far right conservatives shills are going all in defending trump's war crimes now.
They're even bringing their greatest false equivalency hits too to justify trump and department of war crimes head Hegseth ordering 'no quarters'.
The only thing worse than a war criminal, is a pedophile war criminal, which trump is, and you lack any conscious or soul to defend.

>>1461751
>Nobody sane is objecting to drug boats being destroyed.
The fishermen are objecting to their livelihoods being destroyed by faulty US intel thinking they're drug runners.
https://www.npr.org/2025/10/20/nx-s1-5580247/colombia-recalls-ambassador-to-u-s-amid-deadly-boat-strikes-and-diplomatic-clash
>Colombian President Gustavo Petro claims that on September 16, the U.S. attacked the boat of a stranded Colombian fisherman who had no ties to drug smuggling. Petro then declared that, quote, "the United States has invaded our national territory, fired a missile at a - to kill a humble fisherman and destroyed his family, his children."

>>1461754
The US has been tracking these boats for years. The only people who sincerely care are leftists who think that protecting a nation from crime, sedition and invaders is tantamount to fascism.

>>1461752
Like I said, more bullshit below the line. Let's go through this step by step.
>Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, following the first striking of a boat in the Caribbean in September, issued a verbal directive to U.S. service members to "kill everybody" with a second strike that would leave no survivors, according to a new report from the Washington Post.
So lets look at the Washington Post then.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/11/28/hegseth-kill-them-all-survivors-boat-strike/
>The longer the U.S. surveillance aircraft followed the boat, the more confident intelligence analysts watching from command centers became that the 11 people on board were ferrying drugs.
Hmmm... so looks like there was intel on the boat after all. What a fucking shock. I can't believe it.

>Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. “The order was to kill everybody,” one of them said.
So going right back to his "Kill them all" vague quote at the start of the operation which does not equal him saying "No quarter", "Come in for a second pass", or any other bullshit you want to make up because you fail to realize Hegseth wasn't fucking there when the order was given and they've already reported that "Admiral bradley was the one who gave that order for a second strike." I'm getting really fucking tired of repeating myself to you subhumans.

From Hegseth:
>As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.
Couldn't agree more.

>Secretary of Alcoholism Pete Kegsbreath went over a line
Everything Bubba Blower's Baghdad Bob - >>1461750 - says is more bullshit.

>>1461757
>protect the homeland
>>1461204
By pardoning a drug trafficker, sure.

>>1461756
>leftists who think that protecting a nation from crime, sedition and invaders is tantamount to fascism
So, under Churchill's watch, was what based Bomber Harris did to Dresden a war crime? y/n
That must be more than tantamount to fascism, because a PM who wasn't a leftist killed civilians certain others today wouldn't consider 'fascists', amirite?

>>1461757
Reread the first line in the OP post.
>White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Monday that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorized the second, follow-up strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean
Let it sink in.

>>1461762
Oh you mean the same Karoline Leavitt that I quoted from the fucking video, dickhead? Repeat what the fuck she said. I already quoted the conversation like three times now.

>>1461763
Youre always so emotional, shill anon

>>1461727
It's not a war crime, it's murder

>>1461733
Fuck off you retard, attacking shipwrecked crew is quite literally a TEXTBOOK war crime. As in, they use it as a specific example in the books studied in training. Not even the fucking Nazis did it (that often).

>>1461746
It literally wasn't a shipwreck.

Also, again
>Also, you think the war crime people are bitching about was that they sank the ship and not that they murdered the unarmed non-combatants in distress?

>nooo not the heckin future Democrat drug dealers. Noooo drumpft

>>1461744
>I'm sorry I'm still waiting on a direct quote where Hegseth said "Hit 'em again."
>With respect to the strikes in question on Sept. 2, Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes
So now you're claiming that the WH is lying about the 2nd strike being authorized?

The second strike was blatantly a war crime. Either Hegseth authorized it or he didn't. If he authorized it, either he knew what he was authorizing or he didn't. Pick a narrative. Either the WH is lying, Hegseth committed a war crime, or Hegseth is an incompetent fuckwit and the people under him are war criminals.

Those are your 3 options unless you're prepared to argue that unarmed men hanging onto a shipwreck are combatants in which case fuck all you say matters cause you're mentally unwell/in denial.

>>1461776
I forgot the surprise 4th option. We aren't at war, and all the boat strikes are just murders.

That's actually the most correct option.

>>1461776
>So now you're claiming that the WH is lying
If there is one thing this White House is famous for it's lying about anything and everything.

>>1461727
Here I thought the Trump Administration was against snitching, like with Mike Pence - Now, they’re snitching on Mike Pence?! What the?!?

>>1461768
>Fuck off you retard, attacking shipwrecked crew is quite literally a TEXTBOOK war crime.
Oh yeah? Show me the textbook.

>>1461770
>It literally wasn't a shipwreck.
Then neither was this boat Hegseth ordered the strike on since you want to play that game.

>>1461776
>So now you're claiming that the WH is lying about the 2nd strike being authorized?
Hegseth approved the strike on the boat. He's not the one who called in the second strike. I know reading is difficult for you subhumans BUT LET ME QUOTE IT AGAIN FOR THE FUCKING 500TH TIME
>"Admiral bradley was the one who gave that order for a second strike."
>"And he was well within his authority to do so."
Who gave the order for a second strike, Anon? Hmmm? Can you answer that or is it too fucking complicated for you?

