• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Drug Boat Strike

I mean of course the Venezuelan govt and the families would say that, just like of course the president’s folks would claim the opposite. I’m not sure this tweet really clarifies anything with facts, other than i suppose the last sentence

This was just an example tweet. Add to the pile the articles that speak tobthe questionable legality, etc...

We owe it to the guys or gals who took that shot to know that their target was valid, met the ROE, and was in accordance with the LOAC. Hand waiving doesn't do that.
 
I mean of course the Venezuelan govt and the families would say that, just like of course the president’s folks would claim the opposite. I’m not sure this tweet really clarifies anything with facts, other than i suppose the last sentence
It suggests there are families that can be queried for details outside of our intel organization. I expect investigative journalists will.

That boat does not look like a fishing boat, unless it's like the open ocean version of an overpowered bass boat that has to race its competitors to the best fishing hole. Three engines and moving fast in decent waves? Also, we just boarded a much bigger Venezuelan fishing boat that had only 9 people on board. Why did this one have 11?

Sad that I am just not trusting our government right now? Where TF is congress?
 
Last edited:
There's two separate issues at hand. One is the reality of what the vessel was doing. The other is the legality of the action taken.

Because many don't feel the shot was legal (with good reason) or just don't like the administration, they're turning the reality of what the vessel was doing into a political weapon. It's important to understand and differentiate the two in this case, especially here in AW as a group of individuals who are educated in the specifics of ROE thanks to their professions.

Assuming there was an asset available, that vessel would have been fired on under normal circumstances if it didn't stop. There's zero question in mind that would have happened. Everything about that configuration indicates it meets the ROE for AUF. The important thing to know/be aware of is that the shots wouldn't have been at the people. I know you guys understand that, but just reiterating the point.

As an aside, it is relevant to mention that people do get injured even when conducting AUF. Bullets can do interesting things.
 
If you don't believe it the kill/attack is valid, you don't pull the trigger (switch, button, device).
This is a rather Pollyannaish trope where there's never ambiguity and you always have perfect information upon which to base your decisions. Probably a good thing to say to a Marine at the shooting range during boot camp, but not terribly helpful otherwise.
 
There's two separate issues at hand. One is the reality of what the vessel was doing. The other is the legality of the action taken.

Because many don't feel the shot was legal (with good reason) or just don't like the administration, they're turning the reality of what the vessel was doing into a political weapon. It's important to understand and differentiate the two in this case, especially here in AW as a group of individuals who are educated in the specifics of ROE thanks to their professions.

Assuming there was an asset available, that vessel would have been fired on under normal circumstances if it didn't stop. There's zero question in mind that would have happened. Everything about that configuration indicates it meets the ROE for AUF. The important thing to know/be aware of is that the shots wouldn't have been at the people. I know you guys understand that, but just reiterating the point.

As an aside, it is relevant to mention that people do get injured even when conducting AUF. Bullets can do interesting things.
Also a difference between deliberate vs. reactionary fires.

I saw an interesting TACAID on a 1-star's desk that related ROE to weapons posture.

No one wants people below a 3-star questioning deliberate fires tasking and/or ROE legality in the heat of the moment. Questions like "is this operation legal" is answered at the 4-star / SECDEF level.

The USMC did a pretty good job of ethical decision making in warfare for CGOs. We don't want another My Lai. The USAF isn't so good. And there are folks who essentially say that if certain words are said in the chat rooms or on the phones it's on someone else "higher". While true in a sense, they still have to look themselves in the mirror every morning.
My Lai is interesting insofar as everything down to the batallion level was 'clean.' "Search and Destroy" was valid, sanctioned doctrine (albeit ugly by today's standards) and is how the orders were written through that level.

The issue is when people at ground zero didn't recognize that the village wasn't rife with Viet Cong and didn't call off the attack.

I think the Company Commander is who should have fried, but instead the military hung a boot 2nd LT out to dry until he was pardoned. We can armchair QB that the orders from batallion should have been more specific vis a vis how to verify the presence of Viet Cong... but again, they were conducting a relatively 'standard' operation for the time.

The quotes from some of the NCOs on why they obeyed the orders of the officers, even though their guts told them it was wrong, are extremely interesting and enlightening.
 
Last edited:
Well, if you're comparing hay bales to pills, the fact that pills are greater by weight than hay bales tells you something.

Sketchy source...
The Mexican federal government has mostly been an honest actor in its drug war, with thousands of federal agents murdered. What reason do you believe that the source is 'sketchy' other than the fact that it doesn't agree with your pre-conceived ideas?

