A T T E N T I O N - MEMBERS OF DRUG CARRYING VESSEL IDENTIFIED The men killed in the US military strike on Venezuelan drug-carrying vessel recently, were from the small coastal town called San Juan de Unare, Sucre State in Venezuela. Before their trip, two other vessels had made the journey, so these 11 men thought nothing would happen to them either. Amongst the fishermen, was the son of the owner of the boat, who was tracking it with a GPS device. Since 2 decades now, the fishermen saw transporting drugs was more lucrative than fishing....and most families in the town "lived off of this". The cost of this cargo was about $40 million but once on US shores can cost $120 million or more. Names of some of the men on the boat (no surnames given) * Richard (Los Testigos village) *Luis Alberto (Los Testigos village) * Enrique (San Juan de Unare) *Yorje (San Juan de Unare) *Leo (San Juan de Unare) * Euclides (San Juan de Unare) *Alias "El musculo" (San Juan de Unare) *Alias " El Gato" Nobody in the town can say anything currently, as government officials have taken over it, and nobody can talk, give any information etc. All this information was given clandestinely. First, because Venezuelan government was saying the video Donald Trump shared was made with artificial intelligence, and they were making a big fuss and joking about it. Secondly, and most importantly, it seems that they knew about the illicit transportation going on in the town....as well as other coastal towns (villages). Source: Venezuelan Journalist

A video still released by the White House of a boat U.S. officials say was carrying a drug shipment from Venezuela bound for the U.S. The video included an airstrike that appeared to destroy the vessel and kill those on it. U.S. forces patrolling the southern Caribbean fired on a Venezuelan boat that U.S. officials say was linked to drug trafficking. President Donald Trump posted a video to social media of an apparent airstrike on a moving speedboat that he said was carrying a drug shipment. “We, just over the last few minutes, literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat. Lot of drugs in that boat,” Trump told reporters at the White House, before hinting that further strikes may be coming. “And there’s more where that came from.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio referred to the attack as “lethal” in a tweet on the attack, and several people are seen in the 3-engine speedboat-style vessel just prior to the strike, which appears to disable and set the boat on fire. A still from a White House-released video shows the impact of a U.S. military airstrike on a speedboat U.S. officials say was carrying a drug shipment. Neither Trump, Rubio nor the Pentagon offered further evidence of the boat’s alleged smuggling nor provided specifics on the attack, including information on what U.S. assets may have been involved or any post-attack word on casualties, survivors or recovered drugs. Pentagon officials confirmed the attack without offering any details. “As the President announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time,” an emailed release from the Pentagon said. The attack marks a peak in recent U.S. escalations in the southern Caribbean, where a small fleet of U.S. Navy ships has taken up position in the last month off the coast of Venezuela. Both Trump and former President Joe Biden refused to recognize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as the nation’s legitimate ruler. Maduro has been in power in the country since 2013. His regime has long been linked to violence, fraud and narco-trafficking. Trump drastically increased U.S. agitation of Maduro this year when he named him the head of the Tren de Aragua drug cartel. The federal government designated the group as a terrorist organization. Notably, in his post, Trump referred to the crew of the boat as “11 terrorists killed in action.” Top Stories This Week The U.S. has recently surged significant naval assets towards Venezuela. The guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie is en route to the southern Caribbean near Venezuela, a Navy official confirmed to Task & Purpose on Saturday. The USS Lake Erie, a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser, was spotted passing through the Panama Canal by reporters from Agence France-Presse on Friday night, heading to the Caribbean. It is set to join three Aegis-class guided-missile destroyers and the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group already in the waters near Venezuela. Those ships and the Marine Expeditionary Unit onboard the ARG were deployed as part of an anti-drug trafficking operation. P-8 surveillance planes are also operating in the Caribbean. In all, the U.S. has sent ships with thousands of sailors and Marines to waters near Venezuela in recent weeks.   Task & Purpose Video Each week on Tuesdays and Fridays our team will bring you analysis of military tech, tactics, and doctrine.

A video still released by the White House of a boat U.S. officials say was carrying a drug shipment from Venezuela bound for the U.S. The video included an airstrike that appeared to destroy the vessel and kill those on it. U.S. forces patrolling the southern Caribbean fired on a Venezuelan boat that U.S. officials say was linked to drug trafficking. President Donald Trump posted a video to social media of an apparent airstrike on a moving speedboat that he said was carrying a drug shipment. “We, just over the last few minutes, literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat. Lot of drugs in that boat,” Trump told reporters at the White House, before hinting that further strikes may be coming. “And there’s more where that came from.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio referred to the attack as “lethal” in a tweet on the attack, and several people are seen in the 3-engine speedboat-style vessel just prior to the strike, which appears to disable and set the boat on fire. A still from a White House-released video shows the impact of a U.S. military airstrike on a speedboat U.S. officials say was carrying a drug shipment. Neither Trump, Rubio nor the Pentagon offered further evidence of the boat’s alleged smuggling nor provided specifics on the attack, including information on what U.S. assets may have been involved or any post-attack word on casualties, survivors or recovered drugs. Pentagon officials confirmed the attack without offering any details. “As the President announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time,” an emailed release from the Pentagon said. The attack marks a peak in recent U.S. escalations in the southern Caribbean, where a small fleet of U.S. Navy ships has taken up position in the last month off the coast of Venezuela. Both Trump and former President Joe Biden refused to recognize Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as the nation’s legitimate ruler. Maduro has been in power in the country since 2013. His regime has long been linked to violence, fraud and narco-trafficking. Trump drastically increased U.S. agitation of Maduro this year when he named him the head of the Tren de Aragua drug cartel. The federal government designated the group as a terrorist organization. Notably, in his post, Trump referred to the crew of the boat as “11 terrorists killed in action.” Top Stories This Week The U.S. has recently surged significant naval assets towards Venezuela. The guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie is en route to the southern Caribbean near Venezuela, a Navy official confirmed to Task & Purpose on Saturday. The USS Lake Erie, a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser, was spotted passing through the Panama Canal by reporters from Agence France-Presse on Friday night, heading to the Caribbean. It is set to join three Aegis-class guided-missile destroyers and the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group already in the waters near Venezuela. Those ships and the Marine Expeditionary Unit onboard the ARG were deployed as part of an anti-drug trafficking operation. P-8 surveillance planes are also operating in the Caribbean. In all, the U.S. has sent ships with thousands of sailors and Marines to waters near Venezuela in recent weeks.   Task & Purpose Video Each week on Tuesdays and Fridays our team will bring you analysis of military tech, tactics, and doctrine.

A go-fast narcotics transport operating in international waters before being hit by a U.S. military ‘precision strike’ on Sept. 2, 2025. DoD Image This story has been updated to include additional information and video of the strike. THE PENTAGON – U.S. forces performed a “precision strike” on a suspected transnational drug boat that killed the 11 people aboard, the Defense Department and President Donald Trump confirmed on Tuesday. First announced by Trump during a press event at the White House, a senior defense official confirmed the strike in a statement. Trump then published video of the strike on Truth Social, saying the strike targeted the Tren de Aragua transnational criminal organization. “The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in international waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE!” The State Department declared the Venezuela-based Tren de Aragua a foreign terrorist organization in February. “As the president announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time,” reads the senior defense official’s statement. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged the strike on social media website X, posting, “[T]oday the U.S. military conducted a lethal strike in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization.” Spokespeople from the Navy, Coast Guard and U.S. Southern Command were unable to provide additional details on the strike when contacted by USNI News. A strike against a suspected drug vessel is a departure from how the U.S. has handled transnational crime in Southern Command. Typically, military forces support law enforcement agencies like the Coast Guard, which interdict drug vessels and arrest suspects for prosecution via several bilateral legal agreements with South and Central American countries. The strike comes as the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps have massed forces in the Caribbean against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s escalating rhetoric about the Nicolás Maduro regime in Caracas and its alleged support for transnational crime organizations. As of Tuesday, 5,000 sailors and Marines are operating in the Caribbean as part of a White House mission to U.S. Southern Command, USNI News understands. The Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group and the embarked 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit are operating near Puerto Rico in the northern Caribbean Sea, two defense officials confirmed to USNI News. The mission of the ARG/MEU – which is led by flagship USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) – is currently undefined, but comes as the Trump administration ramps up a warship presence in Southern Command amid its ongoing mission at the southern border and counter-drug efforts. USS Fort Lauderdale (LPD-28) and USS San Antonio (LPD-17) are the other two ships that make up the ARG. Over the weekend the 22nd MEU started training in Puerto Rico with the territory’s National Guard, according to a Marine Corps news release. “These operations offer a valuable opportunity to train alongside the National Guard, leveraging existing military training facilities on the island,” the release reads. “The 22nd MEU is actively seeking ways to expand collaborative training opportunities, including jungle training, combined exercises and community engagement events. These combined efforts are aimed at enhancing regional security, disaster response capabilities, and joint capacity building.” Two guided-missile destroyers – USS Jason Dunham (DDG-109) and USS Gravely (DDG-107) – and one cruiser are also operating in the Caribbean, according to the USNI News Fleet and Marine Tracker. USS Lake Erie (CG-70) sailed north through the Panama Canal on Friday. As of Sunday, USS Sampson (DDG-102) was operating at the southern tip of the canal in the Eastern Pacific. Some of the surface combatants have Coast Guard law enforcement detachments onboard, USNI News understands. Last week, Rubio met with SOUTHCOM commander Adm. Alvin Holsey in Florida to talk about the area of responsibility. The Iwo Jima ARG left Norfolk, Va., last month, marking the first time a U.S.-based ARG with embarked Marines has deployed since December in part due to ongoing readiness challenges across the amphibious fleet. The Navy increased its warship presence in U.S. Southern Command in 2020, sending both Littoral Combat Ships and destroyers to sail the waters to conduct counter-narcotics missions, USNI News reported at the time. At the time, the service supported the Coast Guard’s law enforcement mission as part of the Joint Interagency Task Force South and Southern Command’s Campaign Martillo operations against transnational criminal organizations. Related U.S. Stops Houthi Bombing Campaign on Presidential OrdersThe Houthis told the U.S. that they would stop attacks on American warships in the Red Sea, prompting a potential ceasefire, President Donald Trump said during a Tuesday Oval Office meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. “They just don't want to fight, and we will honor that, and we…May 6, 2025In "Aviation"

AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTThe vessel was transporting illegal narcotics through international waters to the United States, the president said.President Trump signed a still-secret directive in July instructing the Pentagon to use military force against some Latin American drug cartels that his administration has labeled “terrorist” organizations.Credit...Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesSept. 2, 2025President Trump said on Tuesday that the United States had carried out a strike against a boat carrying drugs and killed 11 “terrorists,” the administration’s latest military escalation in Mr. Trump’s war against Venezuelan drug cartels that he has blamed for bringing fentanyl into the country.Mr. Trump offered few specifics about the strike during his news conference on Tuesday, but later in the afternoon he posted more details on Truth Social.“Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narco terrorists,” Mr. Trump wrote. He said the strike “occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States.”Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.Helene Cooper is a Pentagon correspondent for The Times. She was previously an editor, diplomatic correspondent and White House correspondent.Eric Schmitt is a national security correspondent for The Times. He has reported on U.S. military affairs and counterterrorism for more than three decades.Edward Wong reports on global affairs, U.S. foreign policy and the State Department for The Times.Alan Feuer covers extremism and political violence for The Times, focusing on the criminal cases involving the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and against former President Donald J. Trump. A version of this article appears in print on Sept. 3, 2025, Section A, Page 7 of the New York edition with the headline: 11 ‘Terrorists’ On Drug Boat Killed in Strike By U.S. Forces. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | SubscribeRelated ContentAdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT

SummaryTrump shares video showing speedboat explodingUS officials say boat was carrying illegal narcoticsStrike comes amid increased deployment of warships to CaribbeanWASHINGTON, Sept 2 (Reuters) - The U.S. military killed 11 people on Tuesday in a strike on a vessel from Venezuela allegedly carrying illegal narcotics, President Donald Trump said, in the first known operation since his administration's recent deployment of warships to the southern Caribbean."We just, over the last few minutes, literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat, a lot of drugs in that boat," Trump told reporters at the White House.The Reuters Tariff Watch newsletter is your daily guide to the latest global trade and tariff news. Sign up here."And there's more where that came from. We have a lot of drugs pouring into our country, coming in for a long time ... These came out of Venezuela."He later shared a video on his Truth Social platform that appeared to show footage from overhead drones of a speedboat at sea exploding and then on fire."The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike," Trump said.He added that the U.S. military had identified the crew as members of Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, which the U.S. designated a terrorist group in February. He repeated allegations that Tren de Aragua is being controlled by Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro, accusations that Caracas denies.Venezuela's Communications Minister, Freddy Nanez, suggested in a post on social media that the video shared by Trump was created with artificial intelligence.Reuters conducted initial checks on the video, including a review of its visual elements using a manipulation detection tool which did not show evidence of manipulation. However, thorough verification is an ongoing process, and Reuters will continue to review the footage as more information becomes available.The Pentagon has not released specifics about the attack, including what kind of drugs were on board, the quantity, or how the strike was carried out.The decision to blow up a suspected drug vessel passing through the Caribbean, instead of seizing the vessel and apprehending its crew, is highly unusual and evokes memories of the U.S. fight against militant groups like al Qaeda."'Being suspected of carrying drugs' doesn't carry a death sentence," said Adam Isacson, Director for Defense Oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America, in a post on X.U.S. President Donald Trump replies to a question during an event to announce that the Space Force Command will move from Colorado to Alabama, in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 2, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tabThe United States has deployed warships in the southern Caribbean in recent weeks with the aim of following through on a pledge by Trump to crack down on drug cartels.Tuesday's strike appeared to be the first such military operation in the region to that effect.Seven U.S. warships, along with one nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, are either in the region or expected to be there soon, carrying more than 4,500 sailors and Marines.While U.S. Coast Guard and Navy ships regularly operate in the Southern Caribbean, the current buildup exceeds the usual deployments in the region.In the naval force are warships, including USS San Antonio, USS Iwo Jima, and USS Fort Lauderdale. Some can carry aerial assets like helicopters while others can also deploy Tomahawk cruise missiles.The U.S. military has also been flying P-8 spy planes in the region to gather intelligence, U.S. officials have said. They have been flying over international waters.Speaking to reporters, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said: "These particular drugs were probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean.""Suffice it to say that the president is going to be on offense against drug cartels and drug trafficking in the United States."Trump's singling out of Maduro has raised alarms in Caracas that their government might be the real target.Last month, the United States doubled its reward for information leading to the arrest of Maduro to $50 million, accusing him of links to drug trafficking and criminal groups.Venezuelan officials have repeatedly said that Tren de Aragua is no longer active in their country after they dismantled it during a prison raid in 2023.Reporting by Steve Holland, Phil Stewart, Idrees Ali and Daphne Psaledakis in Washington; additional reporting by Vivian Sequera and Deisy Buitrago in Caracas and Kylie Madry in Mexico City; Writing by Phil Stewart; Editing by Howard Goller, Rosalba O'Brien and Stephen CoatesOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tabPhil Stewart has reported from more than 60 countries, including Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China and South Sudan. An award-winning Washington-based national security reporter, Phil has appeared on NPR, PBS NewsHour, Fox News and other programs and moderated national security events, including at the Reagan National Defense Forum and the German Marshall Fund. He is a recipient of the Edwin M. Hood Award for Diplomatic Correspondence and the Joe Galloway Award.National security correspondent focusing on the Pentagon in Washington D.C. Reports on U.S. military activity and operations throughout the world and the impact that they have. Has reported from over two dozen countries to include Iraq, Afghanistan, and much of the Middle East, Asia and Europe. From Karachi, Pakistan.

Bernd Debusmann JrBBC News, White HouseDonald Trump/Truth SocialDonald Trump posted a video on social media showing a motor boat speeding across choppy waters before it bursts into flames.President Donald Trump says the US has carried out a strike against a drug-carrying vessel in the southern Caribbean, killing 11 "narcoterrorists". He posted on social media that Tuesday's US military operation had targeted members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.Trump said the vessel was in international waters and was transporting illegal narcotics bound for the US. The Trump administration has ratcheted up military and political pressure against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in recent weeks, including through a $50m (£37m) reward for information leading to his arrest on drug-trafficking charges. Maduro has vowed Venezuela would fight any attempted US military intervention. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump said that US forces had "shot out" a "drug-carrying boat" in the vicinity of Venezuela. "A lot of drugs in that boat," he said. Trump added he had been briefed on the incident by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine. Later the president posted on his Truth Social platform: "Earlier this morning, on my Orders, US Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility." He added: "The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No US Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE!"His post was accompanied by a grainy aerial video showing a motor boat speeding across choppy waters before it bursts into flames.In a social media post, Venezuela's communications minister, Freddy Ñáñez, suggested, without evidence, that the video shared by Trump was created with artificial intelligence. The Reuters news agency wrote that its initial checks on the video had not revealed any signs of manipulation, but that its verification process was ongoing.Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a post on X that "today the US military conducted a lethal strike in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a designated narco-terrorist organisation". It is so far unclear what drugs the vessel was believed to have been carrying. What is Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang targeted by Trump?The 1798 law that Trump used to deport migrantsSince returning to the White House in January, Trump has designated several drug-trafficking organisations and criminal groups in Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America as terrorist organisations.He has used allegations of criminality as a justification for deporting Venezuelans. He did, however, suffer a blow late on Tuesday when a US appeals court ruled that he could not invoke an 18th-Century wartime law to speed up these removals.As well as Tren de Aragua, Trump has taken aim at the Cartel of the Suns - a group that the US alleges is headed by Maduro and other high-ranking Venezuelan officials, some drawn from the country's military or intelligence services. The US military has moved to bolster its forces in the southern Caribbean over the last two months, including through the deployment of additional naval vessels and thousands of US Marines and sailors. The Trump administration has repeatedly signalled a willingness to use force to stem the flow of drugs into the US. "There's more where that came from," Trump said of the strike on the vessel. Venezuela's government has reacted angrily to the deployments. On Monday, for example, Maduro vowed to "declare a republic in arms" if the US attacked, adding that the US deployments were "the greatest threat that has been seen on our continent in the last 100 years". In at least one other respect, Trump has taken a softer stance towards Venezuela - by reportedly allowing US company Chevron to work within the country in partnership with the country's state-run PDVSA oil firm.

