Former JAG Officer Questions Legality of U.S. Strikes on Vessels in Caribbean and Pacific

Questionable Legality of Maritime Strikes

• ❓ The legality of U.S. military strikes on vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific, resulting in over 105 deaths since September, is highly questionable.
• ⚠️ Allegations are extremely grave, with potential for murder charges against individuals in the chain of command, from munitions loaders to decision-makers.
• 🚫 There is a lack of substantial evidence provided to the public or Congress to justify the taking of over 100 lives, especially when the individuals on board appear to be civilians.

Lack of Armed Conflict and Due Process

• ⚖️ By definition of law, there is no armed conflict, no enemy combatants, and no offensive action being taken by the people in these boats.
• 💥 Vessels that are disabled are being vaporized instead of being retrieved, raising serious ethical and legal concerns.
• 📜 The current methods lack due process, unlike legal interdiction efforts typically conducted by the Coast Guard with warrants based on evidence presented to a judge.

Countering Drug Trafficking Arguments

• 🚫 The argument that these strikes are a campaign against drug trafficking is insufficient to justify bombing boats.
• ⚓ The U.S. government has legal methods for drug interdiction, historically employed by the Coast Guard with proper legal authorization.
• 🤷 There is no concrete evidence of drugs on these vessels, nor is there certainty that the individuals are not civilians, leading to lethal actions without sufficient justification.

Burden of Proof and Evidence

• 🔑 The burden of proof lies with those employing lethal force, not with those questioning the actions, such as Senator Mark Warner.
• 🔍 There is no clear evidence of weapons or confirmed drugs on the boats, and the individuals are not agents of another state, yet they are being attacked.
• 🗣️ Explanations provided for these strikes are often dismissed as gibberish, misinterpreting statutes and legal definitions inaccurately.