In the name of transparency, the DoD released a video of one of the survivors attempting to complete his drug smuggling run from the Venezuela coast to the Florida. See below.

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
In the name of transparency, the DoD released a video of one of the survivors attempting to complete his drug smuggling run from the Venezuela coast to the Florida. See below.

Is the smuggler in the room with us now Admiral?
The US isn't supposed to execute people for smuggling cocaine.
You shouldn't just be able to call them enemy combatants if they're not even combatants. Words are supposed to have meanings.
By the logic that you can just call things whatever you want and then you're magically allowed to treat them as that thing, then why not just call them "fish" and say that the American military was just "fishing"? That makes just as much sense to me as what they did.
That's pretty much the MO of authoritarians everywhere. Just listen to Putin or Xi, they talk like that all the time.
They're being very specific with the language, calling them "narco-terrorists".
Only Democrats fight so hard to protect criminals.
Smuggling cocaine isn't a valid defence of the first strike, why would you think it's a valid reason for the second one?
We don't fucking issue death sentences for trafficking drugs.
They still haven’t proven the boat had drugs, or have they?
"Instinct to survive? No, they must be struggling valiantly to get that cocaine shipment squared away." -People who should not be in charge of decisions for themselves
I have no idea why this admiral would be willing to fall on the stupidest sword imaginable for pete god damned hegseth. Like... are they offering him a lot of money or something? How flimsy is his sense of honor that he'd be willing to sell out his entire reputation for that?
You read too many Clancy novels, honor and reputation don't buy Porsches. He'll get some sweet bullshit diplomatic post or hired back as consultant.
Maybe he really is this shitty. Remember that the guy who used to have this job retired a few months ago. Maybe this guy was picked to replace him because he's just as much of an asshole as the rest of them.
"Sir, we have it under good authority that the orange donut the survivor is clutching to is in fact, more cocaine"
So he's admitting his crime.