The USS Sampson, a U.S. Navy missile destroyer, docks in Panama City, Panama, on Sept. 2. The deployment comes amid a broader U.S. Naval presence in Caribbean waters following President Donald Trump's order last month to take action against Latin American drug cartels. Daniel Gonzalez/Anadolu/via Getty hide caption toggle caption Daniel Gonzalez/Anadolu/via Getty Tensions between the U.S. and Venezuela are rising. Days after sending U.S. gunboats to South American waters, President Trump said Tuesday that the U.S. Navy struck a vessel in the southern Caribbean carrying what he described as a Venezuelan drug shipment. Trump told reporters during an Oval Office event that the operation happened "over the last few minutes, (we) literally shot out a a boat, a drug carrying boat, a lot of drugs in that boat." Moments later Secretary of State Marco Rubio tweeted confirmation, calling it a "lethal strike" on a vessel operated by a "designated narco-terrorist organization." In a later Truth Social post about the operation, Trump said 11 people were killed, calling them "terrorists," claiming they were members of Venezuela's Tren de Aragua gang. He included a video in the post labeled "unclassified" showing a strike on a small speedboat with four outboard motors. The strike on the vessel comes amid the Trump administration's increasingly confrontational posture toward the Veneuelan regime.  Washington accuses Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro of leading a drug cartel and has put a $50 million bounty on his head. Then just over a week ago, the U.S. deployed warships—including the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group—to waters off Venezuela's coast in a significant show of force. Maduro claims the U.S. military buildup is a sign that Washington is trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government. In response Maduro has declared "maximum preparedness" in the country, saying that 4.5 million militia members are ready to ensure that "no empire will touch the sacred soil of Venezuela." State TV network Telesur has been running extensive coverage featuring Venezuelans—including fishermen and ordinary citizens—called up for military service. Maduro was sworn in for a third six-year term as Venezuela's president in January 2025, following an election widely criticized as fraudulent. Maduro has used Washington's latest show of force to rally both domestic and international attention. The Venezuela government had not responded to the U.S. strike or President Trump's claims prior to publication. During Trump's first term, U.S. warships were also sent to the region, with little impact. Former U.S. Ambassador to Venezuela James Story, who previously worked on anti-narcotics issues at the State Department, told NPR the current administration's policy toward Venezuela was incoherent. In July, for example, the U.S. reissued a license allowing U.S. oil company Chevron to operate there.

Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!!!!!!!!!

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Tuesday the U.S. has carried out a strike in the southern Caribbean against a drug-carrying vessel that departed from Venezuela and was operated by the Tren de Aragua gang.The president said in a social media posting that 11 people were killed in the rare U.S. military operation in the Americas, a dramatic escalation in the Republican administration’s effort to stem the flow of narcotics from Latin America. Trump also posted a short video clip of a small vessel appearing to explode in flames.“The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States,” Trump said on Truth Social. “No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America.”The video appears to show a long, multi-engine speedboat traveling at sea when a bright flash of light bursts over the craft. The boat is then briefly seen covered in flames.The video, which is largely in black and white, is not clear enough to see if the craft is carrying as many as 11 people. The video also did not show any large or clear stashes of drugs inside the boat.Tren de Aragua originated more than a decade ago at an infamously lawless prison with hardened criminals in Venezuela’s central state of Aragua. The gang has expanded in recent years as more than 7.7 million Venezuelans fled economic turmoil and migrated to other Latin American countries or the U.S.Trump and administration officials have repeatedly blamed the gang for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some cities. And the president on Tuesday repeated his claim — contradicted by a declassified U.S. intelligence assessment — that Tren de Aragua is operating under Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s control.The White House did not immediately explain how the military determined that those aboard the vessel were Tren de Aragua members. The size of the gang is unclear, as is the extent to which its actions are coordinated across state lines and national borders.What Maduro had to sayAfter Trump announced the strike, Venezuelan state television showed Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores walking the streets of his childhood neighborhood. A television presenter said Maduro was “bathing in patriotic love” as he interacted with supporters.“In the face of imperialist threats, God (is) with us,” Maduro told supporters.Maduro did not address the strike directly but charged that the U.S. is “coming for Venezuela’s riches,” including oil and gas. The South American country has the world’s largest proven oil reserves.“From the neighborhoods of Caracas ... I tell you, there will be peace in Venezuela, with sovereignty,” he said.Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez questioned the veracity of the video. “Based on the video provided, it is very likely that it was created using Artificial Intelligence,” he said on his Telegram account. He couldn’t say what tools would have been used to create the video, but said it showed an “almost cartoonish animation, rather than a realistic depiction of an explosion.”Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio first announced the strike earlier Tuesday, shortly before Rubio left on a trip to Mexico and Ecuador for talks on drug cartels, security, tariffs and more.In a brief exchange with reporters before departing Miami for Mexico City, Rubio deferred questions about the specifics of the strike to the Pentagon. He said the drugs on the vessel were likely headed to Trinidad or elsewhere in the Caribbean.For years, Rubio has spoken out against Maduro and other Latin American leftist governments and supported opposition leaders. In 2018, during Trump’s first term, Rubio told Univision there was a “strong argument” to be made for the use of the U.S. military in Venezuela. He’s also accused Venezuelan officials of aiding drug traffickers.Asked if Trump would carry out operations on Venezuelan soil, Rubio was opaque. “We’re going to take on drug cartels wherever they are and wherever they’re operating against the interests of the United States,” he said.U.S. sent destroyers to waters off VenezuelaThe operation came after the U.S. announced plans last month to boost its maritime force in the waters off Venezuela to combat threats from Latin American drug cartels.Maduro’s government has responded by deploying troops along Venezuela’s coast and border with neighboring Colombia, as well as by urging Venezuelans to enlist in a civilian militia.Maduro has insisted that the U.S. is building a false drug-trafficking narrative to try to force him out of office. He and other government officials have repeatedly cited a United Nations report that they say shows traffickers attempt to move only 5% of the cocaine produced in Colombia through Venezuela. Landlocked Bolivia and Colombia, with access to the Pacific and Caribbean, are the world’s top cocaine producers.The latest U.N. World Drug Report shows that various countries in South America, including Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, reported larger cocaine seizures in 2022 than in 2021, but it does not assign Venezuela the outsize role that the White House has in recent months.“The impact of increased cocaine trafficking has been felt in Ecuador in particular, which has seen a wave of lethal violence in recent years linked to both local and transnational crime groups, most notably from Mexico and the Balkan countries,” according to the report.Maduro on Monday told reporters he “would constitutionally declare a republic in arms” if his country were attacked by U.S. forces deployed to the Caribbean.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Tuesday the U.S. has carried out a strike in the southern Caribbean against a drug-carrying vessel that departed from Venezuela and was operated by the Tren de Aragua gang.The president said in a social media posting that 11 people were killed in the rare U.S. military operation in the Americas, a dramatic escalation in the Republican administration’s effort to stem the flow of narcotics from Latin America. Trump also posted a short video clip of a small vessel appearing to explode in flames. “The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States,” Trump said on Truth Social. “No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America.” President Donald Trump speaks during an event about the relocation of U.S. Space Command headquarters from Colorado to Alabama in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Sept. 2, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) The video appears to show a long, multi-engine speedboat traveling at sea when a bright flash of light bursts over the craft. The boat is then briefly seen covered in flames. The video, which is largely in black and white, is not clear enough to see if the craft is carrying as many as 11 people. The video also did not show any large or clear stashes of drugs inside the boat. Tren de Aragua originated more than a decade ago at an infamously lawless prison with hardened criminals in Venezuela’s central state of Aragua. The gang has expanded in recent years as more than 7.7 million Venezuelans fled economic turmoil and migrated to other Latin American countries or the U.S. Trump and administration officials have repeatedly blamed the gang for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some cities. And the president on Tuesday repeated his claim — contradicted by a declassified U.S. intelligence assessment — that Tren de Aragua is operating under Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s control.The White House did not immediately explain how the military determined that those aboard the vessel were Tren de Aragua members. The size of the gang is unclear, as is the extent to which its actions are coordinated across state lines and national borders. What Maduro had to sayAfter Trump announced the strike, Venezuelan state television showed Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores walking the streets of his childhood neighborhood. A television presenter said Maduro was “bathing in patriotic love” as he interacted with supporters.“In the face of imperialist threats, God (is) with us,” Maduro told supporters.Maduro did not address the strike directly, but charged that the U.S. is “coming for Venezuela’s riches,” including oil and gas. The South American country has the world’s largest proven oil reserves.“From the neighborhoods of Caracas ... I tell you, there will be peace in Venezuela, with sovereignty,” he said.Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez questioned the veracity of the video. “Based on the video provided, it is very likely that it was created using Artificial Intelligence,” he said on his Telegram account. He couldn’t say what tools would have been used to create the video, but said it showed an “almost cartoonish animation, rather than a realistic depiction of an explosion.” Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio first announced the strike earlier Tuesday, shortly before Rubio left on a trip to Mexico and Ecuador for talks on drug cartels, security, tariffs and more.In a brief exchange with reporters before departing Miami for Mexico City, Rubio deferred questions about the specifics of the strike to the Pentagon. He said the drugs on the vessel were likely headed to Trinidad or elsewhere in the Caribbean.For years, Rubio has spoken out against Maduro and other Latin American leftist governments and supported opposition leaders. In 2018, during Trump’s first term, Rubio told Univision there was a “strong argument” to be made for the use of the U.S. military in Venezuela. He’s also accused Venezuelan officials of aiding drug traffickers.Asked if Trump would carry out operations on Venezuelan soil, Rubio was opaque. “We’re going to take on drug cartels wherever they are and wherever they’re operating against the interests of the United States,” he said. US sent destroyers to waters off VenezuelaThe operation came after the U.S. announced plans last month to boost its maritime force in the waters off Venezuela to combat threats from Latin American drug cartels.Maduro’s government has responded by deploying troops along Venezuela’s coast and border with neighboring Colombia, as well as by urging Venezuelans to enlist in a civilian militia. Maduro has insisted that the U.S. is building a false drug-trafficking narrative to try to force him out of office. He and other government officials have repeatedly cited a United Nations report that they say shows traffickers attempt to move only 5% of the cocaine produced in Colombia through Venezuela. Landlocked Bolivia and Colombia, with access to the Pacific and Caribbean, are the world’s top cocaine producers. Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro speaks during a press conference in Caracas, Venezuela, Monday, Sept. 1, 2025. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos) The latest U.N. World Drug Report shows that various countries in South America, including Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, reported larger cocaine seizures in 2022 than in 2021, but it does not assign Venezuela the outsize role that the White House has in recent months.“The impact of increased cocaine trafficking has been felt in Ecuador in particular, which has seen a wave of lethal violence in recent years linked to both local and transnational crime groups, most notably from Mexico and the Balkan countries,” according to the report.Maduro on Monday told reporters he “would constitutionally declare a republic in arms” if his country were attacked by U.S. forces deployed to the Caribbean.___Garcia Cano reported from Mexico City. AP journalists Matthew Lee in Mexico City, Jorge Rueda in Caracas, Venezuela, Adriana Gomez Licon in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, and Sagar Meghani in Washington contributed reporting.

The Pentagon, in a statement, confirmed the military conducted a “precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization,” but did not provide further information. The U.S. has ramped up its military presence in the southern Caribbean in recent months as the administration threatens to use American military power to combat cartels. Several U.S. ships are patrolling the waters off the coast of Venezuela, including the guided missile cruiser USS Lake Erie, which crossed the Panama Canal last weekend. Trump has fixated on Tren de Aragua since early in his second term. He has used the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime measure, to target members of the gang for deportation.Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed the strike on X and later told reporters that the Trump administration would “wage combat” against drug cartels threatening the U.S. U.S. officials have long accused Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro of ties with gangs in the country, going as far as to indict Maduro on narcotics trafficking charges in 2020. The administration in 2025 increased a criminal bounty on the leader of up to $50 million. Officials have alleged that Maduro and other top lieutenants are linked to notorious gangs Tren de Aragua and the Cartel de los Soles.And Washington has increasingly accused other top Venezuelan military and intelligence officials of being involved with, or leading, transnational criminal groups based in the country.Venezuela has rejected the allegations as smears intended to justify a potential U.S. military intervention in the South American country and the overthrow of its leftist government. The country and its allies have also mobilized civilian brigades ahead of a potential invasion.

The U.S. military strike on an alleged Venezuelan drug vessel raises serious concerns. Even if you accept the Trump Admin’s framing, this action is legally questionable under both U.S. and international law.

Trump screencap The TWZ Newsletter Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy. The U.S. military has conducted a “lethal strike” in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that departed from Venezuela and was operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on X. His comments came moments after U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters that “over the last few minutes [the military] literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat, a lot of drugs in that boat.” The incident took place as Trump has dispatched at least eight warships to the region to fight drug trafficking. No details were immediately available about how the strike was carried out, or against what type of vessel or which organization was targeted. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday said deadly attacks against drug smugglers traversing the Caribbean and considered narco-terrorists will continue. You can read more about that in our latest story here. This appears to be the first lethal attack on a cartel drug vessel since Trump deployed warships to the area, signaling a change to kinetic interdiction operations. However, even U.S. Southern Command, which oversees military operations in the region, did not have details. This is a developing story. Stay with The War Zone for updates. Update: 5:08 PM Eastern – A senior U.S. official released a statement about this incident. “As the President announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time.“ Update 5:24 PM Eastern – Rubio said the targeted vessel was on a common route and that these operations will continue, CNN reported on X. Update: 5:35 PM Eastern – Trump just released via Truth Social a statement and a declassified video of the boat strike. “Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!!!!!!!!!” The video shows a small boat with several people on it speeding through the water before being struck. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Trump screencap The TWZ Newsletter Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy. The U.S. military has conducted a “lethal strike” in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that departed from Venezuela and was operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on X. His comments came moments after U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters that “over the last few minutes [the military] literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat, a lot of drugs in that boat.” The incident took place as Trump has dispatched at least eight warships to the region to fight drug trafficking. As @potus just announced moments ago, today the U.S. military conducted a lethal strike in the southern Carribean against a drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization.— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) September 2, 2025 No details were immediately available about how the strike was carried out, or against what type of vessel or which organization was targeted. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday said deadly attacks against drug smugglers traversing the Caribbean and considered narco-terrorists will continue. You can read more about that in our latest story here. This appears to be the first lethal attack on a cartel drug vessel since Trump deployed warships to the area, signaling a change to kinetic interdiction operations. However, even U.S. Southern Command, which oversees military operations in the region, did not have details. This is a developing story. Stay with The War Zone for updates. Update: 5:08 PM Eastern – A senior U.S. official released a statement about this incident. “As the President announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time.“ Update 5:24 PM Eastern – Rubio said the targeted vessel was on a common route and that these operations will continue, CNN reported on X. Sec Rubio says the ship targeted was on a common route & indicates these operations will continue. He defers to the pentagon on what kinds of drugs were on board, the cartel targeted, and to the WH counsel office re legal authority for the strike. He’s now en route to Mexico. https://t.co/DdWdxk1QTR— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 2, 2025 Update: 5:35 PM Eastern – Trump just released via Truth Social a statement and a declassified video of the boat strike. “Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!!!!!!!!!” The video shows a small boat with several people on it speeding through the water before being struck. President Trump has shared video of a deadly U.S. military strike on a drug smuggling vessel from Venezuela, which killed 11 people. On Truth Social, Trump stated: "Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified… pic.twitter.com/dHoVn1bjoE— gCaptain (@gCaptain) September 2, 2025 Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

Trump screencap The TWZ Newsletter Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy. The U.S. military has conducted a “lethal strike” in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that departed from Venezuela and was operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on X. His comments came moments after U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters that “over the last few minutes [the military] literally shot out a boat, a drug-carrying boat, a lot of drugs in that boat.” The incident took place as Trump has dispatched at least eight warships to the region to fight drug trafficking. As @potus just announced moments ago, today the U.S. military conducted a lethal strike in the southern Carribean against a drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization.— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) September 2, 2025 No details were immediately available about how the strike was carried out, or against what type of vessel or which organization was targeted. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday said deadly attacks against drug smugglers traversing the Caribbean and considered narco-terrorists will continue. You can read more about that in our latest story here. This appears to be the first lethal attack on a cartel drug vessel since Trump deployed warships to the area, signaling a change to kinetic interdiction operations. However, even U.S. Southern Command, which oversees military operations in the region, did not have details. This is a developing story. Stay with The War Zone for updates. Update: 5:08 PM Eastern – A senior U.S. official released a statement about this incident. “As the President announced today, we can confirm the U.S. military conducted a precision strike against a drug vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization. More information will be made available at a later time.“ Update 5:24 PM Eastern – Rubio said the targeted vessel was on a common route and that these operations will continue, CNN reported on X. Sec Rubio says the ship targeted was on a common route & indicates these operations will continue. He defers to the pentagon on what kinds of drugs were on board, the cartel targeted, and to the WH counsel office re legal authority for the strike. He’s now en route to Mexico. https://t.co/DdWdxk1QTR— Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) September 2, 2025 Update: 5:35 PM Eastern – Trump just released via Truth Social a statement and a declassified video of the boat strike. “Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE! Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!!!!!!!!!” The video shows a small boat with several people on it speeding through the water before being struck. President Trump has shared video of a deadly U.S. military strike on a drug smuggling vessel from Venezuela, which killed 11 people. On Truth Social, Trump stated: "Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified… pic.twitter.com/dHoVn1bjoE— gCaptain (@gCaptain) September 2, 2025 Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

BREAKING: SECDEF Orders the guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie and the Iwo Jima ARG/22nd MEU to Southcom to fight narcoterrorists, per DOD spox. This is in addition to the three destroyers already operating in the region.