There are several plausible explanations for decreased marijuana arrests that don't revolve around the cartels losing interest in revenue from the product due to U.S. domestic production.

Yet those DARE programs, just like other abstinence programs, did not work.



In fact, your statements about drug deaths going down in the 1980s and 1990s is false. Deaths per 100,000 people doubled during that time period.

I said from the 1980s to 2000s. It's true that drug use spiked in the 1990s (thanks, crack wave), but went way down in the latter half of that decade and into the 00s.

The problem with using the word 'abstinence' is that it creates a false dichotomy of zero or bust. We made a lot of advancements against illicit drug use and then we decided we 'lost' and therefore it wasn't important. And now China is using England's opioid tactics against the U.S.
 
ambiguity and ... information
Based on what you have, you do or do not take the shot.
As long as you are comfortable with your briefing, ROE, and intel, I'm good with the shooters (no matter the platform) decision.
If not clear on what you're briefed, the ROE, or intel, then ask ask and ask again for clarity.
This was not a kill or be killed scenario milliseconds to make a decision, so again, your choice to pull the trigger.
 
Yeah. It's a little different in this community when you have chat rooms and phones and, depending on the support of your command, you may lose your job and career because you didn't do something. Even with the support of your command, they can only do so much when the the situation room is watching.

The USMC did a pretty good job of ethical decision making in warfare for CGOs. We don't want another My Lai. The USAF isn't so good. And there are folks who essentially say that if certain words are said in the chat rooms or on the phones it's on someone else "higher". While true in a sense, they still have to look themselves in the mirror every morning.
Not surprised, USMC generally seems to invest more into PME than most other services.

I’m also not surprised USN (or USAF as you say) don’t spend that much time on it. Our battles are far more technical, and there is a reliance on a flow of orders to do stuff that is essentially “trust me, just do it.”

You can basically have almost no direct info on how the targeting of a Tomahawk or anti ship missile strike order was developed, the expectation is still that you will carry out the order given.

Naval culture also has a very strong tradition of the Captain of the ship or sub being in charge of everything onboard.

I’d guess NLEC CO/XO would be the first time there is a serious conversation of the ethics of war and killing.
 
Based on what you have, you do or do not take the shot.
Obviously, but this doesn't imply that any given shooter has done the right thing, particularly with the benefit of hindsight, which can turn into a question of whether you (or other participants in the kill chain) could have, or should have known things.

My critique of your post was in what seemed like a nonchalant oversimplification in what can be very complex decision-making processes that oftentimes involve more than one person.
 
seemed like a nonchalant oversimplification in what can be very complex decision-making processes that oftentimes involve more than one person
Nothing I wrote was intended to be nonchalant nor an oversimplification.
It always boils down to the moment you "pull the trigger."
There is no equivocation at that moment.
You either do, or you do not.
And you stand by your decision.
If after the fact it is determined that the decisions of those above you was flawed, that's on them, not the shooter.
 
Naval culture also has a very strong tradition of the Captain of the ship or sub being in charge of everything onboard.

I’d guess NLEC CO/XO would be the first time there is a serious conversation of the ethics of war and killing.
ROE decisions are at the core of our command quals.

Your average O4 1120 knows more about ROE than an O5 JAG because we don't have the luxury of having one onboard.

But the morbid joke is we're all going to jail after the fact if we even survive.
 
ROE decisions are at the core of our command quals.

Your average O4 1120 knows more about ROE than an O5 JAG because we don't have the luxury of having one onboard.

But the morbid joke is we're all going to jail after the fact if we even survive.
Not specific to this event but I find that is a lot of the Inertia left over from 20 years of 72+ hour target soaks and CDE scores of 0 being the minimum.

People with Stars don’t seem to have a problem from what I’ve seen, but it makes a lot of guys wearing gold/silver oak leaves that grew up in the “every kinetic is an automatic 15-6” very uncomfortable with sensor to shooter being a timed drill. Concepts like firing on a sigint/comint based trigger set without looking visually at the target… stuff that is absolutely happening in that war laboratory of Russia Ukraine just reads as an automatic war crime. We’d better start getting more comfortable with the idea that we won’t be granted the time in target latency for everybody to get a vote on passing it on through to be actioned.

Regarding these strikes….
I’m reluctant on buying that these strikes were just haphazard because I remember this same media groups deliberately trying to paint what we were doing over Mosul/Raqqa as just indiscriminate death from above in 16/17. For all the “show us proof” there seems little to no concern in revealing method and means on that.
 
Back
Top