>>1461781
>Show me the textbook
>https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/DOD-LAW-OF-WAR-MANUAL-JUNE-2015-UPDATED-JULY%202023.PDF
>5.9 PERSONS PLACED HORS DE COMBAT
>Persons, including combatants, placed hors de combat may not be made the object of attack. Persons placed hors de combat include the following categories of persons, provided they abstain from any hostile act and do not attempt to escape:
>• persons in the power of an adverse party;
>• persons not yet in custody, who have surrendered;
>• persons who have been rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck; and
>• persons parachuting from aircraft in distress/

>Then neither was this boat Hegseth ordered the strike on
The boat Hegseth ordered the second strike on was unarmed in the first place, completely disabled, sinking, and uncrewed with 2 men hanging onto the wreckage.

The boat you're bitching about was none of those things.

>He's not the one who called in the second strike
Did he authorize it or didn't he?
>Who gave the order for a second strike, Anon?
Everyone in the chain of command down to the person above the person that carried out the strike starting with at least Hegseth.

>>1461785
Lets start with this part first:
>The boat Hegseth ordered the second strike on was unarmed in the first place,
And you know this how?

>>1461787
>And you know this how?
We have footage of the strike

Also, did you just skip over you being completely blown the fuck out on this shit being a textbook war crime?

>>1461765
I'm not even sure what he's trying to do. Blame the military and not the department of war crimes?
If that's the case, this 1000% justifiies the senators who said military should ignore trump's illegal war crime orders.

>>1461788
>We have footage of the strike
And you know for a fact that there were no weapons on the boat because you saw it through FLIR?

>Also, did you just skip over you being completely blown the fuck out on this shit being a textbook war crime?
No I'm taking your points one at a fucking time because I'm getting tired of typing 50 paragraphs just to get to the part where your source is you made it the fuck up - like the boat was unarmed.

>>1461789
>this 1000% justifiies the senators who said military should ignore trump's illegal war crime orders.
Yeah, kinda makes all that bitching about the military not getting illegal orders ridiculous when it instantly comes out they've been war criming on orders.

Seems like just a few days ago the president was calling for members of Congress to be hung for even implying that could happen.

Oh wait, it fucking was.

>>1461790
>And you know for a fact that there were no weapons on the boat
I know for a fact there were no weapons capable of engaging US forces on the boat, yes.

The "vessel" was unarmed. I don't give a shit if the people on board were packing knives for cutting up fish. That's not what I'm talking about and you fucking know it.

And all of this is completely immaterial to the second strike.

>>1461790
>No I'm taking your points one at a fucking time
But you skipped the first point
>your source is you made it the fuck up
My source is the fucking department of defense law of war manual.

What the fuck is this cope?

>>1461757
I believe everything the government says. They said the vaccine was safe and effective. And they say the boat is a drug boat. So I believe it. The government would never lie to us.

>>1461794
Fuck off, anti-vaxxer. This thread has enough mental illness already.

>>1461792
Okay cool so now we've moved from
>the boat was unarmed
to
>okay maybe it wasn't but they weren't a threat
then back to
>the """vessel""" was unarmed

Which is it?

>That's not what I'm talking about and you fucking know it.
And you fucking know Hegseth didn't call in for a 2nd strike, but you want to take anything vaguely said and use it as facts. So now we're going to go through this bit by bit, line by line, pedantic as all fuck so you cocksucking subhuman faggots can't weasel your way out of it.

Now answer my question, boy.

>>1461793
>But you skipped the first point
As I said, I'll get back to that after we squash your DURR BOAT NO GUNZ DURR take. One at a time.

>>1461792
I'm waiting boy. Hurry up.

>>1461796
>Which is it?
>okay maybe it wasn't but they weren't a threat
1. I never said maybe it was. It wasn't.
2. Boat and vessel mean the same thing in this context.
3. You've invented a position for me to take and refused to acknowledge what words mean in order to frame me as moving goalposts when I have not in order to not engage with my position.
4. None of this has fuck all to do with the second strike.

Quit being a bitch.

>And you fucking know Hegseth didn't call in for a 2nd strike
No. I know he did. Quit being a lying bitch.

>>1461799
>>1461801
Also
>https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/DOD-LAW-OF-WAR-MANUAL-JUNE-2015-UPDATED-JULY%202023.PDF
>5.9 PERSONS PLACED HORS DE COMBAT
>Persons, including combatants, placed hors de combat may not be made the object of attack. Persons placed hors de combat include the following categories of persons, provided they abstain from any hostile act and do not attempt to escape:
>• persons in the power of an adverse party;
>• persons not yet in custody, who have surrendered;
>• persons who have been rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck; and
>• persons parachuting from aircraft in distress/
I'm fucking waiting on you engaging with the meat and potatoes.

>>1461801
>1. I never said maybe it was. It wasn't.
And you know it was unarmed how?
>2. Boat and vessel mean the same thing in this context.
And?
>3. You've invented a position for me to take and refused to acknowledge what words mean in order to frame me as moving goalposts when I have not in order to not engage with my position.
You're the dumb motherfucker who said
>The boat Hegseth ordered the second strike on was unarmed in the first place,
Now either back that up with proof that there were no weapons or be a man and admit you fucked up.
>4. None of this has fuck all to do with the second strike.
Yeah. As soon as you admit you fucking lied about the unarmed part we'll get to the other parts, the second strike, the hors de combat, etc. Don't worry. I've got plenty of time to prove you wrong.

>Quit being a bitch.
Quit being a lying faggot and admit you have no fucking clue whether the boat, vessel, fucking submarine - whatever the fuck you want to call it - was unarmed.

>No. I know he did. Quit being a lying bitch.
No actually he didn't, but don't worry we'll get there. First things first. Show me the fucking evidence that the boat was unarmed.

>>1461802
>I'm fucking waiting on you engaging with the meat and potatoes.
When you eat the side of bullshit you made up we'll move on to the main course, faggot.

>>1461803
>And you know it was unarmed how?
We. Have. Video.