On Sept. 2nd, the Trump administration announced what it described as a “lethal strike” against an alleged drug smuggling vessel in the Caribbean. In a post on social media accompanied with a video of the strike, President Donald Trump stated that the attack was “against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists.” Trump also noted that Tren de Aragua had previously been designated as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). The social media post also asserted that the strike had occurred in international waters and killed “11 terrorists.” Although the facts are still emerging, the Trump administration’s extraordinary lethal attack on this purported smuggling vessel – and its vow that the strike was a start of a campaign – raise a number of significant potential legal issues. And even apart from these legal concerns, the strike constitutes a deeply troubling gratuitous use of the military that resulted in the unnecessary killing of 11 individuals. Background President Trump had reportedly flirted with the idea of using military force against drug trafficking organizations during his first term. Early in his second term, his administration began to cast drug trafficking organizations as terrorists and hinted at possibly using targeted killing tools developed over the last few decades in the counter-terrorism context. In February, the State Department for the first time designated eight drug trafficking organizations, including Tren de Aragua, as FTO). To be clear, this step does not by itself provide authority for the use of force. In the past, however, it has paved the way to military action, including the strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Certainly, the rhetoric from key figures close to Trump suggests that the administration views FTO designation as a stepping stone to using force. Soon after the designations were publicly revealed, Elon Musk commented on social media that listing “means they’re eligible for drone strikes.” The Trump administration’s “border czar” Tom Homan said in November that the president was “committed to calling [the cartels] terrorist organizations and using the full might of the United States special operations to take them out.” Secretary of Defense Hegseth stressed on Fox News that “all options will be on the table if we’re dealing with what are designated to be foreign terrorist organizations who are specifically targeting Americans on our border.” The Trump administration would cite the FTO designation of Tren de Aragua and lean further into the use of military tools against the group when in March it invoked the wartime authority of the Alien Enemies Act—and then relied on that authority to rendition hundreds of Venezuelans to El Salvador. The September military strike occurs in the context of a broader military deployment to the Caribbean—a deployment reportedly pushed by Secretary of State Rubio to put pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. The deployment includes three destroyers and an amphibious assault group with 4,500 sailors, including 2,500 marines, on board. U.S. forces in the region were further bolstered by a guided missile cruiser and at least one submarine, the nuclear-powered USS Newport News. Domestic Legal Authority for the Use of Force A U.S. president may direct the use of military force pursuant to either (1) a congressional authorization for the use of force/declaration of war or (2) inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution, typically as commander in chief of the U.S. military. The scope of the president’s authority to direct the use of force under Article II in the absence of congressional authorization is contested. Although there is broad agreement that the president may use force to repel “sudden attack,” the U.S. executive branch has taken a much more expansive view of the president’s unilateral war powers. Here the Trump administration will almost certainly rely solely on Article II of the Constitution as the source of authority for the attack on this vessel. Despite labelling the targets “narcoterrorists,” there is no plausible argument under which the principle legal authority for the U.S. so-called “war on terror”—the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force—authorizes military action against the Venezuelan criminal entity Tren de Aragua. Under the executive branch’s two-prong test for when a president may use force without congressional authorization, the contemplated operation must advance an important “national interest” and must not amount to “war in the constitutional sense,” which the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has recognized as an outer limit on the president’s unilateral warmaking authority. That said, OLC precedent marks out remarkably wide latitude, with the first prong in particular having been critiqued as being unconstraining, and it is not clear whether it would have limited the president in this instance even assuming OLC advice was sought before the strike took place. Further, though Trump and others in his administration have emphasized the prior designation of Tren de Aragua as an FTO, such designation does not by itself convey authority to use force. Nonetheless, such FTO designations are widely and mistakenly perceived as authorizing such action within the executive branch. Thus, designation of Tren de Aragua and a number of other Latin American criminal entities as FTOs in February foreshadowed this week’s attack in the Caribbean, despite providing no actual legal authority for it. War Powers Resolution When the U.S. president directs certain military actions in the absence of prior congressional authorization, those actions must be reported to Congress under the 1973 War Powers Resolution. Further, when U.S. armed forces are introduced “into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances,” the president must not only report the action to Congress within 48-hours but terminate such military action within 60-days unless Congress votes to authorize it. The War Powers Resolution does not define what it means for U.S. armed forces to be introduced into hostilities. Nonetheless, the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on the Resolution explains: The word hostilities was substituted for the phrase armed conflict during the subcommittee drafting process because it was considered to be somewhat broader in scope. In addition to a situation in which fighting actually has begun, hostilities also encompasses a state of confrontation in which no shots have been fired but where there is a clear and present danger of armed conflict. “Imminent hostilities” denotes a situation in which there is a clear potential either for such a state of confrontation or for actual armed conflict. Unsurprisingly, the executive branch has espoused different, narrower interpretations of these terms that are less likely to constrain the president’s ability to use military force without congressional authorization. In the most oft-repeated formulation, the State Department’s Legal Adviser informed Congress in a 1975 letter that its working definition of “hostilities” meant “a situation in which units of the U.S. armed forces are actively engaged in exchanges of fire with opposing units of hostile forces.” “Imminent hostilities” means “a situation in which there is a serious risk from hostile fire to the safety of United States forces.” The executive branch has at times taken the position that supposedly defensive action by U.S. armed forces is exempt from the reporting and withdrawal requirements of the War Powers Resolution because U.S. armed forces were not “introduced” into hostilities, but instead hostilities were introduced to U.S. armed forces. The Biden administration adopted this legal theory to wage a yearslong military campaign against the Houthis without congressional authorization despite the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution. The White House has in the past sometimes treated U.S. attacks on foreign vessels as introductions into hostilities triggering the War Powers Resolution. This was the case for the 1986 Gulf of Sidra incident involving air and naval fighting with Libya and a 1988 episode during the Tanker War when U.S. helicopters in the Persian Gulf responded to the distress call of a tanker under attack by (presumably Iranian) small boats, were fired on by the boats and returned fire in self-defense. In my view, the U.S. attack on this supposed smuggling vessel constituted the introduction of U.S. armed forces into hostilities, triggering both the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolution as well as its 60-day clock for withdrawing U.S. forces. The attack not only resembles previously reported incidents during the Reagan administration, but U.S. armed forces were deliberately introduced into the situation with the U.S. president himself reportedly giving the order to “blow up” the supposed smuggling vessel. UN Charter Any use of force by the United States must also comply with the UN Charter—both as a matter of international and domestic law. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter provides that: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” The UN Charter safeguards states from the use of force. It is not currently clear what states (if any) were impacted by the U.S. attack on this vessel and thus whether Article 2(4) of the Charter is implicated by this strike. According to the Trump administration, the strike occurred in international waters. There is no indication that the vessel was flagged under any country (which would make an attack on the vessel an attack on the flag state in the view of the United States) Although some countries (such as the United States) have in the past treated attacks on their nationals abroad as attacks on the state itself, as of publication no country has claimed the 11 people reportedly killed in this attack and the Venezuelan government claimed the video of the incident was generated by artificial intelligence. Use of Lethal Force Working in collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Navy has for many years conducted maritime interdictions of suspected drug smugglers under a law enforcement paradigm—including during the current Trump administration. In such operations, U.S. Coast Guard law enforcement personnel board the suspect vessel and take the crew into custody. The attack on the smuggling vessel in the Caribbean was so extraordinary because there was no reported attempt to stop the boat or detain its crew. Instead, the use of lethal force was used in the first resort. According to Secretary of State Rubio, President Trump was given the option of conducting a maritime interdiction but instead elected to blow up the vessel to send a message. Such use of lethal force raises a number of distinct legal issues. Assassination Ban Executive Order 12333 prohibits assassinations, providing that “No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.” Under executive branch legal doctrine, “assassination” is understood to include the targeted killing of individuals. (The Uniform Code of Military Justice also of course criminalizes murder.) Public reporting on the past interpretation of the assassination ban indicates that the U.S. executive branch has recognized two potentially relevant exceptions to the prohibition in recent decades: (1) actions taken in self-defense; and (2) use of lethal force consistent with the law of war. With respect to self-defense, the Trump administration has indicated that it is countering the flow of drugs to the United States. But drug trafficking by itself does not constitute an “armed attack,” nor a threat of an imminent armed attack, for the purposes in international law. Nor does drug trafficking represent the predicate for self-defense commonly recognized as required for the invocation of self-defense under criminal law in the United States. The Law of War Although not explicit, the administration’s framing of its attack on the alleged Tren de Aragua smuggling vessel suggests that it is targeting the group as if it were a terrorist organization with which the United States is engaged in an armed conflict. Such a law of war framework in turn raises a number of subsidiary questions. Even assuming that Tren de Aragua constitutes an organized armed group (which there is reason to doubt) with which the United States is involved in a non-international armed conflict, it is far from clear that the attack on the vessel and the killing of those aboard was lawful under the law of war. The administration has not sought to explain how either the boat or its passengers were lawful military objectives. In armed conflict, combatants/fighters (not hors de combat) may be targeted on a status basis. Further, civilians directly participating in hostilities may also be made the object of attack. Smuggling drugs by itself does not render a civilian a combatant/fighter subject to status-based targeting. Nor does it constitute direct participation in hostilities. Nor has the administration argued that the cargo of the vessels was somehow a lawful military objective and the passengers somehow lawful collateral damage consistent with the principle of proportionality. Assuming arguendo that the United States is operating under the law of war in targeting this supposed Tren de Aragua vessel, attacks directed against civilians or civilian objects violate the law of war. Moreover, certain violations of the law of war constitute war crimes under both international and U.S. domestic law. Specifically, the U.S. War Crimes Act criminalizes murder, defined as the “act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause.” Many other states not only criminalize this offense but have universal jurisdiction over the crime, regardless of who perpetrates it. We still lack details about the individuals aboard the targeted vessel as well as the legal rationale for the attack. But if U.S. forces are targeting individuals who are civilians—not qualifying as combatants/fighters or directly participating in hostilities—this raises the specter of accountability under the War Crimes Act. The Right to Life in Human Rights Law Such attacks may also violate the right to life under international human rights law. And while the U.S. government has not consistently acknowledged the extraterritorial application of the relevant legal obligation as a matter of treaty law (see this 2014 Just Security symposium for long-running debate on that issue), DoD’s 2024 Operational Law Handbook (pages 98-99) adopts the view that murder is prohibited by a peremptory rule of customary international law applicable even extraterritorially. An Extraordinary and Unsettling Action The Trump administration’s military attack on this alleged smuggling vessel is not only extraordinary and unsettling in its own right, but also because of the context in which it occurs and for what it may portend for future action. The use of lethal force in this attack appears gratuitous and the administration has not explained why law enforcement tools were inadequate to address the situation. Of a piece with the deployment of troops to U.S. cities, the strike is an unnecessary and performative use of the U.S. military—a use that is legally fraught at best. (Indeed, Trump threatened Chicago with a troop deployment in the same Oval Office appearance in which he announced the strike.) And the use of lethal force against these supposed terrorists is ominous both because the Trump administration has vowed further such strikes in Latin America and because this administration has deployed the “terrorist” label more broadly domestically, including against migrants and political opponents. Congress—which has largely been missing in action this year—needs to reassert its own prerogatives over war powers and the use of these military tools as the White House seeks to further abuse these instruments both abroad and at home. FEATURED IMAGE: The US Navy warship USS Sampson (DDG 102) docks at the Amador International Cruise Terminal in Panama City on September 02, 2025. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said on September 1, 2025, that eight US military vessels with 1,200 missiles were targeting his country, which he declared to be in a state of "maximum readiness to defend" itself.(Photo by MARTIN BERNETTI/AFP via Getty Images)

On Sept. 2nd, the Trump administration announced what it described as a “lethal strike” against an alleged drug smuggling vessel in the Caribbean. In a post on social media accompanied with a video of the strike, President Donald Trump stated that the attack was “against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists.” Trump also noted that Tren de Aragua had previously been designated as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO). The social media post also asserted that the strike had occurred in international waters and killed “11 terrorists.” Although the facts are still emerging, the Trump administration’s extraordinary lethal attack on this purported smuggling vessel – and its vow that the strike was a start of a campaign – raise a number of significant potential legal issues. And even apart from these legal concerns, the strike constitutes a deeply troubling gratuitous use of the military that resulted in the unnecessary killing of 11 individuals.  Background President Trump had reportedly flirted with the idea of using military force against drug trafficking organizations during his first term. Early in his second term, his administration began to cast drug trafficking organizations as terrorists and hinted at possibly using targeted killing tools developed over the last few decades in the counter-terrorism context.  In February, the State Department for the first time designated eight drug trafficking organizations, including Tren de Aragua, as FTO). To be clear, this step does not by itself provide authority for the use of force. In the past, however, it has paved the way to military action, including the strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.  Certainly, the rhetoric from key figures close to  Trump suggests that the administration views FTO designation as a stepping stone to using force. Soon after the designations were publicly revealed, Elon Musk commented on social media that listing “means they’re eligible for drone strikes.” The Trump administration’s “border czar” Tom Homan said in November that the president was “committed to calling [the cartels] terrorist organizations and using the full might of the United States special operations to take them out.” Secretary of Defense Hegseth stressed on Fox News that “all options will be on the table if we’re dealing with what are designated to be foreign terrorist organizations who are specifically targeting Americans on our border.” The Trump administration would cite the FTO designation of Tren de Aragua and lean further into the use of military tools against the group when in March it invoked the wartime authority of the Alien Enemies Act—and then relied on that authority to rendition hundreds of Venezuelans to El Salvador. The September military strike occurs in the context of a broader military deployment to the Caribbean—a deployment reportedly pushed by Secretary of State Rubio to put pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. The deployment includes three destroyers and an amphibious assault group with 4,500 sailors, including 2,500 marines, on board. U.S. forces in the region were further bolstered by a guided missile cruiser and at least one submarine, the nuclear-powered USS Newport News.  Domestic Legal Authority for the Use of Force A U.S. president may direct the use of military force pursuant to either (1) a congressional authorization for the use of force/declaration of war or (2) inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution, typically as commander in chief of the U.S. military. The scope of the president’s authority to direct the use of force under Article II in the absence of congressional authorization is contested. Although there is broad agreement that the president  may use force to repel “sudden attack,” the U.S. executive branch has taken a much more expansive view of the president’s unilateral war powers. Here the Trump administration will almost certainly rely solely on Article II of the Constitution as the source of authority for the attack on this vessel. Despite labelling the targets “narcoterrorists,” there is no plausible argument under which the principle legal authority for the U.S. so-called “war on terror”—the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force—authorizes military action against the Venezuelan criminal entity Tren de Aragua. Under the executive branch’s two-prong test for when a president may use force without congressional authorization, the contemplated operation must advance an important “national interest” and must not amount to “war in the constitutional sense,” which the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has recognized as an outer limit on the president’s unilateral warmaking authority.  That said, OLC precedent marks out remarkably wide latitude, with the first prong in particular having been critiqued as being unconstraining, and it is not clear whether it would have limited the president in this instance even assuming OLC advice was sought before the strike took place.   Further, though Trump and others in his administration have emphasized the prior designation of Tren de Aragua as an FTO, such designation does not by itself convey authority to use force. Nonetheless, such FTO designations are widely and mistakenly perceived as authorizing such action within the executive branch. Thus, designation of Tren de Aragua and a number of other Latin American criminal entities as FTOs in February foreshadowed this week’s attack in the Caribbean, despite providing no actual legal authority for it. War Powers Resolution When the U.S. president directs certain military actions in the absence of prior congressional authorization, those actions must be reported to Congress under the 1973 War Powers Resolution. Further, when U.S. armed forces are introduced “into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances,” the president must not only report the action to Congress within 48-hours but terminate such military action within 60-days unless Congress votes to authorize it. The War Powers Resolution does not define what it means for U.S. armed forces to be introduced into hostilities. Nonetheless, the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on the Resolution explains: The word hostilities was substituted for the phrase armed conflict during the subcommittee drafting process because it was considered to be somewhat broader in scope.  In addition to a situation in which fighting actually has begun, hostilities also encompasses a state of confrontation in which no shots have been fired but where there is a clear and present danger of armed conflict. “Imminent hostilities” denotes a situation in which there is a clear potential either for such a state of confrontation or for actual armed conflict. Unsurprisingly, the executive branch has espoused different, narrower interpretations of these terms that are less likely to constrain the president’s ability to use military force without congressional authorization. In the most oft-repeated formulation, the State Department’s Legal Adviser informed Congress in a 1975 letter that its working definition of “hostilities” meant “a situation in which units of the U.S. armed forces are actively engaged in exchanges of fire with opposing units of hostile forces.” “Imminent hostilities” means “a situation in which there is a serious risk from hostile fire to the safety of United States forces.”  The executive branch has at times taken the position that supposedly defensive action by U.S. armed forces is exempt from the reporting and withdrawal requirements of the War Powers Resolution because U.S. armed forces were not “introduced” into hostilities, but instead hostilities were introduced to U.S. armed forces. The Biden administration adopted this legal theory to wage a yearslong military campaign against the Houthis without congressional authorization despite the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution. The White House has in the past sometimes treated U.S. attacks on foreign vessels as introductions into hostilities triggering the War Powers Resolution. This was the case for the 1986 Gulf of Sidra incident involving air and naval fighting with Libya and a 1988 episode during the Tanker War when U.S. helicopters in the Persian Gulf responded to the distress call of a tanker under attack by (presumably Iranian) small boats, were fired on by the boats and returned fire in self-defense. In my view, the U.S. attack on this supposed smuggling vessel constituted the introduction of U.S. armed forces into hostilities, triggering both the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolution as well as its 60-day clock for withdrawing U.S. forces. The attack not only resembles previously reported incidents during the Reagan administration, but U.S. armed forces were deliberately introduced into the situation with the U.S. president himself reportedly giving the order to “blow up” the supposed smuggling vessel.   UN Charter Any use of force by the United States must also comply with the UN Charter—both as a matter of international and domestic law. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter provides that: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” The UN Charter safeguards states from the use of force. It is not currently clear what states (if any) were impacted by the U.S. attack on this vessel and thus whether Article 2(4) of the Charter is implicated by this strike. According to the Trump administration, the strike occurred in international waters. There is no indication that the vessel was flagged under any country (which would make an attack on the vessel an attack on the flag state in the view of the United States) Although some countries (such as the United States) have in the past treated attacks on their nationals abroad as attacks on the state itself, as of publication no country has claimed the 11 people reportedly killed in this attack and the Venezuelan government claimed the video of the incident was generated by artificial intelligence. Use of Lethal Force Working in collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Navy has for many years conducted maritime interdictions of suspected drug smugglers under a law enforcement paradigm—including during the current Trump administration. In such operations, U.S. Coast Guard law enforcement personnel board the suspect vessel and take the crew into custody. The attack on the smuggling vessel in the Caribbean was so extraordinary because there was no reported attempt to stop the boat or detain its crew. Instead, the use of lethal force was used in the first resort. According to Secretary of State Rubio, President Trump was given the option of conducting a maritime interdiction but instead elected to blow up the vessel to send a message. Such use of lethal force raises a number of distinct legal issues. Assassination Ban Executive Order 12333 prohibits assassinations, providing that “No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.” Under executive branch legal doctrine, “assassination” is understood to include the targeted killing of individuals. (The Uniform Code of Military Justice also of course criminalizes murder.)  Public reporting on the past interpretation of the assassination ban indicates that the U.S. executive branch has recognized two potentially relevant exceptions to the prohibition in recent decades: (1) actions taken in self-defense; and (2) use of lethal force consistent with the law of war. With respect to self-defense, the Trump administration has indicated that it is countering the flow of drugs to the United States. But drug trafficking by itself does not constitute an “armed attack,” nor a threat of an imminent armed attack, for the purposes in international law. Nor does drug trafficking represent the predicate for self-defense commonly recognized as required for the invocation of self-defense under criminal law in the United States. The Law of War Although not explicit, the administration’s framing of its attack on the alleged Tren de Aragua smuggling vessel suggests that it is targeting the group as if it were a terrorist organization with which the United States is engaged in an armed conflict. Such a law of war framework in turn raises a number of subsidiary questions.  Even assuming that Tren de Aragua constitutes an organized armed group (which there is reason to doubt) with which the United States is involved in a non-international armed conflict, it is far from clear that the attack on the vessel and the killing of those aboard was lawful under the law of war. The administration has not sought to explain how either the boat or its passengers were lawful military objectives.  In armed conflict, combatants/fighters (not hors de combat) may be targeted on a status basis. Further, civilians directly participating in hostilities may also be made the object of attack. Smuggling drugs by itself does not render a civilian a combatant/fighter subject to status-based targeting. Nor does it constitute direct participation in hostilities. Nor has the administration argued that the cargo of the vessels was somehow a lawful military objective and the passengers somehow lawful collateral damage consistent with the principle of proportionality. Assuming arguendo that the United States is operating under the law of war in targeting this supposed Tren de Aragua vessel, attacks directed against civilians or civilian objects violate the law of war.  Moreover, certain violations of the law of war constitute war crimes under both international and U.S. domestic law. Specifically, the U.S. War Crimes Act criminalizes murder, defined as the  “act of a person who intentionally kills, or conspires or attempts to kill, or kills whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause.” Many other states not only criminalize this offense but have universal jurisdiction over the crime, regardless of who perpetrates it. We still lack details about the individuals aboard the targeted vessel as well as the legal rationale for the attack. But if U.S. forces are targeting individuals who are civilians—not qualifying as combatants/fighters or directly participating in hostilities—this raises the specter of accountability under the War Crimes Act. The Right to Life in Human Rights Law Such attacks may also violate the right to life under international human rights law. And while the U.S. government has not consistently acknowledged the extraterritorial application of the relevant legal obligation as a matter of treaty law (see this 2014 Just Security symposium for long-running debate on that issue), DoD’s 2024 Operational Law Handbook (pages 98-99) adopts the view that murder is prohibited by a peremptory rule of customary international law applicable even extraterritorially. An Extraordinary and Unsettling Action The Trump administration’s military attack on this alleged smuggling vessel is not only extraordinary and unsettling in its own right, but also because of the context in which it occurs and for what it may portend for future action.  The use of lethal force in this attack appears gratuitous and the administration has not explained why law enforcement tools were inadequate to address the situation. Of a piece with the deployment of troops to U.S. cities, the strike is an unnecessary and performative use of the U.S. military—a use that is legally fraught at best. (Indeed, Trump threatened Chicago with a troop deployment in the same Oval Office appearance in which he announced the strike.) And the use of lethal force against these supposed terrorists is ominous both because the Trump administration has vowed further such strikes in Latin America and because this administration has deployed the “terrorist” label more broadly domestically, including against migrants and political opponents. Congress—which has largely been missing in action this year—needs to reassert its own prerogatives over war powers and the use of these military tools as the White House seeks to further abuse these instruments both abroad and at home.  FEATURED IMAGE: The US Navy warship USS Sampson (DDG 102) docks at the Amador International Cruise Terminal in Panama City on September 02, 2025. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro said on September 1, 2025, that eight US military vessels with 1,200 missiles were targeting his country, which he declared to be in a state of "maximum readiness to defend" itself. (Photo by MARTIN BERNETTI/AFP via Getty Images)

Po­lice be­lieve the body that washed ashore at Cumana is that of one of the peo­ple on board a boat sus­pect­ed of car­ry­ing drugs, arms, and am­mu­ni­tion which was de­stroyed by a US bat­tle­ship while at sea ear­li­er this week.The body was dis­cov­ered around 9:30 pm on Cumana To­co Beach.Ac­cord­ing to po­lice, the de­ceased is a Venezue­lan na­tion­al. His right hand and right foot were miss­ing, a piece of cloth­ing was tied around his neck, and his body showed signs of burns.The body was found by Ja­son Clement of Ma­tu­ri­ta, who was camp­ing at O’Hal­lo­ran Camp in Cumana.Po­lice were in­formed, and a par­ty of of­fi­cers led by In­sp Sankar and in­clud­ing PCs Isles, McK­etchie, and Boodoo re­spond­ed.Dis­trict Med­ical Of­fi­cer Dr Lynch viewed the body, pro­nounced the man dead, and or­dered its re­moval to the San­gre Grande Hos­pi­tal mor­tu­ary pend­ing a post-mortem.To­co Po­lice are con­tin­u­ing in­ves­ti­ga­tions.

