On Blowing Up Boats

What with Holiday preparations, general affairs (we’ve had A LOT of snow early in the winter in Madison), and working on another, still-unfinished post, I haven’t previously expounded – perhaps “ranted” would be a more apt description — on President Donald Trump’s Administration’s blowing up of allegedly drug-running boats in international waters.  What has caused me to take your time here is an observation that seems to me to be the most critical facet – and potentially the most supportive aspect for the preservation of our democracy – of the possible ramifications of the Regime’s launching of four strikes on a boat on September 2, 2025.  (I believe that it is undisputed that two occupants of the boat survived the first strike, but were killed in the second.  Two subsequent strikes – apparently to completely obliterate the vessel itself – followed.)  I feel it is appropriate to note that potentially supportive aspect here because it occurred to me before I saw any media commentator make it.

However, let’s first – as a client of mine used to say decades ago when reviewing the progress of an ongoing negotiation – review the bidding regarding these operations.

The Administration claims that its actions are justified because we are at “war” with “narco-terrorists.”  Note how skillfully Mr. Trump and his minions have moved the goal posts:  it seems that the majority of commentators feel obligated to start their commentaries regarding these actions with the proviso, “assuming we are at war.”  These talking heads might as well say, “Well, assuming Siamese cats are tigers …”  The Administration’s whole premise is absurd.  [The justification for the last two strikes on the boat on September 2 makes one blink:  “We had to make sure that the boat could no longer be used [as an instrument of war] against us.”  What?  Relative to our U.S. Naval strength, the boat was a canoe.  This is akin to calling a contest between the Los Angeles Dodgers and a West Madison Little League team, “a baseball game.”  We are not at war.   

Next.  The United States certainly has the right to use legitimate means to limit illicit drug smuggling into our country.  These Regime activities glaringly fail the legitimacy test.  First, as far as I know, no satisfactory evidence has been given that any specific struck boat was actually carrying drugs.  One of the primary premises of this nation is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.  Where did that go?  U.S. KY Sen. Rand Paul has noted statistics indicating that over the years our U.S. Coast Guard interceptions of suspected trafficking vessels have failed to discover drugs 25% of the time – from which one could infer that perhaps 20 of the 80 killed in these strikes have been innocent.  [I heard one pundit suggest a particularly sad nuance:  that cartels may be requiring otherwise law-abiding individuals to undertake drug runs upon threat that their loved ones will otherwise be tortured or killed.  (Such a scenario seems increasingly credible given the cartels’ now-understandable concern about the risk that the Regime’s actions pose to their personnel.)  Although these coerced individuals would, if apprehended, be guilty of drug smuggling, under such pressure either you or I would undertake these missions.]  Second, subject to your correction, I do not believe that drug trafficking offenses are generally characterized as capital crimes under U.S. law.  Mr. Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are bullies who clearly just enjoy beating up on the weak and pandering their manhood to the gullible MAGA base.  Whether those operating these struck boats have been guilty or innocent, with every strike the Regime is arguably in violation of international law.

Let’s step back a minute.  I can’t resist.

As all who care are aware, in November six Congressional Democrats with military or national security backgrounds released a video in which they advised our current members of the military that they had the right to disobey “unlawful orders.”  Mr. Trump quickly fired back with posts on his social network proclaiming that the members’ behavior was “seditious behavior, punishable by death,” indicated that these members should be arrested and tried, and forwarded a post asserting that the members should be hanged.  Aside from the fact that Mr. Trump’s accusations were wholly baseless, the depth of irony of such declarations, coming from a man who lied about losing an election and incited a seditious attack on our nation’s Capitol, is literally nauseating.

As this is typed, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth are in the process of shifting all of the responsibility for the second strike on the boat in the September 2 incident — the strike that killed the two individuals who survived the first strike – to Adm. Frank Bradley (who is currently reported to have ordered the second strike after Mr. Hegseth, apparently undisputedly, had given the order to “Kill Them All” before the first strike) – while disingenuously appearing to support the Admiral’s action.  Such is obviously a despicable abdication of responsibility.  Former President Harry Truman – who coined our most pithy, well-known description of presidential responsibility, “The Buck Stops Here” – must be rolling over in his grave.  (Of course, Mr. Truman, a man of rectitude, has probably already figuratively drilled at least halfway to China beneath his gravestone throughout the Trump presidencies; this latest outrage has probably just made him spin a little faster.)

I haven’t done any research on Adm. Bradley; I have no idea whether he was by nature a willing participant in this operation or merely acting as a reluctantly-obedient subordinate when he ordered the second strike (if he indeed did).  If there is any substance to the opinions being voiced by military legal experts seemingly across the political media spectrum – and even accepting the baseless premise that we are at war with drug cartels (see; even I’m doing it 😉) – there may well be grounds warranting the Admiral’s placement under court martial for a war crime (as well as the personnel who actually executed the strike).  A vital reminder:  all the evidence is almost certainly not yet in, and the Admiral is scheduled to meet with members of Congress today in confidential sessions.  That said, if he and his involved subordinates do suffer severe consequences for the actions they took on September 2 – while at the same time the Trump Administration seeks to exonerate Mr. Hegseth and distance Mr. Trump from the incident – I would submit that the incident potentially provides a silver – nay, gold – lining for the preservation of our democracy:  by their unscrupulous, gutless behavior, Messrs. Trump and Hegseth will have alienated the entire American military.

If in the future Mr. Trump or Mr. Hegseth orders military personnel to move against peaceful American protestors – recall that Mark Esper, the last Secretary of Defense in the first Trump Administration, related in his memoir, A Sacred Oath, that when demonstrators protested in Washington, D.C., after the murder of George Floyd, Mr. Trump asked authorities, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” — do you think they’ll obey the order?  Would you?

The most instructive aspect of this incident will be how Mr. Trump reacts.  It was clear from the day Mr. Trump nominated Mr. Hegseth that he was an atrociously stupid choice as Secretary of Defense.  However, when challenged, the President ALWAYS doubles down, considers admission of mistake an indication of weakness, pushes through – and with his core supporters, it has worked for the last decade.  I wonder how such an approach will work with the military, which has maintained a fiercely nonpartisan tradition – while being acutely aware of its own position and prerogatives –throughout this country’s existence.  I was never in the military, so anything I venture is obviously the broadest speculation; but one can question how much support Mr. Trump will retain with the military if he reflexively clings to and protects Mr. Hegseth.

You can’t be a dictator without controlling your citizenry.  You can’t control your citizenry without a military that obeys you.

I am well aware that my notes of optimism in recent posts are no more than slivers of reassurance in an era of tragedy.  Still, they’re better than nothing.

Stay well – and for those in the north, stay warm.   😊