You've already asked and I've already answered this fucking question. Did I break you? Show me the fucking boat's weapons.

Or I know. You're going to claim the boat itself is a weapon cause you could ram someone or something with it like cops do with cars.

>>1461804
Show me the weapons, cunt. Then eat your meat and potatoes. Or at this point it would be crow.

>>1461805
>We. Have. Video.
From a fucking FLIR watching from above. You have no fucking clue if any of the men on board had weapons or if they had any stowed away on the boat. Now as soon as you admit this we can move on to the 'meat and potatoes'. Just say
>sorry Anon I fucked up because I'm a retard and I don't know for sure whether the boat had weapons or not
Or we can sit here all day and argue this point - which is exactly why I'm doing this one point at a time.

>>1461805
>Show me the weapons, cunt.
It's not my job to prove or disprove your claim, faggot. You made it up so either back it up or take it back.

>>1461806
>You have no fucking clue if any of the men on board had weapons or if they had any stowed away on the boat
And? That has nothing to do with what I said.

Look, you seem very confused about my claim, so let's just move on. The boat was covered in dozens of invisible SAM launchers. I concede. You win. You got what you wanted.

Now then
>https://media.defense.gov/2023/Jul/31/2003271432/-1/-1/0/DOD-LAW-OF-WAR-MANUAL-JUNE-2015-UPDATED-JULY%202023.PDF
>5.9 PERSONS PLACED HORS DE COMBAT
>Persons, including combatants, placed hors de combat may not be made the object of attack. Persons placed hors de combat include the following categories of persons, provided they abstain from any hostile act and do not attempt to escape:
>• persons in the power of an adverse party;
>• persons not yet in custody, who have surrendered;
>• persons who have been rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck; and
>• persons parachuting from aircraft in distress/
Sit the fuck down and eat your crow.

>>1461806
>It's not my job to prove or disprove your claim, faggot.
>Prove a negative or we can't move on
What a bitch.

>>1461760
Read:
>It's only a warcrime if you can be punished
The Allies won the war. Nobody talks about Churchill sending firebomb fleets to the black forest for that reason.
Bombing drug boats is actually justified because they have killed far more American citizens by comparison.

>>1461807
>And? That has nothing to do with what I said.
>The boat Hegseth ordered the second strike on was unarmed in the first place,
>unarmed
That is in fact what you said. But like you said, lets move on since you already conceded.

>Sit the fuck down and eat your crow.
LMAO I'm going to enjoy shoving this in your fucking face. But before we start, remember earlier in the thread how I brought up operation Praying Mantis over some anon (possibly you) arguing with me about how it's illegal to double tap a shipwreck? And then they said here >>1461770
>It literally wasn't a shipwreck.
Do you agree with this post? Yes or no. Trust me, I'm going somewhere with this one, but let's get your input first.

>>1461810
It wasn't a shipwreck. And its crew were not targeted in the water after it became a shipwreck several hours after the final strike.

>>1461810
Gotta love how your only defense basically amounts to "Uh we basically did it before, so it isn't a war crime"

>>1461810
its cute that you think the shill cares about their shitty argument

>>1461794
>They said the vaccine was safe and effective
'I got the Pfizer' - Trump
Was Operation Warp Speed ordered by Biden?
>May 15 2020
Welp, there's your opinions as dead as 1.3 million antivaxxtards. And this government is just lies, damn lies & statistics.

>>1461795
>>1461816
I'm not even anti-vax, just jokingly pointing out hypocrisy of right wingers blindly believing these are drug boats because the government told them they were. Notice how none of them actually replied and addressed what I said.

>>1461786
It's official: Trump loves drug traffickers.

>>1461812
The Iranian ship that was called in as already sinking by the A-6E Intruders that sunk it (well started the process anyways) wasn't a shipwreck... but this drug boat was? Do you see how that's a contradiction?

My own personal gloating aside, it doesn't matter that you faggots played yourselves ITT because Admiral Mitch Bradley - the guy who actually ordered the second strike, not Hegseth - made his decision because
>"the survivors were still legitimate targets [and] because they could theoretically call other traffickers to retrieve them and their cargo."

In other words that ship was "disabled", not "destroyed" or "shipwrecked".

And not only that, but the ship was declared a military objective and can still be struck, regardless if there were survivors on it- per your fucking law of war manual you posted here.

>5.6.3 Objects That Are Military Objectives. Military objectives, insofar as objects are
concerned, include “any object which by its nature, location, purpose or use makes an effective
contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in
the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.”206

This definition of military objective may be viewed as a way of evaluating whether
military necessity exists to attack an object.207

And as we all know about the Law of Armed Conflict proportionality rule, it would only be a violation if the "expected incidental damage" was excessive in relation to the "anticipated military advantage" - Otherwise you'd have to go back and arrest every president that's been in office my entire adult life.

Once again, ya played yourselves.

But wait, there's more!

>>1461819
>just jokingly pointing out hypocrisy of right wingers blindly believing these are drug boats because the government told them they were
As I was too, via your words directed at the Covidiots.
And the post above yours is the final nail in the Trump shills' coffin. What say you, lovers of an orange kleptocrat that indulges in 'indulgences' to free those he loves: as in their money like the Mammon-worshiper he is?

>>1461821
The smashed debris bobbing around in the water with two guys barely clinging to it is not equivalent to a warship that limped away and then blew up several entire hours later.
Also, Hegseth explicitly said "kill them all", not "destroy all the drugs". Killing the shipwrecked men in the water was the goal. Live men in the water are not military objects.