News 19 Hrs Ago CoP Allister Guevarro - Police Commissioner Allister Guevarro said it has not yet been determined if the bodies which washed up on Trinidad's north eastern coastline over the weekend are the alleged drug traffickers killed in a US airstrike on September 2, but it is being looked at. "We can only answer that after an investigation is done." Guevarro said on September 8. "We do not wish to speculate in the public, because that would cause fearmongering or any speculation otherwise. We have two bodies thus far has washed up with apparent injuries on those bodies. We will now investigate to determine where the bodies came from, if it is possible, because they were in an advanced state of decomposition. At the end of the day, we would let the evidence speak for itself." Guevarro's comment came in response to a question from Newsday as he toured five schools in South Trinidad, which would have officers stationed as part of a new programme to combat school violence and indiscipline. The commissioner declined to answer Newsday's question if a report of an apparent boat wreckage floating near Tobago was being included in the probe and if the inquiry would include searching for evidence that drugs were on the boat at the time of the strike. "I love the way that you take the question, switch it around and try to get me to comment on the same investigation that I told you we would not be commenting on." Newsday was also unable to reach Homeland Security Minister Roger Alexander or Foreign and Caricom Affairs Minister Sean Sobers for comment on whether TT was working with Venezuela to identify and return the bodies, or if the US is involved in the investigation. On September 2, US military forces amassing in the Southern Caribbean over the last few weeks blew up a pirogue at sea with an airstrike. The White House said 11 people were killed and alleged it was a drug-smuggling operation being run by the Tren de Aragua cartel. The legality of the attack has since been questioned internationally, with many experts declaring it violated human rights and international maritime law. Locally, however, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar endorsed it, calling for traffickers to be violently killed due to their negative impact on TT's society. The first body was discovered at the Cumana beach, Toco, on the morning of September 5. It appeared to be that of a Latino and had missing limbs and signs of burns. Two days later, another body washed up, but at Balandra beach. It also appeared to be that of a Latino and had a missing leg.

Story highlightsUS Vice President JD Vance sparked controversy on X after a deadly US airstrike on a Venezuelan "narco-terrorist" group. When called a war criminal for killing civilians without due process, Vance responded, "I don’t give a shit what you call it," drawing widespread backlash.US Vice President JD Vance does not "give a s**t" if people call him a war criminal for using US military to kill suspected drug dealers in international waters. On Saturday (Sep 6) Brian Krassentein of the Krassentein twin brothers called out Vance on X over the United States' airstrike that killed 11 alleged "narcoterrorists" and members of Venezuela-based crime group Tren de Aragua. In reply to Vance's post calling the airstrike the "highest and best use of military", Krassentein said, "Killing the citizens of another nation who are civilians without any due process is called a war crime." To this, Vance rebuffed, "I don't give a s**t what you call it".The US claims to have killed 11 narco-terroristsAdd WION as a Preferred SourceUS President Donald Trump on Tuesday (Aug 2) announced that American forces had bombed a “drug-carrying” vessel in the southern Caribbean, after it departed from Venezuela, killing eleven on board.US Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the ship was run by a "designated narco-terrorist organisation" - the Tren de Aragua gang. This marked a major escalation of tensions between the US and Venezuela after America stationed three warships off the Venezuelan coast last month. The US also increased the bounty on Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro to a whopping $50 million - more than what it offered for Osama Bin Laden. Meanwhile, Maduro has slammed the American attempts at alleged 'regime change' in Venezuela and said that he was ready to “declare a republic in arms” if attacked by US forces.Vance gets called out by netizensReplying to Vance's 'don't give a s**t' statement, Krassentein noted that, "Killing 11 people in this way could be classified as an extrajudicial killing under international human rights law, potentially exposing U.S. officials to responsibility.""Good luck in 2029. Any idea what the penalty for such a crime would be?," he added, asking "Imagine if Venezuela decided to bomb a boat driving from Maryland to New York City, which had 11 Americans and a bunch of drugs in it. What would be your response?".Trending Stories'The 47-year-old marvel': How engineers are keeping a 1970s spacecraft alive in interstellar space'Stupid mistake' costs British student her freedom: 23-year-old jailed for life in DubaiHow many missiles can a Su-57 carry at once?Su-57 production: Why is Russia building so few stealth fighters?Top 10 greenest countries in the world (2025): Latest EPI 2024 rankings'The Hydrogen Wall': Has Voyager already found the secret boundary of our solar system?'Breaking Firewall': Understanding Voyager’s data on the edge of interstellar space at 50,000°CWho rules the space? Top 7 nations with most satellites - Check where India standsUS to block firms from outsourcing to Indians? Here’s what Trump aide claims'The first alien broadcast?': The bizarre Voyager data that baffled NASA scientistsIt started with Brian Krassentein, who, along with his brother Ed, during Trump's first term, was known for posting anti-Trump replies to the POTUS's posts. However, the US VP later faced a barrage of criticism from netizens who called him out for his "sins". One X user quoted the Bible's fifth commandment, saying, "The Catholic Church - which you profess to belong to - calls it 'a sin which cries out to heaven for vengeance' (CCC 2268). Murder is wrong."Another user questioned Vance, "How long before you start using this as a pretext to kill US citizens without a trial? What, exactly, would stop you?".

The lethal strike on a boat in the Caribbean on Tuesday was a criminal attack on civilians, according to a high-ranking Pentagon official who spoke to the Intercept on the condition of anonymity.  The Trump administration paved the way for the attack, he said, by firing the top legal authorities of the Army and the Air Force earlier this year. “The U.S. is now directly targeting civilians. Drug traffickers may be criminals but they aren’t combatants,” the Department of Defense official said. “When Trump fired the military’s top lawyers the rest saw the writing on the wall, and instead of being a critical firebreak they are now a rubber stamp complicit in this crime.” President Donald Trump claimed that the attack was aimed “against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists,” in a TruthSocial post. He continued: “TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of [Venezuelan President] Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere.”  Trump accompanied the post with a video of a four-engine speedboat cutting through the water with numerous people on board. An explosion then destroys the boat. Trump said the attack killed 11 people. It was unclear whether they were given a chance to surrender before the United States killed them. After days of silence, the White House issued a statement late Thursday claiming the attack was lawful. White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said it was “taken in defense of vital U.S. national interests and in the collective self-defense of other nations who have long suffered due to the narcotics trafficking and violent cartel activities of such organizations.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth offered his own justification for the strike the same day. “Every boatload of any form of drug that poisons the American people is an imminent threat. And at the DoD our job is to defeat imminent threats,” he told a group of journalists. “A foreign terrorist organization poisoning your people with drugs coming from a drug cartel is no different than Al Qaeda, and they will be treated as such as they were in international waters.” Two U.S. government officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Hegseth’s justification – which one called “completely unserious” – took shape after the attack.  Experts said Hegseth’s rationale was flimsy, if not farcical. “Tren de Aragua being designated as a foreign terrorist organization is a purely domestic law enforcement designation. It offers no authority for the military to use deadly force,” said Todd Huntley, who was an active-duty judge advocate for more than 23 years, serving as a legal advisor to Special Operations forces engaged in counterterrorism missions around the world. “Under international law, there’s no way this even gets close to being a legitimate use of force.” We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us. Become a member Other legal experts have agreed with Huntley, now the director of the National Security Law Program at the Georgetown University Law Center. Members of Congress have echoed the assessment. “Congress has not declared war on Venezuela, or Tren de Aragua, and the mere designation of a group as a terrorist organization does not give any President carte blanche to ignore Congress’s clear Constitutional authority on matters of war and peace,” said Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn, in a statement. “There is no conceivable legal justification for this use of force. Unless compelling evidence emerges that they were acting in self-defense, that makes the strike a clear violation of international law.” Hegseth said the attack would be followed by others. “It won’t stop with just this strike,” he told Fox News on Wednesday. “Anyone else trafficking in those waters who we know is a designated narco-terrorist will face the same fate.” Diosdado Cabello, the Venezuelan Minister of Interior, Justice and Peace called the Tuesday attack “an illegal massacre in international waters” and said the United States had “violated international law.” Under international law, there’s no way this even gets close to being a legitimate use of force. Brian Finucane, who worked for a decade in the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State, where he advised the U.S. government on counterterrorism and other military matters, also noted that designating a group as a foreign terrorist organization does not, by itself, provide authority for the use of military force. “Nonetheless, such FTO designations are widely and mistakenly perceived as authorizing such action within the executive branch,” he wrote in a legal analysis published this week. “Thus, designation of Tren de Aragua and a number of other Latin American criminal entities as FTOs in February foreshadowed this week’s attack in the Caribbean, despite providing no actual legal authority for it.” U.S. attacks around the world – from Libya to Somalia – during the war on terror have been justified under strained interpretations of the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force. But despite the Trump administration labeling cartels “narcoterrorists,” experts say there is no plausible argument that the AUMF can apply to Tren de Aragua. “We knew exactly who was in that boat,” Hegseth told Fox News on Wednesday. The Pentagon has frequently claimed to have killed terrorists when it has instead killed innocents. A 2023 investigation by The Intercept, for example, determined that an April 2018 drone attack in Somalia killed at least three, and possibly five, civilians, including 22-year-old Luul Dahir Mohamed and her 4-year-old daughter Mariam Shilow Muse. At the time, the military announced it had killed “five terrorists” and that “no civilians were killed in this airstrike.”  Several experts and government officials speculated that the boat the U.S. struck on Tuesday may not even have been smuggling drugs due to what they said was an unusually large number of people on board the vessel. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth departs Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, Sept. 4, 2025. Photo: U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Madelyn Keech/Office of the Secretary of Defense Public Affairs/DVIDS Experts and government officials were incredulous that a judge advocate signed off on the strike, variously speculating that any lawyer involved must have been ignored, pressured or simply capitulated to the will of the president.  Hegseth fired the Air Force’s and Army’s top judge advocates general (JAGs) in February to avoid “roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief.” The next month he commissioned his personal lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, as a Navy JAG and empowered him to help overhaul the JAG corps, reportedly pursuing changes that would encourage lawyers to approve more aggressive tactics and take a more lenient approach to those who violate the law of war. Parlatore’s prior claim to fame was successfully defending Eddie Gallagher, a Navy SEAL accused of first-degree murder in the death of a captured ISIS fighter as well as the attempted murder of civilians in Iraq. Distinguished former JAGs and members of Congress have repeatedly spoken out about Hegseth’s efforts to undermine the independence of military legal counsel and subvert military justice. In February, Trump designated Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua, MS-13 in El Salvador, and six cartels based in Mexico as foreign terrorist organizations. More recently, the Trump administration added the Venezuelan Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, to a list of specially designated global terrorist groups, alleging that it is headed by Maduro and high-ranking officials in his administration. In July, Trump also signed a secret directive ordering the Pentagon to use military force against some Latin American drug cartels he has labeled terrorist organizations. Venezuelan officials believe Trump may be renewing long-running efforts, which failed during his first term, to topple Maduro’s government. Maduro and several close allies were indicted in a New York federal court in 2020, during the first Trump presidency, on federal charges of narco-terrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine. Last month, the U.S. doubled its reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million. Speaking on Fox News, Hegseth did not rule out regime change by the U.S. in Venezuela. “That’s a presidential-level decision and we’re prepared with every asset that the American military has,” he said. Two armed Venezuelan F-16 fighter jets flew over the U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer Jason Dunham in the southern Caribbean Sea in a show of force on Thursday.  The Pentagon called it a “highly provocative move” that was “designed to interfere with our counter-narco-terror operations” and issued a threat. “The cartel running Venezuela is strongly advised not to pursue any further effort to obstruct, deter or interfere with counternarcotics and counterterrorism operations carried out by the U.S. military,” read the statement released on X Thursday night. Hegseth declined to say what type of weapons were used in the Tuesday strike but referenced “assets that we have in the region” include a “MEU” or Marine Expeditionary Unit “which holds 2,200 combat infantry Marines and has plenty of its own organic assets.” He added: “So we’ve got assets in the air, assets in the water, assets on ships, because this is a deadly serious mission for us.” The Intercept previously reported that U.S. Marines and sailors from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit recently deployed to southern Puerto Rico. The 22nd MEU did not reply to repeated requests for comment about whether they were involved in the Tuesday attack. All told, around 4,500 U.S. personnel, seven U.S. warships and one nuclear-powered attack submarine are either in the Caribbean or are expected to arrive there soon.  Several government officials suggested to The Intercept that Rear Adm. Milton “Jamie” Sands III, head of Naval Special Warfare Command, was fired by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth late last month due to the admiral’s concerns about impending attacks on civilian vessels in international waters. Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson pushed back on the officials’ claims. “No, that’s not accurate,” she replied by email. Sands did not respond to requests by The Intercept for an interview prior to publication. Tuesday’s strike, as carried out, fell under the authority of U.S. Southern Command. Sands oversaw the Navy’s SEAL teams, so would not have been in the operational chain of command for the Tuesday strike, and would not have had authority to approve or reject the planned operation. Last month, more than 30 humanitarian, public interest, immigrant rights, faith-based, veterans’ advocacy, and drug policy reform groups called on Congress to oppose the use of military force against drug cartels in Latin America by the Trump administration. Melding two failed American wars — the war on drugs and the war on terror — would “put people at risk of violence and destabilize hemispheric relations while hindering, not helping, efforts to protect communities from drug trafficking and other crime,” according to the organizations, which include Alianza Americas, Center for Civilians in Conflict, Drug Policy Alliance, Public Citizen, and Win Without War. “The U.S. posture towards the eradication of drugs has caused immeasurable damage across our hemisphere. It has led to massive forced displacement, environmental devastation, violence, and human rights violations. What it has not done is any damage whatsoever to narcotrafficking or to the cartels. It has been a dramatic, profound failure at every level,” said Omar. “Trump and Rubio’s apparent solution, to make it even more militarized, is doomed to fail. Worse, it risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes.”

Vance addressed criticism from Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, who criticized the vice president for endorsing the killing of the people on the boat without any kind of judicial process, and then dismissing concerns about human rights. “I understand the concerns about due process, I understand some of the criticisms that have been raised, but this is not a situation where we can send the Navy SEALs into these places, arrest them and give them a proper civil trial or criminal trial,” Vance said in the interview. The president announced Sept. 2 that the U.S. conducted an airstrike against a suspected drug boat off the coast of Venezuela, killing 11 people. Vance defended it at the time as “the highest and best use of our military” while dismissing accusations the strike amounted to a war crime.Vance’s earlier comments drew the ire of the Libertarian-leaning Paul, who questioned the lack of due process for the suspected drug traffickers killed in the strike and called Vance’s comments “a despicable and thoughtless sentiment.”Legal experts have questioned the legal basis for the strike and have warned about the precedent it sets for future actions against suspected criminals outside the country. Democrats have joined Paul in raising concerns over the legality of the strike.Despite a long history of isolationism, Vance has inched toward a more aggressive foreign policy approach since taking office alongside Trump. He has become a key messenger for some of the president’s high-profile foreign policy actions, including the U.S. strike on Iran and the efforts to negotiate a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.

