U.S. military force used against drug traffickers

[KevinB]

All of this can be disregarded if you’re comfortable with law enforcement acting outside of the law, but I’m not accusing you of that, so I assume ‘doing things right’ remains important.

So I was fine will the rest of your comments. The USCG HITRON units used to interdict boat smugglers, and so there is a change in that - if this was a new USG Policy, it isn't acting outside of the law, but it really is not a new policy.
This has been going on way before Tom Clancy wrote Clear and Present Danger - lets face it, we sent the CAG to kill Pablo and have been running Counter Narcotics FID with 7th SFG and Black Side CIA and JSOC for decades - the only thing new with this is that it was posted on Twitter instead of a gunfight in the jungle.

 

[brihard]

Not you or I, nor @brihard personally I suspect -- but he did bring about a legitimate concern.
Same reason InterPol doesn't share info with some people.
Admittedly I suspect that most of the Smugglers are not getting skylighted by FINTRAC, but by CI's/HUMINT, ELINT/SIGINT, and ISR

Yeah, I doubt much of this will actually be derived from allied collection, but you never know. Could a Canadian wiretap on a suspect here, in co junction with some of our human source work end up identifying points of contact on the other end that get mapped into a network and targeted? Absolutely.

Canada already has “don’t share!” countries and individual agencies based on risks of how info is used. This isn’t a new concept.

So I was fine will the rest of your comments. The USCG HITRON units used to interdict boat smugglers, and so there is a change in that - if this was a new USG Policy, it isn't acting outside of the law, but it really is not a new policy.
This has been going on way before Tom Clancy wrote Clear and Present Danger - lets face it, we sent the CAG to kill Pablo and have been running Counter Narcotics FID with 7th SFG and Black Side CIA and JSOC for decades - the only thing new with this is that it was posted on Twitter instead of a gunfight in the jungle.

I’m talking about Canadian law. I cannot speak to the legalities of U.S. targeting and lethal strikes. Canadian and other foreign law may not permit criminal intelligence to be shared without certain newly-present risks being mitigated. And advertising it for everyone to see makes it much more visible. I get that that’s the point, but it removes a lot of ambiguity or plausible deniability.

Separately, and way outside my arcs, but I wonder if a transition to lethal targeting by the U.S. would impact Op CARIBBE at all?

 

[KevinB]

Yeah, I doubt much of this will actually be derived from allied collection, but you never know. Could a Canadian wiretap on a suspect here, in co junction with some of our human source work end up identifying points of contact on the other end that get mapped into a network and targeted? Absolutely.

Canada already has “don’t share!” countries and individual agencies based on risks of how info is used. This isn’t a new concept.

Agreed

I’m talking about Canadian law. I cannot speak to the legalities of U.S. targeting and lethal strikes. Canadian and other foreign law may not permit criminal intelligence to be shared without certain newly-present risks being mitigated.

Don't worry we read you mail anyway - you won't need to official share it

And advertising it for everyone to see makes it much more visible. I get that that’s the point, but it removes a lot of ambiguity or plausible deniability.

Yeah, POTUS is a showman, he likes to appeal to the masses - and often loses sight of the bigger picture in a lot of things.

Separately, and way outside my arcs, but I wonder if a transition to lethal targeting by the U.S. would impact Op CARIBBE at all?

I guess the question would be dependent upon AOR's - the CAF has worked AO specific ROE within the same theatre before, or entity/situation specific ROE. The question to me is more what does the GoC think of the optics - and that will be the deciding factor.

 

[Halifax Tar]

My post wasn't really aimed at you, I understand what the quotations mean in my quoted portion of yours and my exasperation is more because I actually think you're right and to me its frustrating.

All of this can be disregarded if you’re comfortable with law enforcement acting outside of the law, but I’m not accusing you of that, so I assume ‘doing things right’ remains important.

I think our laws should work to protect those who do good and punish those who do bad. I'm more of a 'do the right thing' than 'do things right' person.

 

[brihard]

My post wasn't really aimed at you, I understand what the quotations mean in my quoted portion of yours and my exasperation is more because I actually think you're right and to me it’s frustrating.

Got it- sorry man. I misread that.

 

[Rifleman62]

Do you think that the USN will interdict, board, search cargo vessels heading to Venezuela for the reported large shipment of drones?

The Russian milblog channel Rybar is suggesting that Russia deliver “Shahed-131/136” One-Way Attack Drones to Venezuela to “deter” any future military action from the United States

 

[OldSolduer]

Do you think that the USN will interdict, board, search cargo vessels heading to Venezuela for the reported large shipment of drones?

It wouldn't be the first time the USN has blockaded a country in that area....

 

[brihard]

Do you think that the USN will interdict, board, search cargo vessels heading to Venezuela for the reported large shipment of drones?

Be a big escalation if they do. How big could depend on the flag of the vessel.

 

[KevinB]

Do you think that the USN will interdict, board, search cargo vessels heading to Venezuela for the reported large shipment of drones?

I think you misspelled Sink…
All depends on what POTUS wants to do about Russia.

Deniable sinking
Overt sinking
VBSS
Ignore

All 4 are potential actions.