>>1461823
Ah ah, don't want to hear it. You don't get to decide what military objectives count (which this boat was a military object) nor whether it was a shipwreck or not (per Adm. Bradley it wasn't) when you want to split hairs over a sinking Iranian ship. But let's keep going with the military objective part, since you want to keep splitting hairs about the disabled boat (while I type up the next post for Hegseth's quote). Let's pretend for a second instead of drugs they were shipping biological material for a WMD (since you don't give a shit how many Americans die to fentanyl). Now the first attack hits but doesn't destroy all the material. Do you think the fact that someone's clinging to it, we have to go "Welp nevermind, two guys are clinging to the boat so now we can't destroy it."

Of course not. It's still a military objective, and per LOAC the risks of blowing it up to protect Americans outweigh the risk of blowing up two men who aren't even mentioned in the report if they were incapacitated or not.

>>1461821
>"the survivors were still legitimate targets [and] because they could theoretically call other traffickers to retrieve them and their cargo."
By this logic, someone parachuting out of a destroyed aircraft is a legitimate target if they might have a radio on them. Complete fucking nonsense.

>>1461821
>>"the survivors were still legitimate targets [and] because they could theoretically call other traffickers to retrieve them and their cargo."
Yeah that doesn't hold up. They were shipwrecked and unarmed. Literally clinging onto floating wreckage. There was barely a military advantage to bombing it once; bombing it again was a war crime. Cope.

>>1461825
>Now the first attack hits but doesn't destroy all the material. Do you think the fact that someone's clinging to it, we have to go "Welp nevermind, two guys are clinging to the boat so now we can't destroy it."
Except that's not what happened shill. The boat was fucked; any potential drugs on it was at the bottom of the ocean. They bombed them anyway, and admitted the whole point was No Quarter. And No Quarter orders ARE ILLEGAL.

>>1461825
>possible drugs are the equivalent to an active WMD
Okay, now apply that bullshit to US soil, warfighter.

By the way, I know where your dumbass got some of the arguments you're using and that jackass is a dumbass too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
'officers of the Imperial Japanese Navy ordered the deliberately sadistic murders of more than 20,000 Allied seamen and countless civilians in cold-blooded defiance of the Geneva Convention'
'The Japanese Navy sank Allied merchant and Red Cross vessels, then murdered the survivors floating in the sea or in lifeboats'
Were those war crimes? y/n
>>1461809
Read: >>1461786
Trump has just pardoned the killer of so many American citizens.
How can you compare with someone who isn't a hypocrite: such as, say... someone who isn't a rightard?

>>1461826
Or that person could have material on them and be considered a legal target since they're carrying the military objective with them. If these two on the boat swam away from it before the second strike and then were gunned down in the water, then yes that would be a LOAC violation.

>>1461827
>They were shipwrecked and unarmed.
>unarmed
Oh we're back to this again?
>There was barely a military advantage to bombing it once;
Intel said drugs were on that boat, despite what you fags said earlier (lol first it's "there were no drugs on the boat" now it's "there were no weapons on the boat either". Source is always "dude just trust me).
>bombing it again was a war crime.
Wrong. I quoted your own .pdf where it allows military targets to keep getting shot if they're not destroyed.

>>1461828
>The boat was fucked; any potential drugs on it was at the bottom of the ocean.
Another bullshit claim you can't prove. Woah hat trick!

>>1461829
>Okay, now apply that bullshit to US soil, warfighter.
Why? This is a military matter, not police.

>By the way, I know where your dumbass got some of the arguments you're using and that jackass is a dumbass too.
Then you should be able to refute them without making shit up that didn't happen or isn't in the report.

>>1461832
>Another bullshit claim you can't prove.
>yeah, those guys in the water? they're both holding onto a brick of coke and a manpad with the hand they aren't using to cling to debris. super dangerous, very military.

>>1461727
May we see the double-tap?

>>1461833
>I know all the drugs were destroyed. Dude just trust me!
>I know there weren't any weapons onboard. Dude just trust me!
>I know there wasn't any intel on this ship. Dude just trust me!
>I know Hegseth said no quarter. Dude just trust me!
What else you got?

>>1461836
If "well I think those guys bobbing around in the ocean still have guns and intel and are each personally holding onto an objective" was an excuse, they wouldn't have bothered explicitly adding shipwrecked men to the list of people you shouldn't shoot at.
And if they had intel worth killing them for, they have intel worth sending a coast guard ship out to retrieve.

>>1461836
>I know they still have drugs!
>I know they have guns!
>I know etc etc
A lack of self awareness indicates very low izzat.

>>1461838
>>I know they still have drugs!
Intel did... Y'know the same intel you fags said we didn't have of the boat?

What should happen to those who support killers of US citizens?

>>1461837
>If "well I think those guys bobbing around in the ocean still have guns and intel and are each personally holding onto an objective" was an excuse, they wouldn't have bothered explicitly adding shipwrecked men to the list of people you shouldn't shoot at.
I guess you're just special and missed the part where the list allows you to shoot at military objectives even if hors de combat are on or near it. Which is why when a president... liiiike Biden... blows up a building full of children he doesn't go to jail.

>>1461839
Intel explicitly didn't know anything, they just watched it out in the water and decided it had drugs. Nobody checked.

>>1461828
>and admitted the whole point was No Quarter. And No Quarter orders ARE ILLEGAL.

So the closest anyone got to Hegseth saying "no quarter" was that WaPo article saying
>"Defense [sic] Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. 'The order was to kill everybody,' one of them said."
So nothing written down, quote taken from two anonymous sources, so we're at least two levels of hearsay just at this part - spoken before the operation even began. And because they're anonymous sources we can't hold anyone accountable or verify if they're credible.