People on board the boat off the coast of Venezuela that the U.S. military destroyed last Tuesday were said to have survived an initial strike, according to two American officials familiar with the matter. They were then killed shortly after in a follow-up attack. The boat was under U.S. surveillance for a significant period of time. Those on board apparently spotted the U.S. aerial assets and altered the vessel’s course. U.S. officials said the boat appeared to have turned back toward shore, after which it was subjected to multiple strikes. Three sources, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the boat was attacked by one or more drones. A very small number of Senate and House staffers separately received highly classified briefings about the attack on Tuesday. No senators or House members were in attendance, people familiar with the briefings told The Intercept. Two officials familiar with the strike were left with the impression that more attacks in the Caribbean would be forthcoming in the weeks ahead. Multiple sources say that Special Operations Command, or SOCOM, conducted the lethal operation. This is considered highly unusual given all the other military assets based in the region. Col. Allie Weiskopf, SOCOM’s director of public affairs, would not comment on the command’s involvement in the attack. “We don’t have anything for you,” she told The Intercept. In response to questions from The Intercept, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell sent this statement: “Narco-terrorists who poison the American people will find no safe harbor in international waters or anywhere in our hemisphere. This strike sent a clear message: if you traffic drugs toward our shores, the United States military will use every tool at our disposal to stop you cold.” President Donald Trump said he authorized the attack and posted an edited video to social media last week showing a four-engine speedboat cutting through the water with numerous people on board. An explosion then destroys the boat. Trump said the strike killed 11 people whom he characterized as “narcoterrorists.” The administration has offered no evidence to support these assertions. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also made clear that the U.S. could have halted the ship and arrested the crew but chose to kill them instead. “Instead of interdicting it, on the president’s orders, we blew it up — and it’ll happen again,” he boasted. We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us. Become a member Brian Finucane, a former State Department lawyer who is an expert in counterterrorism issues and the laws of war said that the new details, while horrific, did not change the underlying legal issues. “The U.S. president is asserting the power to engage in the premeditated killing of people outside of armed conflict,” he told The Intercept. “There is no evidence that these people were lawful targets. The Trump administration hasn’t established that there was an armed conflict, hasn’t established that the law of armed conflict governed any such hostilities, and hasn’t established that the people aboard the vessel, the vessel itself, or its cargo were lawful targets under the law of war.” Members of Congress from both parties have expressed alarm about the attack. Paul told The Intercept that while he didn’t oppose the use of drones in war, he objected to the U.S. summarily killing people without due process. “During my time in the Senate, I have been the foremost critic of drones being used on civilians, especially Americans,” said Paul, a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. “The recent drone attack on a small speedboat over 2,000 miles from our shore without identification of the occupants or the content of the boat is in no way part of a declared war and defies our longstanding Coast Guard rules of engagement which include: warnings to halt, non-lethal force to capture, and ultimately lethal force in self-defense or in cases of resistance.” Last week, a high-ranking Pentagon official who spoke to the Intercept on the condition of anonymity said that the strike in the Caribbean was a criminal attack on civilians and said that the Trump administration paved the way for it by firing the top legal authorities of the Army and the Air Force earlier this year. “The U.S. is now directly targeting civilians. Drug traffickers may be criminals but they aren’t combatants,” the War Department official said. “When Trump fired the military’s top lawyers the rest saw the writing on the wall, and instead of being a critical firebreak they are now a rubber stamp complicit in this crime.”

(Trinidad Express) No State resources will be wasted searching the sea for bodies of Venezuelans killed by the United States military in a drug interdiction exercise last week, says Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.The Prime Minister stressed Trinidad and Tobago’s duty ends with recovering any carcasses that wash ashore.She was responding to a call by Colombian President Gustavo Petro on the Government of Trinidad and Tobago to search for the remains of the 11 men killed in a lethal strike by the US military on a vessel allegedly carrying drugs in the southern Caribbean.Police have yet to identify the two bodies which washed ashore over the weekend.Speaking with the Express yesterday, Commissioner of Police Allister Guevarro said the Police Service was calling on anyone with information to come forward. He also advised against people speculating on whether they may be any of the 11 Venezuelan nationals killed in the Caribbean Sea on September 2 during an airstrike by the United States military.“Thus far, The TTPS continues to investigate both reports of bodies washed up in the Eastern Division. At this time, we will not want to speculate as to the origin of the bodies, or the manner in which they met their demise. But we are asking anyone with information to come forward and share that info with us so we can progress our investigation,” Guevarro stated.On September 5, an unidentified body washed ashore near O’Halloran Trace, Cumana, Toco.On September 7, the body of a man washed ashore along Trinidad’s north-eastern coast at Balandra Beach.Colombia’s Petro yesterday took to his X account, referencing reports of fishermen’s fears in Trinidad.Of the strike, carried out last week on a vessel the US says was carrying 11 members of the Tren de Aragua gang, he said it was “extremely important” that the country’s Government search for the remains of what he said were civilian dead.He also questioned whether permission for the military operation was given to the US by the Government.Petro had earlier criticised the operation, writing on his X account, “If this is true, it’s murder anywhere in the world.”“We have been capturing civilians transporting drugs for decades without killing them. Those who transport drugs are not the big drug traffickers, but the very poor young people of the Caribbean and the Pacific,” wrote Petro. In his post yesterday, he wrote, “It is extremely important that the Caribbean republic of Trinidad and Tobago search for remains of the civilian dead from the US bombing of a civilian vessel, about which we do not know if it was carrying drugs, and if it was, it should not have been bombed.“The bombing took place in the territorial waters of Trinidad and Tobago, did the island’s government give permission? Life comes first always and everywhere,” he added.The Express asked Persad-Bissessar whether this call will be heeded and whether law enforcement resources will be dispatched to search for bodies.She said: “No, we will not waste resources to look for those bodies. Our Coast Guard resources will be utilised for the protection of our borders, not to look for dead drug traffickers. However, if any carcass washes up on our shores we will recover it,” she said.She said this vessel was transporting drugs by members of the notorious Tren de Aragua gang.“That was not a civilian vessel. The drugs on that boat bring death to persons here, destroy families and careers and fracture our society. Those drugs bring more death and despair than conventional weapons.“We are in a war against drugs and trafficking. There will be consequences, I much prefer seeing drug and gun traffickers blown to pieces than seeing hundreds of our citizens murdered each year because of drug-fuelled gang violence,” she said.PM off to New YorkOn Monday, the Prime Minister held a telephone discussion with Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau. The Deputy Secretary commended Trinidad and Tobago as a strong US partner in the Caribbean. He acknowledged Persad-Bissessar’s public support for US military operations in the southern Caribbean Sea and both governments’ commitment to curbing illegal narcotics and firearms trafficking.Persad-Bissessar said she plans to have face-to-face meetings with US officials while in New York later this month. The Prime Minister will be making her first official trip to attend the United Nations General Assembly in New York, which takes place from September 23 to 29.“Yes, I will be attending. There is a draft agenda that is being finalised,” she said. “We are having discussions through the Port of Spain US Embassy and directly on the phone. The country can expect to see more cooperation between the US and Trinidad in the future.”

The New York Times, an American daily newspaper, has reported that the vessel carrying the alleged Venezuelan drug traffickers killed in the lethal strike reportedly turned around before it was struck and des­troyed by a US military aircraft in the southern Caribbean Sea.The report by The New York Times yesterday said that American officials familiar with the case indicated that the vessel had altered its course and turned around just before the attack was carried out.The men on board had seen the military aircraft trailing it, the report says.According to the report, officials who spoke with The New York Times anonymously said the military had hit the vessel repeatedly before it sank to the bottom of the ocean.The White House last week stated that US military forces had completed a strike against the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang while they were at sea in international waters. The strike resulted in 11 deemed “terrorists” killed in action, it said.US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the vessel had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a de­signated narco-terrorist organisation.Speaking with report­ers after the incident, Rubio said that suspected drugs on board du­ring the strike were likely headed to Trinidad or another Caribbean country, contri­buting to their “instability”.Footage released of the attack depicted the craft with multiple persons on board being struck and then engulfed in fire.According to The New York Times report, “Officials briefed on the strike said that the video does not tell the entire story. It does not show the boat turning after the people aboard were apparently spooked by an aircraft above them, nor does it show the military ma­king repeated strikes on the vessel even after disabling it, the officials said.”Venezuelan media last week reported that the 11 men who were killed had reportedly departed from San Juan de Unare, a small coastal fishing town off the Arismendi municipality of Sucre, Venezuela—less than 100 miles (161 kilometres) from Trinidad’s northern coastReports from independent media El Pitazo last week said the vessel had left the Venezuelan coast last Sunday and was destroyed on Monday in the Caribbean Sea.Eight of the men were natives of the area, and three were from neighbouring towns, it said.Despite Rubio’s ini­tial comments, US admi­nistration officials have reportedly characte­rised the vessel as being destined for the United States.Still, US officials have not confirmed the identity of the men on board, the quantity or type of drugs suspected on board the vessel, the route it was on or the location of the attack.According to Google maps, the distance between San Juan de Unare and the nearest US State, Florida, is 2,470.85 kilometres (1,535.31 miles). The distance between the coastal Venezuelan town and Trinidad’s northern coast is approximately 65 miles. Read More

The Department of War is thwarting congressional oversight of the Trump administration’s attack on a boat off the coast of Venezuela earlier this month. On Monday afternoon, as the full details of the first drone strike remained secret, Trump announced that U.S. forces conducted a second attack on a boat in the U.S. Southern Command are of responsibility, which covers the Caribbean and all of South America. In a post on TruthSocial, he wrote that the strike killed three people. “BE WARNED — IF YOU ARE TRANSPORTING DRUGS THAT CAN KILL AMERICANS, WE ARE HUNTING YOU!” he wrote. Although the president is posting edited videos of these strikes, information about the planning, execution, and legal justification for this campaign on alleged “narcoterrorists” is being kept secret from senior congressional staffers. Last Tuesday, senior staff from House leadership and relevant committees were barred by the Office of the Secretary of War from attending a briefing on the first attack, according to three government sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The military cited “alternative compensatory control measures” — the term for enhanced security procedures designed to keep information under wraps — as the reason. The War Department has attempted to conceal numerous details about the attack that killed 11 people in the Caribbean, including the fact that the vessel altered its course and appeared to have turned back toward shore prior to the strikes. Men on board were said to have survived an initial strike, The Intercept reported last week. They were then killed shortly after in a follow-up attack. “I’m incredibly disturbed by this new reporting that the Trump Administration launched multiple strikes on the boat off Venezuela,” Rep., Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., a member of the House Armed Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations, said of The Intercept’s coverage. “They didn’t even bother to seek congressional authorization, bragged about these killings — and teased more to come.” A very small number of Senate and House staffers, mostly from the Armed Services committees, received highly classified briefings about the attack last Tuesday, after the military delayed the meeting for days. Staff for key members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which oversee war powers, were conspicuously absent. Briefers from the office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict, the civilian Pentagon appointee who oversees special operations, made it clear that the attack was not a one-off and that lethal operations would continue, according to three sources familiar with the meetings. The Department of War did not send a lawyer to the briefing, so no expert was available to comment on the legality of the attack. A senior defense official pushed back on claims that the Pentagon was stymying oversight. “The Department did not bar senior staff from House leadership and relevant committees from attending this briefing,” said the official. “The Department briefed House and Senate Leadership and relevant oversight committee staff with proper security clearance access.” Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson offered a stale quote from chief spokesperson Sean Parnell (previously published by The Intercept) in response to a request for comment about unconfirmed reports to The Intercept that men aboard the vessel attempted to surrender prior to being killed. In a letter to the White House on Wednesday, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia and two dozen fellow Democratic senators said the Trump administration has provided “no legitimate legal justification” for the strike. The senators requested answers to 10 key questions regarding the facts surrounding the attack and its supposed legal underpinnings. “For decades, Congress has wrongly ceded responsibility to the President about when to declare war, and now we’re living with those consequences,” Jacobs told The Intercept. “This is why it’s never been more important for Congress to reclaim our war powers responsibilities and ensure thorough oversight and transparency into all of the Trump Administration’s military actions.” Last week Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., introduced a war powers resolution seeking to stop the Trump administration from conducting future strikes in the Caribbean. Omar told The Intercept that it was designed to “terminate hostilities against Venezuela, and against the transnational criminal organizations that the Administration has designated as terrorists this year.” One former Pentagon legal expert thinks framing the issue around war is a mistake. In her view, this is a clear-cut case of murder. “A war framing confuses the issue. This is not a war.” Sarah Harrison, who advised military leaders on legal issues related to human rights and extrajudicial killings in her former role as associate general counsel at the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel, International Affairs, says that framing the attack in the Caribbean as an act of war is a categorical error. “A war framing confuses the issue. This is not a war,” she explained. “U.S. forces went out and committed murder.” The legal issues at play were simple, she said: “There was no armed attack on the United States that would allow for the U.S. to use force in self-defense. There is no armed conflict between the United States and any cartel group or any Latin American country. A foreign terrorist designation of any of these groups does not change that. It does not authorize force against those groups.” “The killing of all 11 of these men was illegal. This was a premeditated murder of suspected criminals — by definition, civilians — based on the facts provided by the administration themselves,” she told The Intercept. “This president believes that he can kill anyone, anywhere, under any circumstances and not have to rationalize it.” Sarah Yager, a former senior adviser on human rights to the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and now the Washington director at Human Rights Watch, echoed these concerns. “This president believes that he can kill anyone, anywhere, under any circumstances and not have to rationalize it — and that he will be impugned from any accountability,” she said. “I think this should be a real concern for everyone, that the rule of law is being undermined, and we don’t know what restraints there are on the use of force.” Harrison, now a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, emphasized that Secretary of State Marco Rubio made clear that the U.S. could have halted the ship and arrested the crew but chose to kill them instead. “Instead of interdicting it, on the president’s orders, we blew it up — and it’ll happen again,” Rubio boasted. “Under domestic law, and it’s the same rule under international human rights law, the use of lethal force can only be executed if there is an imminent threat to life or serious bodily injury,” said Harrison. “Rubio’s statements underscore the fact that there was no such threat.” She noted that the U.S. military is prohibited by law from executing civilians under the Uniform Code of Military Justice; Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which includes the federal murder statute; and under a long-standing executive order that bans assassinations. Multiple sources say that Special Operations Command, or SOCOM, conducted the lethal operation. This is considered highly unusual given all the other military assets based in the region. Col. Allie Weiskopf, SOCOM’s director of public affairs, would not comment on the command’s involvement in the attack. “We don’t have anything for you,” she told The Intercept. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and others told The Intercept the boat was attacked by one or more drones. Harrison said that the special operators who conducted the strike should be made aware that they complied with an unlawful order. She called on members of Congress to speak out on the issue. The U.S. has continued to ratchet up tension in the Caribbean. Personnel from a U.S. warship boarded a Venezuelan tuna boat with nine fishermen while it was sailing in Venezuelan waters on Saturday, according to Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Yván Gil. The boat was, he said, “illegally and hostilely boarded by a United States Navy destroyer” and 18 armed U.S. personnel remained on the vessel for eight hours. The fishermen were then released. “We don’t have anything to offer you on this,” said a spokesperson for the Office of the Secretary of War in response to a request for comment on the incident and an explanation of how raiding a tuna boat contributes to U.S. national security. Venezuelan officials believe Trump may be renewing long-running efforts, which failed during his first term, to topple President Nicolás Maduro’s government. Maduro and several close allies were indicted in a New York federal court in 2020 on federal charges of narco-terrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine. Last month, the U.S. doubled its reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million. The Trump administration added the Venezuelan Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, to a list of specially designated global terrorist groups earlier this year, alleging that it is headed by Maduro and high-ranking officials in his administration. In July, Trump also signed a secret directive ordering the Pentagon to use military force against some Latin American drug cartels he has labeled terrorist organizations. We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us. Become a member The United States has been surging military assets into the Caribbean for weeks. F-35 stealth fighters landed in Puerto Rico on Saturday afternoon, joining one of the largest U.S. military deployments to the Caribbean in years. This includes around 4,500 U.S. personnel — including Marines and sailors from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit, seven U.S. warships, and one nuclear-powered attack submarine. And at least two MQ-9 Reaper drones were spotted at Coast Guard Air Station Borinquen in Puerto Rico last week. The U.S. is also engaged in the rapid restoration and re-outfitting of the former Roosevelt Roads Naval Station in Ceiba, Puerto Rico, which officially closed in 2004.  The 22nd MEU is operating with the amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima and the amphibious transport dock ships USS San Antonio and USS Fort Lauderdale. Last Monday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth visited the Iwo Jima. “What you’re doing right now — it’s not training,” he told troops on board. “This is the real-world exercise on behalf of the vital national interests of the United States of America to end the poisoning of the American people.” Speaking on Fox News, Hegseth did not rule out regime change by the U.S. in Venezuela. “That’s a presidential-level decision, and we’re prepared with every asset that the American military has,” he said. Jacobs, the California representative, fears that the boat attack in the Caribbean may be the opening salvo of another long-running U.S. military disaster akin to the post-9/11 wars that continue to grind on across the globe today. “We can’t let Donald Trump drag us into another forever war that our youngest generations will pay for with their lives and tax dollars,” she told The Intercept. Update: September 15, 2025, 4:40 p.m. ETThis story has been updated to include details of President Trump’s disclosure of a new U.S. military attack on alleged drug traffickers on Monday afternoon.

Continue reading More for You   Continue reading More for You Capturing Content…

#SepaQue The Spanish Minister of Foreign Affairs, José Manuel Albares, stated this Wednesday that Spain will always be in favor of all policies to eradicate drug trafficking, but with civilian and police methods, which is how it is done, and never with military means. https://bit.ly/4nbWbWw

In the opinion of the Minister of Communication and Information, Freddy Ñáñez, the video that US President Donald Trump presented on Tuesday afternoon about the destruction of a speedboat that was supposedly transporting drugs was created with artificial intelligence. Ñáñez, through his Telegram channel, said that "it seems" that the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, "continues to lie to his president" and, "after leading him into a dead end, now he gives him a video with AI as 'proof'." "Enough is enough Marco Rubio of encouraging war and trying to stain President Donald Trump's hands with blood. "Venezuela is not a threat," the minister added. This Tuesday, Trump released a video on his Truth Social account from the US Army's Southern Command showing a monitored vessel seconds before being destroyed with a missile. He claimed that his country's armed forces eliminated eleven members of the transnational criminal gang Tren de Aragua - an organization designated as a terrorist organization by his Administration - during a "kinetic attack" against a vessel that was allegedly transporting drugs in the Atlantic. An hour before confirming the deaths of the alleged drug traffickers, the Pentagon had indicated to EFE that the attack was carried out in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that had left Venezuela and was being operated by narcoterrorists, and the same information was published on the official account of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

En opinión del ministro de Comunicación e Información, Freddy Ñáñez, el video que el presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, presentó la tarde este martes sobre la destrucción de una lancha rápida que supuestamente trasladaba droga fue creado con inteligencia artificial. Ñáñez, a través de su canal en Telegram, dijo que «parece» que el secretario de Estado de EEUU, Marco Rubio, «sigue mintiéndole a su presidente» y, «luego de meterlo en un callejón sin salida, ahora le da como ‘prueba’ un video con IA».«Basta ya Marco Rubio de alentar la guerra e intentar manchar las manos de sangre al presidente Donald Trump. Venezuela no es una amenaza», agregó el ministro.Este martes, Trump divulgó en su cuenta de Truth Social un video del Comando Sur del Ejército estadounidense donde se observa una embarcación monitoreada segundos antes de ser eliminada con un misil.Aseguró que las fuerzas armadas de su país eliminaron a once integrantes de la banda criminal transnacional Tren de Aragua -organización que fue designada como terrorista por su Administración- durante un «ataque cinético» contra una embarcación que supuestamente trasladaba drogas en el Atlántico.Una hora antes de confirmar el deceso de los supuestos narcotraficantes, el Pentágono había señalado a EFE que el ataque fue realizado en el sur del Caribe contra una embarcación con drogas que había salido de Venezuela y que estaba siendo operada por narcoterroristas, y la misma información fue publicada en la cuenta oficial del secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio.

