Lesh
Diamond Member
- Dec 21, 2016
- 90,971
- 45,506
- 2,615
You’re a moronHe said she said.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You’re a moronHe said she said.
Considering that we’re taking about LEGAL MATTERS hereWow. That was sad.
You didn't ask for a legal definition - you asked for -a- definition.
I supplied one. It proved my point.
Try harder.
What time stamp did she say Hegseth authorized the second strike?That’s not what the press secretary said. She said Hesgeth authorized the second strike and Admiral Bradley conveyed that order
Soon all you want but it’s right there
That's the best you can do.....You’re a moron
You have no idea if that is true or not.Considering that we’re taking about LEGAL MATTERS here
No one is disputing f that it was a drug boat jackass.What would a purpose built open vessel of a design commonly known and encountered as smuggling vessels, with 4 high power outboards, drums of fuel to extend range, bales of some sort in a known drug route evading interdiction at a high rate of speed
be doing?
What left-leaning poster can answer this?
View attachment 1189529
![]()
Oh, and you did not at all address this:
-You- argue the responsibility for rescuing survivors exists -during- the engagement, that to wait until the engagement is over violates the law -- that you have to take the crew off before you can follow up on a burning and un-moving target
Show the words.
This directly addresses it. Just because you don't acknowledge it doesn't mean it isn't addressed. By your own acknowledgement an claim by the way you still haven't supported the boat was "crippled and on fire" meaning that it was at least damaged and probably disabled making it NOT a valid target.Commanders and their subordinates shall take all feasible measures to protect persons in peril at sea, including survivors of damaged or disabled vessels.
Why do you believe your judgement to be more sound than the officers in charge of making such determinations and issuing the necessary follow-up orders, in accordance with the given objectives?That boat was at that point going nowhere.
The engagement was over
No idea that this concerns legal matters?You have no idea if that is true or not.
You haven't a clue what laws these actions are underConsidering that we’re taking about LEGAL MATTERS here
This was an extreme action , going against everything the military stands for. It most likely was a sad attempt to cover up a very bad mistake. Wake up already !If the video ends up showing that there was a second dronestrike on swimmers after the boat was completely under water, I would object to that.
Those gaddam drones cost a buttload of money!
Drop some chum in the water and let nature take its course.
This directly addresses it. Just because you don't acknowledge it doesn't mean it isn't addressed.

So what other drugs are acceptable to smuggle into the US in your sage estimation?No one is disputing f that it was a drug boat jackass.
Also no one has shown any evidence that it was carrying fentanyl (which was the initial justification for this mess).
Now go babble somewhere else
It was a strike against a hostile foreign force speeding toward our shore.This was an extreme action , going against everything the military stands for. It most likely was a sad attempt to cover up a very bad mistake. Wake up already !
That wasn't the sole justification you clown.Also no one has shown any evidence that it was carrying fentanyl (which was the initial justification for this mess).
When you're contesting the definition that is used by the Geneva Convention by going to one that Wikipedia provides the only thing you're doing is that you are not doing a legal analysis but what I call turd polishing. Doesn't matter if you're providing a good argument ANY argument will do.Wow. That was sad.
You didn't ask for a legal definition - you asked for -a- definition.
I supplied one. It proved my point.
Try harder.
The admiral that was in charge? That seems far more likely than Sec of War doing it. Try thinking, or at least in your case, pretend to.So Pete throws the Admiral under the bus?
These troops better watch their asses
Someone gave the order.Everything here is speculation.