So what to do in this situation? Well I have an idea. Know what beats two anonymous sources? Five anonymous sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/01/us/hegseth-drug-boat-strike-order-venezuela.html
>According to five U.S. officials, who spoke separately and on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter that is under investigation, Mr. Hegseth, ahead of the Sept. 2 attack, ordered a strike that would kill the people on the boat and destroy the vessel and its purported cargo of drugs.

>But, each official said, Mr. Hegseth’s directive did not specifically address what should happen if a first missile turned out not to fully accomplish all of those things. And, the officials said, his order was not a response to surveillance footage showing that at least two people on the boat survived the first blast.

Oh snap!

>>1461841
What military objectives were met by killing a pair of unarmed men holding onto wreckage in the middle of the ocean?

The legality of the first strike is already debatable. The legality of the second once the boat was already obliterated is objectively a war crime.

>>1461842
lmao holy shit another "Dude just trust me" take!

>>1461844
>The legality of the first strike is already debatable.
Wrong. Guess who righteously declared cartels to be terrorist organizations this year. Go ahead, guess!

>>1461845
They described the process of watching the boat and decided from satellite views of it being on the water that it was a target. They didn't know shit about that boat. They didn't know who was on it and they didn't know what it was carrying, if anything.

>>1461846
Guess who righteously declared someone not to be head of a terrorist organization this year. Go ahead, guess!

>>1461846
Yeah and the legality of THAT as grounds for war-actions is also debatable.

The Trump Admin is in a catch-22 right now. If they're at war, the second bombing is a war crime. If they're not, they've been committing murder in international water.

>>1461845
The entire story is based around Washington Post publishing "bro trust me this happened." All the other journos are citing WaPo without any actual sources.

>>1461843
This is some "won't someone rid me of this troublesome priest" level shit. Verbal orders are orders.

>>1461843
>So nothing written down, quote taken from two anonymous sources, so we're at least two levels of hearsay just at this part - spoken before the operation even began. And because they're anonymous sources we can't hold anyone accountable or verify if they're credible.
Watch as that Admiral confirms it when he's hauled in to testify.

Also your other sources literally don't contradict the other two. If anything it acts as more proof he ordered them to do it after there were survivors.

The point remains, by the way, that they DID do it. So the US committed a war crime, and buck stops with chain of command. Now it's a matter of if that Admiral will admit he did it, or justify it by saying it was Hegseth's command.

>>1461832
>f these two on the boat swam away from it before the second strike and then were gunned down in the water, then yes that would be a LOAC violation.
But they could have radios on them. Clearly they have to be gunned down in the water.

>>1461841
>I guess you're just special and missed the part where the list allows you to shoot at military objectives even if hors de combat are on or near it
The current explanation for the strike was the 2nd hit was to clear shipping lanes from the hazard of the floating debris.

That's not a military objective. Certainly not a military objective that could be given higher priority than human life.

You're taking already nonsense arguments to such extremes that war crimes literally could not exist absent shooting a naked disabled child in an open field.

>>1461854
>The current explanation for the strike was the 2nd hit was to clear shipping lanes from the hazard of the floating debris.
Oh really? Where did you get that take from?
>"the survivors were still legitimate targets [and] because they could theoretically call other traffickers to retrieve them and their cargo."

>>1461855
>the us navy is so incompetent that they could be beaten to collect materiel on their own doorstep by a mexican fishing boat
Grim.

>>1461849
>If they're at war, the second bombing is a war crime.
Not if the boat was declared a military objective. Again, this is why Biden didn't go to jail when he blew up a building full of kids if Afghanistan. Which is why I think it's so fucking hilarious some of you are sperging about REEEEEE INTEL DIDN'T KNOW DRUGS WERE ON BOAT THEY WEREN'T THERE MAN THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS LIKE!!! lol where was this energy about intel back in 2021? Get fucked.

>>1461856
I guess just make jokes instead of providing a source to yet another "Dude! Just trust me!" claim. lol

>>1461855
>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-account-strike-alleged-drug-boat-odds/story?id=128006261
>And he pushed back on briefing material provided to the White House by the Joint Special Operations Command and a similar explanation to lawmakers that the second strike was to remove a navigation hazard to other vessels.

>>1461858
Hey man, I'm not the one claiming the US navy would be beaten to the punch when they know ahead of time that the stuff will be there and the theoretical narco recovery boat hasn't even cast off yet. Warrior culture my ass. Lazy cowards.

>>1461858
See
>>1461859
And eat a bag of dicks

>>1461859
>the second strike was to remove a navigation hazard to other vessels.
>"Guys we didn't mean to kill those guys. We just wanted to make sure no one hit the little bits of boat leftover from the first strike. That happened to have people on them."

>>1461859
lol ... that's actually kinda funny. Now I'm looking for this briefing material. I wonder who fucked that up.

So to be clear, the current explanation is it's legal to gun down shipwreck survivors because if they have a radio they might call for help and if they don't have a radio and help comes anyway, the debris they are clinging to might pose a hazard to those vessels?

Kinda seems like there is no such thing as war crimes in the minds of some people.

>>1461861
Hey congratulations. A broke ass clock is right twice a day, and you finally threw enough bullshit that something actually stuck for once. Now if you could find a source that shows there weren't any guns or drugs on that boat let me know.

>>1461863
The whole administration is so dysfunctional that it wouldn't surprise me at all if some middling idiot just made it up on the spot because they couldn't remember/never knew the actual reason.

>>1461867
>the us military is scared of two mexicans who might theoretically have waterlogged small arms on them
El em ay oh.

So what should happen to those who support those who kill American citrizens, certain posters in /news/?

>>1461870
LMAO I TAKE IT ALL BACK! lol you fuckers. That quote from that senator (which of course you left out of the green text) was taken in October!
>“The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal,” Rep. Seth Moulton, a Marine Corps veteran who received a classified briefing from Pentagon officials, said of another series of strikes in October.