US President Donald Trump showed a video of the destruction of a vessel, which he announced earlier had left Venezuela, and said that the operation killed "11 terrorists" whom he linked to the Tren de Aragua, a criminal gang that was born in Venezuela and which was declared a terrorist organization last February. On his social network, Truth Social, the Republican leader detailed that "this morning, on my orders, the US Military Forces carried out a kinetic attack against positively identified narco-terrorists from the Tren de Aragua in the area of responsibility of the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM)." He added that the Tren de Aragua is a "foreign organization" that he also linked to the Chavista president Nicolás Maduro. "The attack resulted in the death of 11 terrorists. No US forces were harmed in this operation," Trump explained. First there were shots and then it was a lethal attack. Earlier, from the White House in a press conference he had said that "we just shot at a boat that was transporting drugs. It happened just a few moments ago. We have a lot of drugs coming into our country, coming in for a long time, and they came from Venezuela and they are coming very heavily from Venezuela. A lot of things are coming from Venezuela,” Trump said during a press conference from the White House. The US president added that from Venezuelan territory “a lot of drugs are being sent” and “other things” to US soil, so there will be new announcements in this regard. The official version was also disseminated by Rubio through his account on the social network X. “Today the US military carried out a lethal attack in the southern Caribbean against a drug boat that had departed from Venezuela and was being operated by a designated narcoterrorist organization,” he said. Trump's actions against MirafloresAfter declaring the so-called Cartel of the Suns a terrorist organization and declaring war on drug trafficking from Latin America, the US began an air-naval deployment in the Caribbean Sea last month, with the cooperation of countries such as Curaçao, Trinidad and Tobago and the reinforcement of anti-narcotics operations by France in overseas territory. The White House links the Cartel of the Suns with the administration of Nicolás Maduro, who they point to as one of their leaders and for whom they offer a reward of 50 million dollars to whoever facilitates his capture. Rubio plans to visit Ecuador this Wednesday, September 3, to discuss security and migration issues with President Daniel Noboa. A meeting in which the topic of military deployment in the Caribbean will surely come up. Reaching Mexico is also on his agenda for the coming days. During the press conference, Trump praised the "incredible" chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, who informed him of the attack against the alleged Venezuelan vessel, a move that was confirmed shortly after by the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, through a message on X. The Republican leader said that more will be known "after this meeting" in the Oval Office, advancing a possible statement from the Administration with more details about the attack, which according to the president occurred moments before his appearance. The US deployed eight military missile boats and a nuclear-powered submarine in areas of the Caribbean Sea near the coast of Venezuela to combat drug trafficking that "contaminates" the streets of the North American country. What Rubio said about the drug boat "As reported by the President of the United States a few moments ago, today the United States Army carried out a lethal attack in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that had departed Venezuela and that was being operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization," Rubio wrote in a message on the social network X. A few minutes earlier, Trump anticipated the announcement, in an event at the White House, where he wrote that the US Army had "liquidated with gunfire" and "eliminated" a vessel transporting drugs that had departed from a Venezuelan port. Last week, the US Coast Guard reported a "historic seizure" of more than 30 tons of drugs in military operations in the Pacific and the Atlantic, in which he mentioned the seizure of narcotics in three towns near Venezuela: Aragua, Carabobo, and Falcón. Maduro warned Trump on Monday. This Monday, Chavista leader Nicolás Maduro denied the US accusations of drug trafficking and assured that this was the "most brutal attack" by that country against Latin America in 100 years. He also warned that if the White House decides to intervene in Venezuela, the country will enter "armed struggle," after reporting to international media that the country has 8.5 million militiamen after two days of voluntary enlistment in this branch of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces. Tensions between the two countries escalated after the US military mobilization to the Caribbean. While allied countries such as Cuba, Mexico, Iran, Brazil, China, and Russia have expressed concern about this deployment, in Latin America others such as Argentina, Ecuador, and Paraguay support Trump. The same is happening in Caribbean nations such as Trinidad and Tobago, Curaçao, and Guyana, which have given their support to this unusual deployment of vessels. Military personnel, warships, and marines in this area of the American continent. Information from Efe

El presidente de los Estados Unidos, Donald Trump mostró un video de la destrucción de una embarcación, que más temprano anunció que salió de Venezuela, y dijo que en la operación murieron «11 terroristas» a los que ligó con el Tren de Aragua, banda criminal que nació en Venezuela y a la cual declararon como organización terrorista el pasado mes de febrero.En su red social, Truth Social, el líder republicano detalló que “esta mañana, por mis órdenes, las Fuerzas Militares de EEUU llevaron a cabo un ataque cinético contra narcoterroristas del Tren de Aragua identificados positivamente en el área de responsabilidad del Comando Sur (SOUTHCOM)”.Y agregó que el Tren de Aragua es una «organización extranjera» a la que también vinculó con el mandatario chavista Nicolás Maduro.“El ataque resultó en la muerte de 11 terroristas. Ninguna fuerza estadounidense fue herida en esta operación”, explicó Trump.Primero fueron disparos y después fue un ataque letalMás temprano, desde la Casa Blanca en una conferencia de prensa había dicho que “acabamos de disparar a un barco que transportaba drogas. Sucedió hace sólo unos momentos. Tenemos muchas drogas entrando a nuestro país, entrando desde hace mucho tiempo y estas vinieron desde Venezuela y están viniendo muy fuertemente desde Venezuela. Muchas cosas están viniendo de Venezuela», expresó Trump durante una conferencia de prensa desde la Casa Blanca. El mandatario estadounidense agregó  que desde territorio venezolano “se está enviando mucha droga” y “otras cosas” a suelo norteamericano, por lo que habrá nuevos anuncios al respecto.La versión oficial también fue difundida por Rubio a través de su cuenta en la red social X. “Hoy el ejército estadounidense llevó a cabo un ataque letal en el sur del Caribe contra un barco con drogas que había partido de Venezuela y estaba siendo operado por una organización narcoterrorista designada”, expresó. Las acciones de Trump contra MirafloresTras declarar al llamado Cartel de los Soles como organización terrorista y declarar la guerra al narcotráfico proveniente de Latinoamérica, EEUU inició el mes pasado un despliegue aeronaval en el Mar Caribe, con la cooperación  de países como Curazao, Trinidad y Tobago y el reforzamiento de operaciones antinarcóticos por parte de Francia en territorio de ultramar. La Casa Blanca vincula al Cártel de Los Soles con la administración de Nicolás Maduro al que señalan como uno de sus líderes y por el que ofrecen una recompensa de 50 millones de dólares a quien facilite su captura.Rubio tiene previsto visitar Ecuador este miércoles 3 de septiembre, para tratar temas de seguridad y migración, con el presidente Daniel Noboa. Reunión en la que seguramente saldrá a relucir el tema del despliegue militar en el Caribe. Llegar a México también está en su agenda de los próximos días. Durante la rueda de prensa, Trump elogió al «increíble» jefe del Estado Mayor Conjunto, Dan Caine, quien lo puso al tanto del ataque contra el supuesto navío venezolano, un movimiento que confirmó poco después por el secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, a través de un mensaje en X.El líder republicano adelantó que se sabrá más «después de esta reunión» en el Despacho Oval, avanzando un posible comunicado de la Administración con más detalles sobre el ataque, que según el mandatario ocurrió momentos antes de su comparecencia.EE.UU. desplegó ocho barcos militares con misiles y un submarino de propulsión nuclear en áreas del mar Caribe cercanas a las costas de Venezuela para combatir el tráfico de drogas que «contaminan» las calles del país norteamericano.Qué dijo Rubio del barco con drogas«Tal y como informó el presidente de los Estados Unidos hace unos momentos, hoy el Ejército de los Estados Unidos llevó a cabo un ataque letal en el sur del Caribe contra un buque con drogas que había partido de Venezuela y que estaba siendo operado por una organización designada como narcoterrorista», escribió Rubio en un mensaje en la red social X.Pocos minutos antes, Trump se adelantó al anuncio, en un acto en la Casa Blanca, donde escribió que el Ejército estadounidense había «liquidado a tiros» y «eliminado» una embarcación que transportaba drogas y que había partido de un puerto venezolano.La semana pasada, la Guardia Costera de EEUU informó de una «incautación histórica» de más de 30 toneladas de droga en operaciones militares en el Pacífico y el Atlántico, en las que mencionó la incautación de narcóticos en tres localidades cercanas a Venezuela: Aragua, Carabobo y Falcón.Maduro advirtió a Trump el lunesEste lunes, el mandatario chavista Nicolás Maduro negó las acusaciones de narcotráfico de EEUU y aseguró que se trataba del «ataque más brutal» de ese país contra América Latina en 100 años.También advirtió que si la Casa Blanca decide intervenir en Venezuela el país entrará en «la lucha armada», tras informar con medios internacionales que el país cuenta con 8,5 millones de milicianos tras dos jornadas de alistamiento voluntario en este cuerpo de la Fuerza Armada Nacional Bolivariana.Las tensiones entre los dos países escalaron después de la movilización militar estadounidense hacia el Caribe. Mientras que países aliados como Cuba, México, Irán, Brasil, China y Rusia han expresado su preocupación por este despliegue, en Latinoamérica otros como Argentina, Ecuador y Paraguay respaldan a Trump.Lo mismo ocurre en las naciones del Caribe como Trinidad y Tobago, Curazao y Guyana que han dado su apoyo a este despliegue inusual de embarcaciones militares, naves de guerra e infantes de Marina en esta zona del continente americano.Con información de Efe

Washington (United States), 03/09/2025.- U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (C) speaks during an announcement in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., on September 2, 2025. Photo: EFE / EPA / AL DRAGO / POOLDefense Department sources confirmed to EFE that the U.S. Armed Forces carried out a "precision strike" against a vessel operated by a designated "narco-terrorist" organization in an anti-drug operation near Venezuela, which shortly after President Donald Trump said were from the Tren de Aragua and in which "terrorists" died. "The United States military forces carried out a precision strike against a drug trafficking vessel operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization," senior Defense officials detailed, adding that details of the operation will be published later. This afternoon, the U.S. president, Donald Trump had praised the “incredible” chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, who briefed him on the attack on a drug vessel allegedly coming from Venezuela, a move confirmed shortly after by Secretary of State Marco Rubio through a message on X. What Trump said about the drug vessel “We have a large amount of drugs coming into our country for a long time, and these are coming out of Venezuela. They are coming out of Venezuela in large quantities. A lot of things are coming out of Venezuela, so we took it out (the boat),” the president added. “As the President of the United States reported a few moments ago, today the United States Military conducted a lethal attack in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that had departed from Venezuela and that was being operated by a designated narcoterrorist organization,” Rubio wrote. USA The United States has deployed eight missile-equipped military ships and a nuclear-powered submarine to areas of the Caribbean Sea near the coast of Venezuela to combat drug trafficking that is “contaminating” the streets of the North American country. In response, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro warned on Monday that his country is facing what he considers to be the “greatest threat ever seen” in the Americas “in the last hundred years” and assured that his nation would declare itself “up in arms” if “it were attacked.” Trump showed the video of the ship’s destruction on his social network, Truth Social, and assured that all 11 members on board died. He also identified them as alleged members of the Tren de Aragua, an organization that was designated as a terrorist organization last February and that he linked to Maduro.

Washington (United States), 03/09/2025.- Pete Hegseth, secretario de Defensa de EE. UU. (C), habla durante un anuncio en el Despacho Oval de la Casa Blanca en Washington, D.C., EE. UU., el 2 de septiembre de 2025. Foto: EFE/EPA/AL DRAGO / POOLFuentes del Departamento de Defensa confirmaron a EFE que las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses realizaron un «ataque de precisión» contra una embarcación que era operada por una organización designada como «narcoterrorista» en una operación antidrogas cerca de Venezuela, que poco tiempo después el presidente Donald Trump dijo que eran del Tren de Aragua y en el que murieron «terroristas».«Las fuerzas militares de Estados Unidos llevaron a cabo un ataque de precisión contra una embarcación de narcotráfico operada por una organización designada como narcoterrorista», detallaron funcionarios de Defensa de alto nivel, que agregaron que más adelante se publicarán detalles del operativo.Esta tarde, el presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, había elogiado al «increíble» jefe del Estado Mayor Conjunto, Dan Caine, quien lo puso al tanto del ataque contra una embarcación supuestamente procedente de Venezuela cargada de drogas, un movimiento confirmado poco después por el secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, a través de un mensaje en X.Qué dijo Trump sobre la embarcación con drogas«Tenemos una gran cantidad de drogas que llegan a nuestro país desde hace mucho tiempo, y estas provienen de Venezuela. Salen en grandes cantidades de Venezuela. Muchas cosas están saliendo de Venezuela, así que lo eliminamos (el barco)», agregó el mandatario.«Tal y como informó el presidente de los Estados Unidos hace unos momentos, hoy el Ejército de los Estados Unidos llevó a cabo un ataque letal en el sur del Caribe contra un buque con drogas que había partido de Venezuela y que estaba siendo operado por una organización designada como narcoterrorista», escribió Rubio.EE.UU. ha desplegado ocho barcos militares con misiles y un submarino de propulsión nuclear en áreas del mar Caribe cercanas a las costas de Venezuela para combatir el tráfico de drogas que «contaminan» las calles del país norteamericano.En respuesta, el mandatario de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, advirtió este lunes que su país enfrenta la que considera la «más grande amenaza que se haya visto» en América «en los últimos cien años» y aseguró que su nación se declararía «en armas» si «fuera agredida». Trump mostró en su red social, Truth Social, el video de la destrucción del barco y aseguró que los 11 miembros que iban a bordo de ella fallecieron. Al igual los identificó como supuestos miembros del Tren de Aragua, organización a la que designaron como terrorista en febrero pasado a la que ligó con Maduro.

Just hours after President Donald Trump's announcement of the "lethal attack" on a speedboat carrying alleged narcotics departing from Venezuela, the incident has already sparked a wave of questions ranging from the authenticity of the released video to the legality of the operation itself. Although the Pentagon and senior U.S. officials defend the action as a "precision strike" in international waters, critics in Caracas and independent analysts point to possible manipulation and hidden political motivations. On social media, many users, including analysts, are wondering whether it was actually a drug boat that sank, or if it was a premeditated escalation to pressure the government of Nicolás Maduro. The main trigger for the controversy was the low-resolution video that Trump shared on his Truth Social platform, which shows a boat zigzagging in the Caribbean before exploding in a ball of fire. Is it or isn't it an AI? "Eleven terrorists eliminated," the president posted, attributing the attack to Southern Command forces against members of the Aragua Train. However, Venezuelan Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez was quick to question its veracity, saying it could be a montage generated by artificial intelligence. "Without proof, but with a history of imperialist falsehoods, one has to doubt," wrote Ñáñez, recalling past accusations of US propaganda. Reuters, for its part, conducted a preliminary verification using visual manipulation detection tools and found no clear evidence of alteration to any of the video's elements. Even so, the agency clarified that the analysis process is ongoing, as the material is low-resolution and lacks complete metadata. Digital forensics experts consulted by the BBC agree: "There is no obvious evidence of a deepfake, but the Pentagon's opacity regarding the original source fuels suspicions," comments an anonymous analyst from Georgetown University. Another source of doubt lies in the identification of the ship's occupants and cargo. Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio insist that this is an operation against a "designated narco-terrorist organization," with the boat leaving Venezuelan shores heading north, possibly with cocaine or fentanyl on board. Intimidation, perhaps? But the Department of Defense has not revealed concrete details: what type of aircraft or missile was used? How many kilos of drugs were recovered from the wreckage? How was it confirmed that the eleven deceased were members of the Tren de Aragua? This has led to criticism from observers such as Geoff Ramsey of the Atlantic Council, who in an interview with The Guardian noted: "It's a show of force, but without transparency, it raises questions about whether the target was actually drug traffickers or if it was used as a pretext to intimidate Venezuela." Al Jazeera and The New York Times have highlighted this discrepancy and question whether the White House is exaggerating ties to justify the military escalation. From Caracas, the doubts turn into outright accusations. Maduro, during a tour of his hometown of El Valle, broadcast on state television, avoided mentioning the frontal attack, but exhorted: "In the face of imperialist threats, God is with us." Hours earlier, he had declared "maximum preparedness" with 4.5 million militia members mobilized. Foreign Minister Yvan Gil called the incident "pathetic propaganda" and demanded a UN investigation. He argued that the US naval deployment—seven ships, a nuclear submarine, and thousands of sailors—violates regional sovereignty.

Apenas horas después del anuncio del presidente Donald Trump sobre el «ataque letal» contra una presunta lancha rápida cargada de supuestos narcóticos que partió desde Venezuela, el incidente ya ha desatado una oleada de interrogantes que van desde la autenticidad del video difundido hasta la legalidad misma de la operación. Aunque el Pentágono y altos funcionarios estadounidenses defienden la acción como un «golpe de precisión» en aguas internacionales, voces críticas en Caracas y analistas independientes apuntan a posibles manipulaciones y motivaciones políticas ocultas. En redes sociales, muchos usuarios, incluyendo analistas, se preguntan si fue realmente una embarcación de drogas lo que se hundió, o si se trata de una escalada premeditada para presionar al Gobierno de Nicolás Maduro.El detonante principal de la controversia fue el video con poca definición que Trump compartió en su plataforma Truth Social, que muestra una embarcación que zigzaguea en el Caribe antes de explotar en una bola de fuego.¿Será o no será IA?«Once terroristas eliminados», posteó el mandatario al atribuir el ataque a fuerzas del Comando Sur contra miembros del Tren de Aragua. Sin embargo, el ministro de Comunicaciones venezolano, Freddy Ñáñez, no tardó en cuestionar su veracidad y dijo que podría tratarse de un montaje generado por inteligencia artificial.«Sin pruebas, pero con la historia de falsedades imperialistas, hay que dudar», escribió Ñáñez, al evocar acusaciones pasadas de propaganda estadounidense.La agencia Reuters, por su parte, realizó una verificación preliminar con herramientas de detección de manipulación visual y no encontró indicios claros de alteración en los elementos del video.Aun así, la agencia aclaró que el proceso de análisis continúa, ya que el material es de baja resolución y carece de metadatos completos. Expertos en forense digital consultados por BBC coinciden: «No hay evidencia de deepfake evidente, pero la opacidad del Pentágono sobre la fuente original alimenta las sospechas», comenta un analista anónimo de la Universidad de Georgetown.Otro foco de dudas radica en la identificación de los ocupantes y la carga del barco. Trump y el secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, insisten en que se trata de una operación contra una «organización narco-terrorista designada», con la lancha saliendo de costas venezolanas rumbo al norte, posiblemente con cocaína o fentanilo a bordo.¿Intimidación acaso?Pero el Departamento de Defensa no ha revelado detalles concretos: ¿qué tipo de aeronave o misil se usó? ¿Cuántos kilos de drogas se recuperaron de los restos? ¿Cómo se confirmó que los once fallecidos eran miembros del Tren de Aragua? Esto ha llevado a críticas de observadores como Geoff Ramsey, del Atlantic Council, quien en una entrevista con The Guardian señaló: «Es una demostración de fuerza, pero sin transparencia, genera dudas sobre si el objetivo era realmente narcos o si se usó como pretexto para intimidar a Venezuela». Al Jazeera y The New York Times han destacado esta discrepancia y cuestionan si la Casa Blanca está exagerando lazos para justificar la escalada militar.Desde Caracas, las dudas se convierten en acusaciones directas. Maduro, en un recorrido por El Valle, su barrio natal, transmitido por TV estatal, evitó mencionar el ataque de frente, pero arengó: «Frente a amenazas imperialistas, Dios está con nosotros». Horas antes, había declarado «preparación máxima» con 4,5 millones de milicianos movilizados. El canciller Yvan Gil calificó el incidente como «propaganda patética» y exigió una investigación de la ONU. Argumentó que el despliegue naval estadounidense –siete buques, un submarino nuclear y miles de marinos– viola la soberanía regional.

