DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump says survivors of scrutinized US strike were trying to right boat before 2nd missile was fired

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Monday justified the U.S. military’s decision to fire a second missile in a heavily scrutinized attack on a boat in the Caribbean Sea by claiming that two suspected drug smugglers were trying to right the vessel after it had capsized in the initial strike.

Trump also backtracked on whether he was open to releasing the video footage of the second strike. Last week, Trump told reporters he saw “no problem” in releasing the footage, but on Monday he said he would leave the decision to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The Republican administration is facing calls from Democratic lawmakers to release footage of the Sept. 2 operation in the Caribbean Sea, which killed nine people aboard the boat in an initial strike and then two more who managed to survive.

“They were trying to return the boat back to where it could float, and we didn’t want to see that because that boat was loaded up with drugs,” Trump said on Monday.

When asked by a reporter about his comments last week suggesting he was open to releasing footage of the second strike, Trump denied that was his position and bitterly attacked the reporter as “obnoxious” and “terrible.”

“Whatever Pete Hegseth wants to do is OK with me,” Trump said.

Trump, however, last Wednesday in an exchange with reporters about the strike footage said: “Whatever they have we’d certainly release.”

The Sept. 2 operation was the first in what has become a monthslong series of American strikes on vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean that the administration says are targeting drug smugglers working on behalf of cartels, including some controlled by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. At least 87 people have been killed in 22 known strikes.

Trump has broadly justified the campaign as necessary for his administration to stem the flow of fentanyl and other illegal drugs into the United States. He claims the U.S. is in armed conflict with narco-terrorists.

Hegseth said in a Fox News interview Saturday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California that officials were reviewing the video, but he did not commit to releasing it. “Whatever we were to decide to release, we’d have to be very responsible” about it,” Hegseth said.

The Pentagon on Monday did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the status of Hegseth’s review or confirm Trump’s assertion that the suspects appeared to be trying to turn over the vessel before the second strike was fired.

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers are demanding that the Pentagon hand over “unedited video of strikes” against drug cartels to Congress, threatening to withhold a quarter of Hegseth’s travel budget if it doesn’t. The provision is included in the $900 billion defense bill the House is expected to vote on later this week.

Over the weekend, Sen. Tom Cotton, the Republican who leads the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he would not oppose public release of the footage.

But Cotton, among the top lawmakers on national security committees who were briefed by the Navy admiral commanding those strikes, is splitting with Democrats over whether military personnel acted lawfully in carrying out the second strike to kill the two survivors.

“It’s not gruesome. I didn’t find it distressing or disturbing,” he said, explaining why he does not have a problem with releasing all the footage. “It looks like any number of dozens of strikes we’ve seen on jeeps and pickup trucks in the Middle East over the years.”

Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the video “was profoundly shaking.” And Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said it “did not appear that these two survivors were in any position to continue the fight.” Both Himes and Smith, who spoke separately on Sunday talk shows, have viewed the video.

The classified sessions on Capitol Hill came after a report that Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley had ordered the follow-on attack to comply with Hegseth’s demands.

Bradley told lawmakers there was no “kill them all” order from Hegseth, but a video of the entire series of attacks left some lawmakers with serious questions. Legal experts have said killing survivors of a strike at sea could be a violation of the laws of military warfare.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-st...ribbean-3cf2ca9cbe4523978e935b99c2979caa

Reporter asks question as to why he changed his mind and said two different things only days apart from each other. Trump? Accused reporter of lying and calls the reporter names when in fact it was the reporter telling the truth and trump who is lying. AKA- Just another typical day at The White House. And there is no "armed conflict".

Trump had said he'd have no problem releasing the video ....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cj69x5zge95t

What's happening in Venezuala is crazy - and the MAGA fanboys don't say a peep. It's all sorts of wrong for all sorts of reasons ... not the least of which is that if the US administration actually wanted to do something about the drugs - it would target columbia which is where the drugs are from. Second of which is that these strikes are not legal but then MAGA don't give a crap about legal, so that's really a moot point.

Listening to Bob Dylan today and heard a line that made me think of Trump and Trump supporter: 'Yes, ’n’ how many times can a man turn his head Pretending he just doesn’t see?'

If they were serious about fighting drugs trump wouldn't have just pardoned Jaun Orlando Hernández, the former president of Honduras who was convicted of smuggling over 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S.

stop nit picking!

It's my TDS. You know, it's not the things trump does and says that's the problem. It's when we post it and talk about it that's the problem. Don't believe me? Just ask a MAGA.

Not even Columbia... you don't have to go beyond our own borders to address the demand for said drugs.

Sorry if I wasn't clear ... not talking about demand. Talking abvout the supply.

From AI -- Approximately 90% to 95% of the cocaine entering the United States originates in Colombia. Recent reports from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) consistently place the figure in this range.
Specific data points from the DEA and other U.S. Government estimates include:
98% in 2021, according to forensic analyses of seized cocaine.
93% around 2020.

I understood what you said, I'm saying if we're so worried about drugs coming into this country, addressing the demand would probably be a more effective solution.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the U.S. has seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela amid mounting tensions with the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-12-10-2025

Got it. Yes - if the demand is there, someone will fill the need/demand.