You fucking cunts. lmao good one. I legit got a laugh out of that. Good job.

>>1461871
It would be illegal to say due to a certain executive action that just happened in regard to one of the biggest drug lords ever caught.

Trump supports a killer of American citizens: >>1461864

>>1461865
That's what makes conservatives truely evil, they will see any crime they commit, and find a way to justify it after the fact.
It's the big reason why trump isn't in prison.

>>1461870
Oh don't forget this was a drone strike. What were they gonna do, blast it out of the sky with a pistol?

>>1461872
>That quote from that senator (which of course you left out of the green text) was taken in October!
No. It wasn't. Did you just search for other months mentioned in the article and pop off without reading the context?

The quote is from November 28th.

So assuming the fascist trump's next coup to stay in power indefinitely fails to succeed. What would it take for the next democratic president to just hand over Hegseth to the Venezuelans for his war crimes, to both show there is some accountability, and to rage bait the cons?

>>1461830
That guy was displaced for a socialist because of USAID. And he wasn't ferrying drugs into the US.

>>1461882
>These are the lies the fringe right wing have come up to defend the fact that trump is pro-drugs.

>>1461879
>>1461872
Also, it's literally not about another series of strikes. You made that shit up. Are you responding with ChatGPT or something?

Wait, holy shit, that quote is from the Jerusalem Post. They fucked up the game of telephone. Why the fuck are you even using the Jerusalem Post as a source? The original story is from the Washington Post and I linked you to ABC news.

The briefing on the strikes he was commenting on was in October and the Senator was absolutely referring to the attack in question.

>https://archive.ph/20251202114046/https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/11/28/hegseth-kill-them-all-survivors-boat-strike/
They quote another source saying the same bullshit about the boat being sunk cause it was a hazard, btw.

>In briefing materials provided to the White House, JSOC reported that the “double-tap,” or follow-on strike, was intended to sink the boat and remove a navigation hazard to other vessels — not to kill survivors, according to another person who saw the report.

Stop fucking using shitty Israeli newspapers for US news.

>>1461881
Democrats would be tacitly admitting that they have greater allegiance to latin americans than their own countrymen.

>>1461883
He was combating drug trafficking and doing political purges of corrupt officials before being replaced by an actual communist via the Biden admin.

>>1461882
>And he wasn't ferrying drugs into the US
>>1461864
>U.S. Justice Department asserted that Hernandez, who was president from 2014 to 2022, had abused his power by accepting millions of dollars in bribes from traffickers to protect their U.S.-bound cocaine shipments and to fuel his rise in Honduran politics. A Manhattan jury found Hernandez guilty in March 2024
>bribery & corruption of Hernandez: or he could have refused and prevented those cartels from killing American citizens
What happened just hours ago displaces that wrong opinion, >>1461882
You support that which supports the one who supported the killers of American citizens.

>>1461886
>He was combating drug trafficking
>the U.S. Justice Department asserted that Hernandez, who was president from 2014 to 2022, had abused his power by accepting millions of dollars in bribes from traffickers to protect their U.S.-bound cocaine shipments and to fuel his rise in Honduran politics. A Manhattan jury found Hernandez guilty in March 2024.
That nasty thing called Reality just keeps on proving Trumptards' retarded opinions wrong.

>>1461884
>“The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal,” said Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Massachusetts), a Marine Corps veteran and vocal Trump critic who received a classified briefing from Pentagon officials on the strikes in late October with other members of the House Armed Services Committee. “Mark my words: It may take some time, but Americans will be prosecuted for this, either as a war crime or outright murder.”
>late October

>>1461887
The only thing I'm reading from this is that you trusted the government when the Biden admin did something, but now you're instantly suspicious because the Trump admin is bombing drug cartel boats.

The obvious consequence of what you want is more drug cartel boats and more socialist leaders in latin America. So you're not only a hypocrite, but actually stupid.

>>1461890
The briefing was in late October, you illiterate ESL shitbag.

>>1461891
Good post

>Hernandez, who was president from 2014 to 2022, had abused his power by accepting millions of dollars in bribes from traffickers to protect their U.S.-bound cocaine shipments and to fuel his rise in Honduran politics
>Trump pardons Hernandez
>bribery & corruption of Hernandez: or he could have refused and prevented those cartels from killing American citizens
>>1461891 >>1461894 support a president that supports a corrupt supporter of killers of American citizens. Read into that what you will, citizens of America.

>>1461897
>had abused his power
According to the socialists he was purging from government and a socialist dem president. The same people who told us that President Roomba was totally sane and capable of running the WH.

>>1461891
>hypocrite
>what you want is more drug cartel boats
>Hernandez, who was president from 2014 to 2022, had abused his power by accepting millions of dollars in bribes from traffickers to protect their U.S.-bound cocaine shipments
Hypocrites need to project. Accusations are Admissions.

>>1461898
>Uh, it's only according to the people who imprisoned him for all those drug crimes
>Please ignore how his brother is serving a life sentence for drug trafficking and multiple assassinations relating to that drug trafficking
>...and was literally convicted by the first Trump admin

>>1461898
>had abused his power
But enough about Trump pardoning a drug trafficking protector.
But a rightist who doesn't prevent that which kills American citizens is okay of course. Because he's a rightist, amirite? As long as he's a rightist, who cares about American citizens' lives, eh? You clearly don't.

>>1461899
Alleged trafficking versus actual trafficking.

>>1461900
>Biden won in the safest, most secure election in history and everything his DoJ said was true
>Trump is a fascist and nothing the government says can be trusted
The duality of democrats.

