Does Trump Have the Authority to "Unleash Strikes" on US Territory?

Drug running is a crime.

Crimes are handled by the coast guard and cops in US territorial waters.

Not the Navy and CIA in international waters.

Capture, try, convict, sentence. It’s the Constitutional way.

1 Like

Is Trump correct, does he have the authority to use the military/CIA to “strike” targets on land in US territory and conduct extrajudicial executions?

Noem said why.

as I answered the first time. It depends on the totality of the circumstances.

Is it part of an invasion, incursion, insurrection or rebellion? Yes, absolutely he does.
Is it not part of an invasion, incursion, insurrection or rebellion? No, absolutely he does not

1 Like

I don’t follow her and have no idea what she said. Neither do I care.

prevent incursions… its also the Constitutional way.

This is actually an interesting topic. The real question is, has the President exceeded the authority he does have? That of course, is a question for the Congress, not some district court judge with no war powers. We can all have our beliefs. I believe he has, that once this started a report should have been made to the Congress and the Congress should have had the opportunity to either authorize force or not authorize it. Should they authorize it? That is a political question again for the Congress, and in my mind depends on the totality of the evidence the administration provides to them. For now, the President is acting within what he believes are his Constitutional powers. It is up to the Congress to say if thats true.

1 Like

You are right. Drug runners have participated in killing orders of magnitude more Americans than terrorists have.

2 Likes

Times change. Get used to it.

The Constitution has not changed.

2 Likes

Boy that’s right. They held down every single victim and physically forced every microgram of substance into their bodies repeatedly until death.

1 Like

Virtually no drug user (whether addicted or not) expects a lethal dose of fentanyl in their fix.

Would you feel the same if bootleggers were selling poisonous booze to willing consumers?

1 Like

In over thirty five years in law enforcement I never ran into a substance abuser or drunk that wasn’t a non stop flow of excuses for their self destructive behavior. Always somebody else’s fault. None ever had the stuff forced on them.
A hot load of fentanyl? Bad booze? Excuses, excuses. Like ■■■■■■■■ everybody’s got one.
Darwin rules and when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes.

Regardless of the poor choices people make regarding altering their state of consciousness with drugs or alcohol, the choice should not be the equivalent of playing Russian Roulette. We all made occasional bad decisions growing up, we didn’t deserve to die because someone loaded the game with poison pills. To suggest that the people who die deserve it is morally unacceptable.

1 Like

Maybe. No amount of nanny state on earth can bring Eden. To try is to oppress.
“ The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” ~ Mencken

1 Like

Good for Mencken. But that doesn’t justify selling poison to unsuspecting people just because they make stupid life choices.

:joy:

Heads I win…tails you lose, answer.

IMHO,
I can see that drugs are “invading” the country, so killing the delivery people is OK.

Drugs don’t travel on their own. Narco Terrorists are invading the country and bringing the drugs with them. Each incursion is an attack on the people of the US that narco terrorists know will result in deaths just as sure as if the poisoned a water supply.

I agree with Trump that the repeated incursions do constitute an invasion, and that the invaders are the enemy of the entire nation. Having taken the action he has, it is now incumbent on him to report to the Congress so they can do their job and either authorize or not authorize future military activity and if they choose to through legislation rather than resolution, decide the scope of that activity.

2 Likes

The term “narco terrorists” comes out of Colombia, where some of them actually were terrorists seeking to change the government.

They initially sold narco to fund terror. Even they stopped a long time ago.

It never applied to the US.

1 Like

It still doesn’t. It applies to members of TdA, and maybe MS13.