President Donald Trump said Tuesday that U.S. forces attacked and destroyed a drug vessel from Venezuela in the Caribbean. U.S. forces "fired on a vessel… that was carrying drugs, a lot of drugs," Trump said at the White House. "So we took it out," he said. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on X that "U.S. military forces carried out a lethal attack… on a drug trafficking vessel that had departed from Venezuela and was operated by a designated narco-terrorist organization." Later, through Truth Social, the president expanded on the details: “This morning, following my orders, military forces carried out a kinetic attack against narco-terrorists from the Aragua Train, in the Southern Command area of responsibility. It is a designated foreign terrorist organization, operating under the control of Nicolás Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terrorism in the United States and the Western Hemisphere.” He also added that the vessel was in international waters and that “the attack resulted in the deaths of 11 terrorists in combat.” The announcement came after days of rising tensions between Washington and Caracas, which severed relations in 2019. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has declared a state of maximum alert to defend against what he describes as US military threats. The Trump administration, which accuses Maduro of leading a drug cartel, deployed warships to the southern Caribbean in what it described as an operation. anti-drug measures, although Trump has not threatened to invade Venezuela. With information from AFP

El presidente Donald Trump dijo el martes que fuerzas estadounidenses atacaron y eliminaron en el Caribe una embarcación que transportaba drogas desde Venezuela. Las fuerzas estadounidenses «dispararon contra una embarcación (…) que transportaba drogas, muchas drogas», dijo Trump en la Casa Blanca. «Así que la eliminamos», precisó. El secretario de Estado Marco Rubio anunció en X que «las fuerzas armadas estadounidenses llevaron a cabo un ataque letal… contra una embarcación de narcotráfico que había partido de Venezuela y era operada por una organización designada como narco-terrorista». Luego, a través de Truth Social, el mandatario amplió los detalles: “Esta mañana, siguiendo mis órdenes, las fuerzas militares llevaron a cabo un ataque cinético contra narcoterroristas del Tren de Aragua, en el área de responsabilidad del Comando Sur. Es una organización terrorista extranjera designada, que opera bajo el control de Nicolás Maduro, responsable de asesinatos en masa, tráfico de drogas, tráfico sexual y actos de violencia y terrorismo en Estados Unidos y el hemisferio occidental». También añadió que la embarcación se encontraba en aguas internacionales y que «el ataque resultó en la muerte de 11 terroristas en combate». El anuncio se produjo tras días de crecientes tensiones entre Washington y Caracas, que rompieron relaciones en 2019. El presidente venezolano, Nicolás Maduro, ha declarado un estado de máxima alerta para defenderse de lo que él califica como amenazas militares de Estados Unidos. El gobierno Trump, que acusa a Maduro de encabezar un cartel de drogas, desplegó buques de guerra en el sur del Caribe en lo que calificó como una operación antidrogas, aunque Trump no ha amenazado con invadir Venezuela. Con información de AFP

Caracas. The Venezuelan government accused the United States of using artificial intelligence to create the video published Tuesday by US President Donald Trump, featuring images of the announced attack on a vessel that, according to Washington, was transporting drugs and had left the South American nation. Via Telegram, Venezuelan Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez said that "it seems" that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio "continues to lie to his president" and, "after leading him into a dead end, is now offering him a video using AI as 'proof'." "Enough, Marco Rubio, of inciting war and trying to stain President Donald Trump's hands with blood. Venezuela is not a threat," added the minister, who shared the video published by the US president on his Telegram channel. This Tuesday, Trump posted a video on his Truth Social account from the U.S. Army's Southern Command showing a vessel being monitored seconds before being destroyed with a missile. Trump claims the U.S. destroyed a drug-laden ship from Venezuela The U.S. president asserted that his country's armed forces eliminated eleven members of the Venezuelan-based transnational criminal gang Tren de Aragua—an organization designated as a terrorist organization by his administration—during a "kinetic attack" against a vessel transporting drugs in the Atlantic. An hour before confirming the deaths of the alleged drug traffickers, the Pentagon had told EFE that the attack was carried out in the southern Caribbean against a drug vessel that had left Venezuela and was being operated by narco-terrorists. The same information was published on the official account of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The United States has deployed eight missile-equipped military ships and a nuclear-powered submarine to areas of the Caribbean Sea near the Venezuelan coast to combat drug trafficking, it said, that is "polluting" the streets of the North American country. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro warned this Monday that his country faces what he considers the "greatest threat ever seen" in the Americas "in the last hundred years," and asserted that his nation would take up arms if "it were attacked." YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN Parents need at least $100 to buy supplies and uniforms Venezuelan wife of Miami resident detained in ICE raid: "She deserves to be here" Thousands of Venezuelans in the most remote areas of the country visit El Pitazo to get essential information for their daily lives. For them, we are the only source of verified news without political bias. Maintaining the operation of this independent media outlet is increasingly expensive and difficult. That's why we ask you to send us a donation to fund our work: we don't charge for reporting, but we hope readers will see the value of our work and make an increasingly necessary financial contribution. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION It's completely secure and only takes a minute.

Caracas. El Gobierno de Venezuela acusó al de Estados Unidos de crear con inteligencia artificial el video publicado este martes por el presidente del país norteamericano, Donald Trump, con imágenes del anunciado ataque contra una embarcación que, según Washington, trasladaba drogas y había salido de la nación suramericana. A través de Telegram, el titular de Comunicación venezolano, Freddy Ñáñez, dijo que «parece» que el secretario de Estado de EE. UU., Marco Rubio, «sigue mintiéndole a su presidente» y, «luego de meterlo en un callejón sin salida, ahora le da como ‘prueba’ un video con IA». «Basta ya Marco Rubio de alentar la guerra e intentar manchar las manos de sangre al presidente Donald Trump. Venezuela no es una amenaza», agregó el ministro, quien compartió en su canal de Telegram el video publicado por el mandatario estadounidense. Este martes, Trump divulgó en su cuenta de Truth Social un video del Comando Sur del Ejército estadounidense donde se observa una embarcación siendo monitoreada segundos antes de ser eliminada con un misil. Trump afirma que EE. UU. destruyó un barco cargado con drogas procedente de Venezuela El mandatario norteamericano aseguró que las fuerzas armadas de su país eliminaron a once integrantes de la banda criminal transnacional de origen venezolano Tren de Aragua -organización que fue designada como terrorista por su Administración- durante un «ataque cinético» contra una embarcación que trasladaba drogas en el Atlántico. Una hora antes de confirmar el deceso de los supuestos narcotraficantes, el Pentágono había señalado a EFE que el ataque fue realizado en el sur del Caribe contra una embarcación con drogas que había salido de Venezuela y que estaba siendo operada por narcoterroristas, y la misma información fue publicada en la cuenta oficial del secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio. Estados Unidos ha desplegado ocho barcos militares con misiles y un submarino de propulsión nuclear en áreas del mar Caribe cercanas a las costas de Venezuela para, dijo, combatir el tráfico de drogas que «contaminan» las calles del país norteamericano. El presidente venezolano, Nicolás Maduro, advirtió este lunes que su país enfrenta la que considera la «más grande amenaza que se haya visto» en América «en los últimos cien años», y aseguró que su nación se declararía «en armas» si «fuera agredida». TAMBIÉN TE PUEDE INTERESAR Padres necesitan mínimo de 100 dólares para comprar útiles y uniformes Esposa venezolana de residente en Miami es detenida en redada del ICE: “Ella merece estar aquí” Miles de venezolanos en las zonas más desconectadas del país visitan El Pitazo para conseguir información indispensable en su día a día. Para ellos somos la única fuente de noticias verificadas y sin parcialidades políticas. Sostener la operación de este medio de comunicación independiente es cada vez más caro y difícil. Por eso te pedimos que nos envíes un aporte para financiar nuestra labor: no cobramos por informar, pero apostamos porque los lectores vean el valor de nuestro trabajo y hagan una contribución económica que es cada vez más necesaria.HAZ TU APORTEEs completamente seguro y solo toma 1 minuto.

The United States military destroyed a boat transporting drugs from Venezuela in an operation that left 11 members of the Tren de Aragua group dead, according to Donald Trump. Caracas.- United States President Donald Trump announced this Tuesday, September 2, that the United States military destroyed a boat loaded with drugs from Venezuela. The moment the boat was destroyed was shared on the US president's social media. According to Trump, the operation was carried out under his orders and targeted members of the Tren de Aragua group, a designated foreign terrorist organization (FTO). The president asserted that the narco-terrorists were in international waters transporting drugs bound for the United States. Donald Trump claims they intercepted a boat carrying drugs from Venezuela. The operation resulted in the deaths of 11 members of the Tren de Aragua group, with no members of the US military injured. The president emphasized that the criminal gang is involved in mass murder, drug trafficking, sexual violence, and acts of terrorism in the United States and the Western Hemisphere. "Please let this serve as a warning to anyone considering importing drugs into the United States. BE CAREFUL!" he warned in an Instagram post. YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN Senator Rick Scott calls for increasing the bounty on Maduro to $100 million Zelle bans Padrino López's son-in-law from using its platform Thousands of Venezuelans in the most disconnected areas of the country visit El Pitazo to get essential information for their daily lives. For them, we are the only source of verified news without political bias. Sustaining the operation of this independent media outlet is increasingly expensive and difficult. That's why we ask you to send us a contribution to fund our work: we don't charge for reporting, but we hope readers will see the value of our work and make a financial contribution, which is increasingly needed. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION It's completely secure and only takes a minute.

Las Fuerzas Militares de Estados Unidos destruyeron una lancha que transportaba drogas desde Venezuela, en una operación que dejó 11 miembros del Tren de Aragua muertos, según afirmó Donald Trump Caracas.- El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, anunció este martes 2 de septiembre que las Fuerzas Militares estadounidenses llevaron a cabo la destrucción de una embarcación cargada con drogas procedente de Venezuela. El momento en el que la lancha es destruida fue compartido en las redes sociales del mandatario estadounidense. Según Trump, la operación se realizó siguiendo sus órdenes y tuvo como objetivo a miembros del Tren de Aragua, organización calificada como terrorista extranjera (TDA). El mandatario aseguró que los narcoterroristas se encontraban en aguas internacionales transportando drogas con destino a Estados Unidos. Donald Trump asegura que interceptaron una embarcación con drogas procedente de Venezuela La acción resultó en la muerte de 11 integrantes del grupo Tren de Aragua, sin que ningún miembro de las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses resultara herido. El presidente enfatizó que la banda criminal está involucrada en asesinatos en masa, tráfico de drogas y violencia sexual, así como en actos de terrorismo en Estados Unidos y el hemisferio occidental. «Por favor, que esto sirva de aviso a cualquiera que esté considerando importar drogas a Estados Unidos. ¡CUIDADO!», advirtió en un post en Instagram. TAMBIÉN TE PUEDE INTERESAR Senador Rick Scott pide aumentar la recompensa por Maduro a 100 millones de dólares Zelle prohíbe el uso de su plataforma al yerno de Padrino López Miles de venezolanos en las zonas más desconectadas del país visitan El Pitazo para conseguir información indispensable en su día a día. Para ellos somos la única fuente de noticias verificadas y sin parcialidades políticas. Sostener la operación de este medio de comunicación independiente es cada vez más caro y difícil. Por eso te pedimos que nos envíes un aporte para financiar nuestra labor: no cobramos por informar, pero apostamos porque los lectores vean el valor de nuestro trabajo y hagan una contribución económica que es cada vez más necesaria.HAZ TU APORTEEs completamente seguro y solo toma 1 minuto.

Defense Secretary Accuses Maduro of Being Directly Involved in Drug Trafficking Affecting US Citizens | File Photo US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth issued a direct message to Nicolás Maduro on Wednesday, calling him the “king of a narco-state,” amid tensions with Venezuela over a US military deployment in the Caribbean. Speaking to Fox News, he said that Washington expects regime change in Venezuela and is prepared for it “with the Army.” “The only person who should be afraid is Nicolás Maduro,” said the Secretary of Defense, who noted that the US justice system is pursuing a $50 million drug trafficking conviction against the president. The US official’s statements came after Donald Trump announced Tuesday that US forces attacked a drug-carrying ship in the southern Caribbean after it departed from Venezuela. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News that the ship was run by a designated narco-terrorist organization and called the attack a lethal one. Later on Tuesday, in a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed the boat was operated by the Tren de Aragua gang and that 11 people died in the operation. Defense Secretary Sends Message to Maduro The Defense Secretary accused Maduro of being directly involved in drug trafficking, which he claimed affects U.S. citizens. “Maduro must decide whether or not to stop being a drug trafficker. Anyone would want him to turn himself in, but we have all the military assets of the Armed Forces ready,” he said. The Pentagon chief insisted that the deployment of troops and operations in the Caribbean constitute an “unequivocal show of force,” in line with President Donald Trump’s foreign policy. “The precise application of American power can change entire dynamics in the world,” he added. “We have assets in the air, assets in the water, assets on ships because this is a very serious mission for us, and it will not stop… just with this attack,” Hegseth said of Tuesday’s attack. Hegseth indicated that Washington’s strategy has the support of international allies, although he acknowledged that powers like China maintain opposing positions. “That is their prerogative,” he noted, emphasizing that the United States remains firm in supporting a political transition in Venezuela. US military deployment United States Nicolás Maduro Pete Hegseth

El secretario de Defensa acusó a Maduro de estar directamente implicado en el tráfico de drogas que afecta a los ciudadanos estadounidenses| Foto ArchivoEl secretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos, Pete Hegseth, lanzó este miércoles un mensaje directo a Nicolás Maduro, a quien calificó de “rey de un narcoestado”, en medio de tensiones con Venezuela por un despliegue militar estadounidense en el Caribe.En declaraciones a Fox News, aseguró que Washington espera un cambio de régimen en Venezuela y que está preparado para ello “con el Ejército”.“La única persona que debería tener miedo es Nicolás Maduro”, sentenció el secretario de Defensa, quien recordó que la justicia estadounidense mantiene sobre el mandatario una condena de 50 millones de dólares por narcotráfico.Las declaraciones del funcionario estadounidense se produjeron después de que Donald Trump anunciara el martes que las fuerzas de Estados Unidos habían atacado un barco que transportaba drogas en el sur del Caribe después de que partiera de Venezuela.El secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, declaró en X que el barco estaba dirigido por una organización narcoterrorista designada y calificó la acción de ataque letal. Más tarde el martes, en una publicación en Truth Social, Trump afirmó que el barco era operado por la banda del Tren de Aragua y que 11 personas murieron en la operación.Secretario de Defensa envía mensaje a MaduroEl secretario de Defensa acusó a Maduro de estar directamente implicado en el tráfico de drogas que, según afirmó, afecta a los ciudadanos estadounidenses.“Maduro debe decidir si deja o no de ser un narcotraficante. Cualquiera desearía que él mismo se entregara, pero tenemos todos los activos militares de las Fuerzas Armadas listos”, señaló.El jefe del Pentágono insistió en que el despliegue de tropas y operaciones en el Caribe constituyen una “demostración inequívoca de fuerza”, en línea con la política exterior del presidente Donald Trump. “La aplicación precisa del poder americano puede cambiar dinámicas enteras en el mundo”, agregó.“Tenemos activos en el aire, activos en el agua, activos en barcos porque esta es una misión muy seria para nosotros, y no se detendrá… solo con este ataque”, dijo Hegseth sobre el ataque del martes.Hegseth indicó que la estrategia de Washington cuenta con respaldo de aliados internacionales, aunque reconoció que potencias como China mantienen posturas contrarias. “Eso es su prerrogativa”, señaló, subrayando que la posición de Estados Unidos se mantiene firme en apoyar una transición política en Venezuela.Despliegue militar de EE UUEstados UnidosNicolás MaduroPete Hegseth

Marco Rubio, US Secretary of StateUS Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on Tuesday that the Trump administration will continue to confront drug cartels anywhere in the world. He made the statement after the military attack on a vessel in the Caribbean attributed to the Tren de Aragua. “We will confront the drug cartels wherever they are and wherever they operate against the interests of the United States. The president's first obligation is to guarantee the national security of our people,” Rubio told the media before traveling to Mexico for an official visit. The official defended the attack as part of Washington's anti-drug offensive. “The president has been very clear. We destroyed a drug-laden ship that left Venezuela, operated by a designated narcoterrorist organization, which is what they are. The era of acting with impunity is over,” he stated. Trump released images showing the vessel being destroyed by a missile. According to the White House, 11 alleged members of the Tren de Aragua were aboard the ship, and they died in the operation. It specified that the contingent deployed in the area—comprised of more than 4,000 marines, three destroyers, and one nuclear submarine—was responsible for carrying out the military action. This is the first confirmed incident since the US government reinforced its presence in the Caribbean near Venezuela.

Marco Rubio, secretario de Estado de Estados UnidosEl secretario de Estado de Estados Unidos, Marco Rubio, afirmó el martes que la administración del presidente Donald Trump continuará enfrentando a los carteles de la droga en cualquier lugar del mundo. La declaración la hizo después del ataque militar contra una embarcación en el Caribe atribuida al Tren de Aragua.“Vamos a enfrentar a los carteles de la droga donde quiera que estén y donde quiera que operen contra los intereses de Estados Unidos. La principal obligación del presidente es garantizar la seguridad nacional de nuestro pueblo”, declaró Rubio a medios antes de viajar a México para una visita oficial.El funcionario defendió el ataque como parte de la ofensiva antidrogas de Washington.“El presidente ha sido muy claro. Destruimos un barco cargado de drogas que salió de Venezuela, operado por una organización narcoterrorista designada, que es lo que son. La época de actuar con impunidad se acabó”, afirmó.Trump difundió imágenes en las que se observa cómo la embarcación es destruida por un misil. Según la Casa Blanca, en el buque viajaban 11 presuntos integrantes del Tren de Aragua, quienes murieron en la operación.Precisó que el contingente desplegado en la zona —integrado por más de 4.000 marines, 3 destructores y 1submarino nuclear— fue el encargado de ejecutar la acción militar. Se trata de la primera confirmada desde que el gobierno estadounidense reforzó su presencia en el Caribe cerca de Venezuela.