>actual trafficking
Not prevented by Hernandez, pardoned by Trump, thus supports a supporter of those killing American citizens.
>alleged
Says a defender of a protector of drug trafficking killing American citizens.
This defender of Trump isn't beating the 'I like American citizens being killed' allegatiions.

>I don't like American citizens being killed
>I don't care about American citizens being killed if it saves the life of one rightist who allows that which kills American citizens to exist in US
The duality of Trump cultists: Republicans.

I wouldn't mind leftists being sent to CECOT.

>>1461903
The federal government doesn't run state elections and every fucking state but parts of Louisiana produces paper records of every vote cast with an ungodly number of eyes and systems in place to secure elections.

Meanwhile it takes like 1-3 fucking ass-holes for the WH to put out a false story and one of them is a fucking convicted fraudster and pathological liar.

Also, we aren't questioning career bureaucrats. We're questioning a drunk, abusive, Fox News host that has made it his personal mission to lobby for war criminals and been in office for less than a fucking year.

Also if Dems were rigging fucking elections, Trump would be fucking in prison right now. I swear, you ass-hats are the worst sore losers on earth.

Rightists mind having their opinions sent to Hell. Which is where they're going for supporting the evil that is rightism. But then, they're already in Hell that is reality which has a liberal bias, or the world would be exactly as they would wish it to be.

>>1461903
What is this cope? Trump lost in 2020; he repeatedly failed to prove any kind of interference. He's lied that it was "stolen" with no evidence to this day.

Meanwhile the Trump admin lies literally every day, openly and obviously. Like remember:
>Under $2 gas! (That still doesn't exist)
>They're eating the cats and dogs! (It was one native crackhead on the other side of the state)
>Here's the unedited Epstein cell footage! (It was edited and had multiple minutes missing)
>Prices are down! (They're up)
>Tariffs aren't a tax! (They objectively are and even they recognized this by getting rid of some to reduce prices)

>The federal government doesn't run state elections
They ran a massive """"election enforcement""" campaign through foreign NGOs and used election machines owned by a company started in Venezuela. And whose machines were phoning home to Venezuela.
>Also if Dems were rigging fucking elections, Trump would be fucking in prison right now.
A black liberal judge framed him for the same crime she was committing.

>>1461910
You forgot to take your pills.

>vote rigging
Mike Lindell 'claimed' that was happening via voting machines. Gee, I wonder why he who was once worth $300 million is now bankrupt?
>Alex Jones losing SCOTUS appeal, thus can be financially destroyed by the Sandy Hook families
Careful. Freedom of Speech does not mean Freedom from Consequences. But that's all rightards are reduced to: wrong opinions.
Republicans & Trump cultists: Lies, Damn Lies & Statistics.

>we value free speech
>unless you question the unquestionable things, then you will get financially ruined, which of course means you deserve it because the government told us so
Are you actually retarded?

>>1461918
Yeah he did a lot more than "question". More "Send angry mobs after mourning parents while outright lying about them being feds and faking it". Shockingly people aren't sympathetic towards the guy profiting on sending mobs after mourning parents because their kids got shot.

>>1461919
You do understand that you keep referring to the authority of a DoJ you currently don't trust, right?

>>1461919
I think he's talking about the coke addict that got sued for defamation cause defamation isn't free speech.

>>1461920
>You do understand that you keep referring to the authority of a DoJ you currently don't trust
The DoJ isn't who ruined Lindell or Jones. Juries did.

Secretary of Alcoholism and Warfighting Pete Kegsbreath is currently in the midst of hanging himself. Lying about not giving orders and oopsie turns out he did give a second order to kill the remaining people on the boat. Trump will hang him out to dry if it becomes a serious issue.
Thus in Fascistic Trump's America, Free Speech does not value you.
Why did the Trump-loaded SCOTUS reject Jones' appeal, thus by his own wrong opinions is condemned?
>what'll happen after 12 midday 20th January 2029: why let good legislation laid down in 2025 go to waste?
May you live in interesting times, rightards.

>>1461922
>Juries did.
You are actually retarded jesus christ.
Alex Jones was fined for the GDP of a small nation for the same reason that Sydney Powell was sued into the dirt; they challenged the interests of the people in power.
I'm not talking about the president. I'm talking about activist judges, AG's and intelligence assets.
The system is made up of individual parts that are ideologically aligned. It does not suffer anything which endangers its authority. You can actually measure how sensitive it is to certain topics based on its reactions, and the idea that you're not allowed to criticize or question a democratically held election should have told you this.
You either trust it, or you don't. Pick a lane.

>>1461925
>I'm talking about activist judges,
Not part of the DoJ. Also appeals are a thing.
>AG's and intelligence assets.
Neither of which were part of the civil lawsuits against those jackasses

Emphasis on civil.

Also, Jones lost firstly for refusing to fucking cooperate with the trial and secondly for getting caught perjuring himself when his dumbass lawyer accidentally sent the plantiffs' attorneys the contents of his cellphone. Shit was fucking hilarious.

>>1461925
...or subhumans such as Jones get what they fucking deserve.
Gee, I wonder why so many others aren't being financially destroyed?

>>1461926
>Not part of the DoJ.
Last (You) for your total lack of knowledge.
>Neither of which were part of the civil lawsuits against those jackasses
They froze free speech by manufacturing public condemnation against both parties.
Alex Jones was written off a crazed conspiracy theorist attacking the parents of victims, which he didn't do, and every one of Trump's lawyers were sued, disbarred or put in prison for questioning the "safest most secure election in US history".
>Jones lost firstly for refusing to fucking cooperate with the trial
The court was demanding Google analytics data from someone who doesn't own the Google IP.

>>1461927
Alex Jones has been consistently right about everything, including Epstein, which was previously considered a conspiracy theory by you fucking retards.