He said we will keep the oil from the tanker. I wonder how stealing a ship and its contents from a nation we are not at war with isn't piracy?

I'm convinced he wants a war. I think he believes that he can stop elections from happening if we are at war...

All previous history to contrary

Just curious. Now that trump himself has well established the fact he has committed piracy by stealing a Venezuelan oil tanker, a nation we are not at war with and the oil which is its cargo, should we now call him Captain Crook? Curious minds want to know.

I don't know.

If a country is skirting legal sanctions, what would you do?

Might be more to this story than some on here think.

This is from ABC: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/satellite-images-suggest-seized-tanker-002311274.html

So are you advocating for the USA to police the world? You want the USA to take miltary action against every nation that skirts legal sanctions? Use force to target and kill any boat that may or may not be a drug boat ... shoot first and ask questions later? Kill any survivors from an attack that are stranded at sea?

Sure there may be some issues with the tanker. Does that mean that across the globe you want the USA to take similare actions everywhere? Because I could have sworn that one of the things I heard from Republicans, whether they were Trump supporters, just hard right, or even MAGA - was the USA needed to not be policing the world and spending money and resources trying to influence/control/police the globe.

Thats not what he is saying ... It should only be done to promote trumps political agenda as smoke and mirrors and hegseths 12 year old he-man mentality.

You said it better than I could have. It seems when King Trump decides military action should be taken against a nation we aren't at war with nothing else matters.

It's rather odd how Russia skirts sanctions all the time and we don't see trump taking these kind of actions against them in terms of oil. Europe won't even be phasing out using Russia's oil and gas completely until 2018 and trump has taken no action against them either.

It almost seems like he has specifically chosen to take someone weak enough to get away with such aggressive action against and pick on them like a school yard bully if we didn't know any better.

Here is a list of all countries under U.S. sanctions....................

Comprehensive Sanctions (Near-Total Embargoes) These are the most restrictive, generally prohibiting most transactions:

Cuba
Iran
North Korea (DPRK)
Russia: (broad, escalating sanctions)
Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk regions of Ukraine

Targeted Sanctions (Sectoral or Specific Restrictions) These apply to specific entities, sectors, or activities, including:

Afghanistan
Belarus: (linked to Russia's actions)
Burma (Myanmar)
Central African Republic (CAR)
China: (specific entities like military companies)
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)
Ethiopia
Hong Kong: (related to China actions)
Iraq: (targeted)
Lebanon: (specific issues)
Mali
Nicaragua
Somalia
South Sudan
Sudan
Syria
Venezuela
Yemen

Here is a list of all nations suspected of breaking U.S. sanctions and some such as Russia and China are KNOWN to be breaking U.S. sanctions.....

Nations frequently mentioned in U.S. government reports and news updates in 2025 as being involved in sanctions evasion or violations (either by the nation itself or entities/individuals within it) include:

China: Entities are frequently targeted for supporting the Russian and Iranian military-industrial bases, acquiring U.S. semiconductor technology, and involvement in human rights issues.

Russia: This nation is the primary target of U.S. financial sanctions due to the war in Ukraine. Sanctions evasion networks involving entities in the UAE, Türkiye, China, Hong Kong, and India have been actively targeted.

Iran: The U.S. has intensified sanctions on Iran's oil industry and procurement networks, with recent enforcement actions in 2025 targeting entities in the UAE, Türkiye, China, Hong Kong, India, Germany, and Ukraine for their roles in its ballistic missile and UAV programs.

North Korea: Sanctions focus on disrupting funding for its WMD program. Reports in 2024 noted Russian entities shipping petroleum to North Korea and facilitating military assistance, leading to additional sanctions targeting these evasion networks.

Venezuela: The U.S. imposed new sanctions in December 2025 on individuals and entities related to the Maduro government and its petroleum sales, often in the context of counter-narcotics efforts and political conflicts.

Belarus: Targeted sanctions continue due to Belarus's ongoing support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Myanmar (Burma): Entities affiliated with the military regime are subject to sanctions.

Sudan: In December 2025, Treasury sanctioned a transnational network recruiting individuals to fight in the Sudanese civil war, building on existing sanctions.

United Arab Emirates (UAE), Türkiye, Hong Kong, India: Entities in these jurisdictions have been repeatedly targeted in 2025 for facilitating sanctions evasion, particularly for Iran and Russia.

I read that article,, Kinda got a kick out of it. It doesn't verify that any infraction took place, just that it MIGHT have.

Then it went on to make a statement that kinda cracked me up.

"pattern of deliberate obfuscation,"

I thought, hey, MAGA might be right, I mean if there is anyone group on the planet that knows anything about OBFUSCATION, it's MAGA!

Anyway, without proof of wrong doing, it's Piracy. Just like Blowing boats out of the water without proof is an act of war. Just like a second attack on a destroyed vessel in order to kill any survivors is cruel and unusual,,, and against the UCMJ!

How do I know they don't have proof, hell, if they had it, they'd put it out there for us all to see. They haven't, and they won't. Because they Can't!

Can we see the second attack on that vessel now... Oh, while we are at it, Where the hell are the Jan 6 Files?

Correction on my previous post. I posted that Europe won't totally stop using Russian oil and gas until 2018. I meant to post 2028.