When Is A War Not A War?

In a speech before the House of Commons on May 13, 1940, referencing the war against Nazi Germany, Winston Churchill stated, “What is our policy? … To wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime.”

The Prussian military theorist Karl von Clausewitz once observed that “war is the continuation of politics by other means.” Various political and moral interpretations exist regarding what constitutes a “just war.” That usually depends on one’s point of view. As the saying goes, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

What if there were a country that had absorbed the loss of over 100,000 of its citizens each year for several years, and which has done little to address the problem? Would that country not be remiss in its primary duty to protect its own citizens? Well, that country does indeed exist; it is called the United States of America.

Last year, over 100,000 Americans died of drug overdoses, mostly young people, the vast majority of them from fentanyl. Fentanyl is a synthetic opiate 50 times more powerful than heroin, the components of which are manufactured in China. The compounds are exported to countries such as Mexico, where the drug cartels then combine them to produce fentanyl. After that, the drug is smuggled across the border by land or sea to the U.S.

Fentanyl is cheap and easy to produce. Also, there is no “growing season,” so the profit margin is high.

Fentanyl has also been observed masquerading as prescription painkillers such as OxyContin. Many buyers who purchased these drugs on the street are totally unaware that they are really purchasing fentanyl. The drug is so powerful that a minuscule amount can prove fatal.

When a vessel is destroyed by airstrike or naval gunfire, there’s:
- No boarding
- No forensic collection
- No chain of custody
- That means no recovered narcotics, no photos of cargo, no crew interrogation — just pre-strike intelligence.

You can’t show what you didn’t seize. Destruction precludes documentation.

Which means they’re telling, TRUST US, WE KNOW WHAT WE’RE DOING.

The problem “Trust us” is not a doctrine; it’s a placeholder for missing legitimacy. When lethal force is used without transparency, we’re not just risking moral erosion — we’re undermining the very systems we claim to defend.

Assuming that the military rules out interdicting the boat ( which I disagree with ), we need Classified briefings to Congress: Even if public disclosure risks operational exposure, elected representatives must be looped in. A bipartisan panel or inspector general could validate the intelligence without compromising sources. After operations, sanitized summaries can be released — showing patterns, affiliations, and rationale.

“Trust us” is not a strategy. It’s a stall. If the record of our intelligence is anything, it does not show us that blind trust is warranted.

RE: How about tracking the boats to their destination, confirming the delivery and cargo that was delivered, holding an immediate mass trial and killing all of them? Are we to object to dead drug traffickers?

You’re being facetious here, I presume.

Here's a short video of the US Coast Guard interdicting a semi-submersible loaded with drugs: U.S. Coast Guard Interdicts Suspected Drug Smuggling Vessel (Semi-Submersible) in the Pacific Ocean

So you see, our Navy and Coast Guard are using every bit of their ability to stop drug smuggling into our country. If some really bad individuals are deep sixed in the process, so be it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.