>Alex Jones has been consistently wrong about everything
ftfy or he wouldn't have been thrown to the legal/financial wolves by the SCOTUS

GOP senator: Hegseth is either lying about second boat strike or incompetent

https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/02/politics/rand-paul-hegseth-boat-strike

>>1461929
>Spews bullshit 24/7 based on random news articles he saw
>"Hey sometimes he was vaguely correct!"
Jones can be literally simulated by a AI bot that takes in random facebook posts and Fox News stories.

>>1461929
What's happened to Jones sets the legal precedent. Good.
Don't have wrong opinions. Or Else.

>>1461928
>Last (You) for your total lack of knowledge.
Right, can you explain what knowledge you have that state court judges are part of the DoJ?
>The court was demanding Google analytics data
No. The court was demanding a spreadsheet that existed and which Jones had personal control over which he repeatedly falsely claimed did not exist.

The data itself wasn't the fucking issue.

>>1461935
>What's happened to Jones sets the legal precedent.
Actually since he lost on summary judgement it really didn't set much precedent.
>What's happened to Jones sets the legal precedent.
He wasn't sued for opinions. Although not knowing the difference between statements of fact and statements of opinion tracks for you.

>>1461885
Fascists are not Americans and never have been.

>Fascists are not Americans and never have been
But enough about the Orange Mussolini and his cultists.

Those who sell secrets - least of all do nothing about those who do so - to an enemy whose values & beliefs aren't exactly like the US's aren't Americans.

>>1461787
The lack of visible weaponry is a pretty good indicator, unless you want to pretend that some dude having a pistol tucked into his pants counts as the boat being armed, in which case a case can be made for blowing up half the cars in America.

>>1461952
Conservatives have always been the enemy of America
>They were the loyalists trying to conserve the British crown during the American Revolution
>They were the confederates trying to conserve the racist institution of slavery during the civil war
>They were the nazis trying to conserve racist authoritarianism during world war II
>Now they're MAGA, which his nazi-ism 2.0
Still baffles me how we have a conservative uniparty after all the shit they've pulled.

>>1461952
Is that why America voted in a Russian stooge?

>>1462002
America and Freedom in general. Conservatism is a great ideology that's so easily hijacked by just changing around some labels to mark the legitimate enemy of freedom as the 'good guys' because it has only one goal: To win. What do they win? We don't exactly know. But they win bigly at careening every country they've ever been put in charge of off a cliff.

>>1462010
Conservatism at its heart is authoritarianism, especially modern conservatism since it's based off the work of Joseph de Maistre. When you hear that meme 'limited government' it's not libertarianism like they claim, it's to limit the public's input and influence into government so only the few rule unfettered. It's why you see republicans, the modern conservative party, pushing so many anti democratic and voter suppression laws.

>>1462002
>>1462010
>>1462012
Trump & his projecting cultists will never beat the traitor & terrorist allegations: >>1461932

>>1462014
>Conservatism at its heart is authoritarianism
No, conservatism at its heart is hierarchism. Authoritarianism involves a central authority, but that is not a necessary goal of conservatism.

As an example, look at the CSA. It was less centralized, but more hierarchical than the Union.

Buzz Aldrin is a Conservative Christian
>It is a magnificent testimony to the evolution of humankind
Yet, when he spoke of the Apollo moon landings he accepted scientific facts with just one word in that quote. Speaking of quotes:
>We will fail in this endeavor if the free countries do not continue their reduction of the barriers which they themselves impose on their trade with each other
Were those who voted for the president who said that conservatives? Must have been, when Adlai Stevenson II lost.
Gee, I wonder why the same president who also said:
>If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power
was the last decent Republican president?

>>1461909
>Under $2 gas! (That still doesn't exist)
Still cheaper than Biden.
>Prices are down! (They're up)
Point to a time where gas was $5/gal under Trump.

>>1462028
>gas is cheap in my village

Then, just as Bush II did with Iraq, why is Trump eyeing up Venezuela's oil if US supposedly 'plenty' to keep gas prices 'low'?
Oh wait, gas prices are still high. And those who voted for him can't afford groceries while their orange Marie Antoinette says 'Let them eat cake' from that ballroom

>>1462028
>Still cheaper than Biden.
But Trump still lied about how cheap gas was. Which is odd, because you'd think he'd just boast about that but no, he's a compulsive fucking liar who needs to lie about literally everything around him because he lives in a state of yes-men induced delusion.

>>1462029
>>1462031
>Prices are up!
>prices are actually down from when Biden was in
>b-but he promised < 2 per gal and didn't deliver so that makes him worse!

>>1462032
No no anon, stop lying. He didn't say his GOAL was <2 gas. He said it already happened.

He lied. To your face.

>>1462033
Just like you lied when you said prices were higher.

>>1462021
And no system maintains a hierarchy like authoritarianism. The only difference is if you have a king or billionaire lead.
Also the Confederates pretended to be decentralized, but they amde sure the rich kept strict control over everything, like the whole slavery is enshrined in their constitution.

>>1462034
Go to a store retard. I'm not arguing with you when I can literally cross compare my grocery bill from last year to this one and notice a 70% increase.

Gas stations that also sell groceries.
Both still aren't cheap.

>>1462039
From when Biden was in? No.

Stop arguing with the trump fascist who will lie to your face that things are cheaper.
The only difference between this and all their other lies for trump is the average person can see they're lying when they have to buy stuff and trump's failed economic policies have caused prices to explode.
Same thing happened when trump tried to downplay the turmp virus pandemic only for people to realize it as really bad when a million Americans died because of trump.

Also this doesn't change the fact that trump and hengseth are war criminals and should be either sent to the international criminals court or better yet, Venezuela to stand trial after they're removed from power.