Former U.S. National Security Council Western Hemisphere Director Juan González expressed serious doubts about the alleged U.S. attack on a Venezuelan ship accused of drug trafficking.He noted that the information disseminated by the Trump administration could be false, but warned that even if it were true, the action would be illegal under both U.S. and international law.“The government assumes the authority to sink any vessel it deems linked to drug trafficking. It's a slippery slope. Without controls, the United States runs the risk of killing fishermen, migrants, or other civilians… and we would have to take the government's word for it,” González said, highlighting the dangers of a policy that operates outside of legal frameworks.The former Biden official recalled that the Rules of Engagement exist to reduce civilian casualties and that "destroying a vessel at sea without boarding or inspecting it opens the door to tragedy." He insisted that the Coast Guard, not the Navy, is the institution trained and legally authorized to carry out counter-narcotics operations.González explained that standard protocols include intercepting with air support, disabling the aircraft when necessary, arresting the crew, and using the information gathered to dismantle larger networks. However, he denounced the White House's opting for media operations that fail to address the roots of the illicit business and generate more propaganda than results."So the U.S. government is using false information to justify a terrorist designation and then spending at least $7 million a day to have an aircraft carrier strike group kill 11 traffickers on a ship with a maximum capacity of three tons?" he asked. Maryland: New Windows Available If You Own A Home In These Zip Codes

During the Plenary Session of the UN Conference on Disarmament, held this Tuesday in Geneva, Switzerland, Ambassador Alexander Yánez, Permanent Representative of Venezuela to the United Nations, denounced the military deployment of the United States in Caribbean waters near the Venezuelan coast. The representative described the presence of destroyers, combat aircraft, the fast-attack nuclear submarine USS Newport News and 4,000 military personnel as a violation of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of any State. The ambassador stressed that this deployment represents a threat to the stability of Latin America and the Caribbean, a region declared a nuclear-weapon-free zone by the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco, ratified by the United States in 1971. "The presence of an offensive-range nuclear submarine in the region contradicts this historic commitment and is intended to be an act of intimidation against a sovereign State," said the diplomat. Likewise, He emphasized the validity of the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, adopted by CELAC in 2014, which reaffirms the regional commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes and the rejection of the threat of force. He also rejected Washington's justifications linking the operation to the fight against drug trafficking. He cited reports from the DEA and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which indicate that Venezuela is free of illicit crops and that only 5 percent of drug trafficking to the United States transits through the Caribbean, while 87 percent occurs in the Pacific, where there is no similar military deployment. "What does the US financial system do with drug trafficking money?" questioned Yánez, noting that drug production has increased in countries with US military bases. He also warned that the deployment seeks to bring about a regime change in Venezuela to seize its oil reserves, comparing the situation with interventions in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. In this context, he demanded the immediate withdrawal of US military forces, including the nuclear submarine, and verifiable guarantees that nuclear weapons will not be used or threatened with use. Yánez concluded by quoting Simón Bolívar: "Courage and skill, Mr. Agent, make up for it with advantage." number. Unhappy are men if these moral virtues do not balance and even surpass the physical ones." Finally, he noted that Venezuela reaffirms its commitment to peace diplomacy and calls on the member states of the Conference on Disarmament to preserve Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone free of nuclear weapons and foreign intervention. During the session, delegations from Iran, Belarus, Cuba, China, Russia, and North Korea expressed their support for Venezuela, condemning the deployment as a threat to regional peace and reaffirming their support for Venezuelan sovereignty.

Durante la Sesión Plenaria de la Conferencia de Desarme de la ONU, celebrada este martes en Ginebra, Suiza, el embajador Alexander Yánez, Representante Permanente de Venezuela ante las Naciones Unidas, denunció el despliegue militar de Estados Unidos en aguas del Caribe cercanas a las costas venezolanas.El representante calificó la presencia de destructores, aviones de combate, el submarino nuclear de ataque rápido USS Newport News y 4.000 efectivos militares como una violación del artículo 2, numeral 4, de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, que prohíbe la amenaza o el uso de la fuerza contra la integridad territorial de cualquier Estado.El embajador destacó que este despliegue representa una amenaza a la estabilidad de América Latina y el Caribe, región declarada zona libre de armas nucleares por el Tratado de Tlatelolco de 1967, ratificado por Estados Unidos en 1971.“La presencia de un submarino nuclear de alcance ofensivo en la región contradice este compromiso histórico y pretende ser un acto de intimidación contra un Estado soberano”, afirmó el diplomático.Asimismo, subrayó la vigencia de la Proclama de América Latina y el Caribe como Zona de Paz, adoptada por la CELAC en 2014, que reafirma el compromiso regional con la solución pacífica de controversias y el rechazo a la amenaza de la fuerza.También rechazó las justificaciones de Washington, que vinculan la operación al combate contra el narcotráfico. Citó informes de la DEA y la Oficina de Naciones Unidas contra la Droga y el Delito, que indican que Venezuela está libre de cultivos ilícitos y que solo el 5 por ciento del narcotráfico hacia Estados Unidos transita por el Caribe, mientras que el 87 por ciento ocurre en el Pacífico, donde no se registra un despliegue militar similar.“¿Qué hace el sistema financiero estadounidense con el dinero del narcotráfico?”, cuestionó Yánez, señalando que en países con bases militares de EE.UU. la producción de drogas ha aumentado.De igual manera, alertó que el despliegue busca propiciar un cambio de régimen en Venezuela para apropiarse de sus reservas de petróleo, comparando la situación con intervenciones en Irak, Siria y Libia.En este contexto, exigió el retiro inmediato de las fuerzas militares estadounidenses, incluido el submarino nuclear, y garantías verificables de que no se emplearán armas nucleares ni se amenazará con su uso.Yánez concluyó citando a Simón Bolívar: “El valor y la habilidad, señor agente, suplen con ventaja al número. Infelices los hombres si estas virtudes morales no equilibrasen y aún superasen las físicas”.Finalmente, señaló que Venezuela reafirma el compromiso con la diplomacia de paz y convoca a los Estados miembros de la Conferencia de Desarme a preservar América Latina y el Caribe como zona libre de armas nucleares e intervenciones extranjeras.Durante la sesión, delegaciones de Irán, Belarús, Cuba, China, Rusia y Corea del Norte expresaron su respaldo a Venezuela, condenando el despliegue como una amenaza a la paz regional y reafirmando su apoyo a la soberanía venezolana.

September 03 2025, 12:14 pm Washington (United States of America), 09/03/2025.- United States President Donald J. Trump and President Karol Nawrocki of the Republic of Poland (not pictured) participate in a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 03 September 2025. (Poland, United States) EFE/EPA/AARON SCHWARTZ / POOLUS President Donald Trump said this Wednesday that Venezuela created a "tremendous problem" for the United States in relation to drug trafficking and irregular immigration, and added: "we are not going to allow it anymore," and the alleged drug traffickers who killed yesterday "are not going to do it again." "Venezuela has acted very badly, both on the drug issue and by sending some of the worst criminals in the world to our country. They empty their prisons in Venezuela and send them to the United States. And that is part of the problem we have. "We're taking them out, we're getting rid of them quickly, but they've caused a tremendous problem," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. The president was asked about the "lethal attack" carried out by US forces in the Caribbean Sea against a boat allegedly belonging to the Tren de Aragua criminal organization, in which eleven "narco-terrorists" died. "There were massive quantities of drugs on the boat. We have recordings of them talking. These were massive quantities of drugs coming into our country to kill a lot of people, and everyone understands that perfectly well," Trump said of the attacked vessel. "They won't do it again. And I don't think a lot of other people will either (transporting drugs). When they see that video, they're going to say, 'We better not do this,'" the US president continued. And he asserted: "We have to protect our country, and we're going to do it. Venezuela is a very bad actor." "We're not going to tolerate it anymore. Venezuela is one of the worst actors in the whole group, and we have a pretty bad group of actors already," he added. Trump said Tuesday that the vessel he said was transporting drugs had been shot down and shared a video from the US military's Southern Command showing them attacking the vessel, a small boat. The US is carrying out an unprecedented military deployment in the Caribbean Sea to combat drug trafficking, something that is normally addressed with intelligence cooperation with local authorities or non-lethal intervention by the Coast Guard. EFE

septiembre 03 2025, 12:14 pm Washington (United States of America), 03/09/2025.- United States President Donald J. Trump and President Karol Nawrocki of the Republic of Poland (not pictured) participate in a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 03 September 2025. (Polonia, Estados Unidos) EFE/EPA/AARON SCHWARTZ / POOLEl presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, aseguró este miércoles que Venezuela creó a Estados Unidos un «tremendo problema» con relación al tráfico de drogas y la inmigración irregular, y añadió: «no vamos a consentirlo más», y los supuestos narcotraficantes que mataron ayer «no lo van a volver a hacer». «Venezuela ha actuado muy mal, tanto por el tema de las drogas como por enviar a algunos de los peores criminales del mundo a nuestro país. Vacían sus cárceles en Venezuela y los envían hacia Estados Unidos. Y ese es parte del problema que tenemos. Estamos acabando con ellos, nos estamos deshaciendo de ellos rápidamente, pero han causado un problema tremendo», aseguró Trump ante los periodistas en el Despacho Oval.El mandatario fue preguntado por el «ataque letal» que las fuerzas estadounidenses llevaron a cabo en aguas del mar Caribe contra una lancha supuestamente perteneciente a la organización criminal Tren de Aragua en la que fallecieron once «narcoterroristas».«En el barco había enormes cantidades de drogas. Tenemos grabaciones de ellos hablando. Eran cantidades masivas de drogas entrando a nuestro país para matar a mucha gente, y todos lo entienden perfectamente», dijo Trump sobre la embarcación atacada.«No lo volverán a hacer. Y creo que muchas otras personas tampoco lo harán (el transporte de drogas). Cuando vean ese video, van a decir: ‘Mejor no hacemos esto'», prosiguió el presidente estadounidense.Y aseguró: «Tenemos que proteger a nuestro país, y lo vamos a hacer. Venezuela es muy mal actor».«No vamos a tolerarlo más. Venezuela es unos de los peores actores en todo el grupo, y tenemos un grupo de actores bastante malos ya», añadió.Trump aseguró este martes que la embarcación que, según dijo transportaba drogas, había sido abatida y compartió un video del Comando Sur del Ejército estadounidense en el que se observaba como atacaban a la embarcación, una pequeña lancha.EE.UU. está llevando a cabo un despliegue militar en el mar Caribe sin precedentes para combatir el tráfico de drogas, algo que normalmente se aborda con cooperación de inteligencia con autoridades locales o intervención no letal de la Guardia Costera. EFE

September 03, 2025, 10:00 am MQ-9 Reaper UAV. Photo: Lieutenant Colonel Leslie Pratt. U.S. Department of Defense sources on condition of anonymity revealed that the MQ-9 Reaper stealth drone was responsible for blowing up the drug-laden speedboat in the Caribbean Sea, which had 11 crew members belonging to the Tren de Aragua. lapatilla.comAs detailed by The New York Times in an investigation on the subject, «a senior American official said that a Special Operations aircraft — an attack helicopter or an MQ-9 Reaper drone — carried out the attack on Tuesday morning against a four-engine speedboat loaded with drugs». According to the source cited by the newspaper, «American surveillance planes and other sensors had been monitoring the cartels’ maritime traffic for weeks before the attack, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss operational details». Likewise, The New York Times reported that «a second senior American official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said that there would be more attacks of this type against cartel vessels». The officials consulted did not clarify what type of projectile was used in the mission. Video: @WhiteHouse / XThe MQ-9 Reaper drone, originally known as Predator B, is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developed by the company American General Atomics Aeronautical Systems and used by the United States Air Force, among others. This aircraft has carried out highly important military missions in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq, where it killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani with a surgical strike near an airport. General Atomics designed a naval version of the Reaper, called "Mariner", to meet the requirements of the US Navy's Wide Area Maritime Surveillance (Bams) program. It weighs over two tons and has a length of 11 meters and a wingspan of 20. It also has a maximum speed of 480 km/h and a cruising speed of 278 km/h. It can achieve 14 hours of uninterrupted flight time. The typical MQ-9 system consists of multiple aircraft, ground control stations, satellites, and flight and maintenance crews. Its armament can include up to four AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-surface missiles or two Hellfire missiles and two 230 kg GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bombs. The 230 kg GBU-38 JDAM can also be carried. Depending on mission requirements, the MQ-9 Reaper can carry several AIM-9X Block 2 missiles.

septiembre 03 2025, 10:00 am MQ-9 Reaper UAV. Foto: Teniente Coronel Leslie PrattFuentes del Departamento de Defensa de Estados Unidos bajo condición de anonimato revelaron que el dron furtivo MQ-9 Reaper fue el responsable de volar en pedazos en el mar Caribe a la lancha rápida cargada de drogas y que contaba con 11 tripulantes pertenecientes al Tren de Aragua. lapatilla.comSegún detalló The New York Times en una investigación sobre el tema, «un alto funcionario estadounidense dijo que un avión de Operaciones Especiales —un helicóptero de ataque o un avión no tripulado MQ-9 Reaper— llevó a cabo el ataque el martes por la mañana contra una lancha rápida cuatrimotor cargada de drogas».De acuerdo con la fuente citada por el diario, «aviones de vigilancia estadounidenses y otros sensores habían estado vigilando el tráfico marítimo de los cárteles durante semanas antes del ataque, dijo el funcionario, que habló bajo condición de anonimato para discutir los detalles operativos».Asimismo, The New York Times reseñó que «un segundo alto funcionario estadounidense, que también habló bajo condición de anonimato, dijo que habría más ataques de este tipo contra embarcaciones de cárteles».Los funcionarios consultados no aclararon cuál fue el tipo de proyectil utilizado en la misión.Video: @WhiteHouse / XEl dron MQ-9 Reaper, originalmente conocido como Predator B, es un vehículo aéreo no tripulado (UAV) desarrollado por la compañía estadounidense General Atomics Aeronautical Systems y usado por la Fuerza Aérea de los Estados Unidos, entre otras.Este aparato ha efectuado misiones de gran relevancia bélica en Afganistán, Siria e Irak, donde abatió con un ataque quirúrgico al general iraní Qasem Soleimani cerca de un aeropuerto.General Atomics diseñó una versión naval del Reaper, llamada «Mariner», para cubrir los requisitos del programa Zona Amplia de Vigilancia Marítima (Bams) de la Armada de EEUU.Tiene un peso superior a las dos toneladas y cuenta con una longitud de 11 metros y una envergadura de 20. Asimismo, tiene una velocidad máxima de 480 km/h y una velocidad de crucero de 278 km/h. Puede alcanzar las 14 horas de vuelo ininterrumpido.El sistema típico MQ-9 se compone de varios aviones, estaciones de control en tierra, satélites y tripulaciones de vuelo y mantenimiento.Entre su armamento puede contar hasta con cuatro misiles aire-superficie AGM-114 Hellfire o dos misiles Hellfire y dos bombas guiadas por láser GBU-12 Paveway II de 230 kg. La GBU-38 JDAM de 230 kg también puede ser llevada. Dependiendo de los requisitos de misión, el MQ-9 Reaper puede llevar varios misiles AIM-9X Block 2.

The journalist @SebastianaB reveals new details about the vessel that set sail from San Juan de Unare (Sucre) with a "very large" drug shipment headed toward Trinidad, and was attacked by the United States. She says that the owner of the boat would be a very well-known person in Unare with the surname Gómez. Here you can see her full report:

| BREAKING NEWS: The boat belonging to the Cartel of the Suns bombed by the United States reportedly left San Juan de Unare, Sucre, for Trinidad and Tobago. The son of a local drug lord is reportedly dead.

| ÚLTIMA HORA: La Embarcación bombardeada por Estados Unidos del Cartel de los Soles por EEUU. habría salido de San Juan de Unare, en Sucre, hacia Trinidad y Tobago . Habría muerto el hijo de un capó de la droga de la zona.

#InTheSierra Testimonies from relatives in Sucre state refute Trump's narrative about the naval attack. The vessel was headed to Trinidad and Tobago (25 nautical miles) and NOT the US (1,100+ nautical miles), according to the digital outlet ElPitazo. The "ship" lacks the range for that distance.

#EnLaSierra Testimonios de familiares en el estado Sucre desmienten la narrativa de Trump sobre el ataque naval. La embarcación se dirigía a Trinidad y Tobago (25 mn) y NO a EE.UU. (1.100+ mn) según medio digital ElPitazo. "Buque" carece de autonomía para esa distancia.

The boat was a flipper type (12 m), with a maximum range of 200 nautical miles. Destination Trinidad: viable. Destination USA: impossible. Maritime interdiction protocols were ignored. There was no warning and no boarding attempt.

La lancha era tipo "flipper" (12m), con autonomía máxima 200 mn. Destino Trinidad: viable. Destino EE.UU.: IMPOSIBLE. Los protocolos de interdicción marítima fueron ignorados. No hubo advertencia ni intento de abordaje.

Representatives of the Cartel of the Suns say the video of the drug-laden speedboat destroyed by the United States off the coast of Venezuela was created using virtual reality. Others will tell you that the boat with four engines, costing tens of thousands of dollars, belonged to fishermen. But as I told you yesterday, in San Juan de Unare they are in mourning. They even want to cancel the Patron Saint Festival. Many are afraid to say anything out of retaliation, others because it will ruin the business from which most of them make a living. Threats are never lacking. This is not a story; it's the reality of a narco-state.

Personeros del Cartel de Los Soles dicen que el video de la lancha rápida con droga destruída por Estados Unidos frente a la costa de Venezuela fue creado con realidad virtual, otros te van a decir que esa lancha con 4 motores que cuestas decenas de miles de dólares era de pescadores. Pero como les dije ayer, en San Juan de Unare están de luto. Hasta quieren cancelar las Fiestas Patronales. Muchos temen decir algo por represalias, otros porque se les arruina el negocio del que viven la mayoría. Las amenazas no faltan. No es cuento, es la realidad de un narco estado.

VIDEO | Donald Trump has shared a video on social media of the moment the US fired on a boat coming from Venezuela. The attack left 11 dead. https://social.elpais.com/oqs6z48

VÍDEO | Donald Trump ha compartido en sus redes sociales un vídeo del momento en el que EE UU dispara contra una embarcación procedente de Venezuela. El ataque ha causado 11 muertos https://social.elpais.com/oqs6z48

Regarding the drug boat sunk by the United States in the Caribbean: several Venezuelans who died in the operation have been identified. Residents of San Juan de Unare, Sucre, report that the town has been taken over by the National Guard to prevent anyone from speaking to the press. YouTube: https://youtube.com/@la_katuar

Sobre la narcolancha hundida por Estados Unidos en el Caribe: varios venezolanos que fallecieron en el operativo han sido identificados Pobladores de San Juan de Unare, Sucre, reportan que el pueblo está tomado por la guardia nacional para evitar que alguien declare a la prensa YouTube: https://youtube.com/@la_katuar

#HeadlinesThursday4September #FightCensorship #ReadAndShare Boat destroyed by US leaves San Juan de Unare; neighbors mourn the 11 men who died

#TitularesJueves4Sept #CombateLaCensura #LeeYComparte Lancha destruida por EE UU partió de San Juan de Unare, vecinos lloran a los 11 hombres que murieron

“San Juan de Unare in mourning, may those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace, so that their families can live a little better,” wrote one resident on TikTok. September 4, 2025 - 4:34 pm September 4, 2025 - 4:34 pm Events.- In San Juan de Unare, Sucre state, residents mourn the 11 men who died when a speedboat was destroyed by the United States Navy in the Caribbean Sea on Monday. Through social media, residents of this coastal area have lamented the deaths of these individuals, which contradicts the government's version, which suggests that the video of the attack published by US authorities was created using artificial intelligence. Relatives and residents of San Juan de Unare, in Sucre state, reported this Thursday, September 4, via TikTok, the alleged identities of some of the 11 Venezuelans who reportedly died during the United States attack on a boat in "international waters." "San Juan de Unare in mourning, may those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace, so that their families can live a little better," wrote one resident on TikTok. Relatives of the boat's crew reject the government's version. With photographs and farewell messages, they revealed the identities of the victims: eight were from Unare and three from Güiria, as confirmed by local sources to El Pitazo and journalist Sebastiana Barráez. Boat departed from San Juan de Unare bound for Trinidad The boat departed on the night of August 31 and was bound for Trinidad and Tobago. The director of El Pitazo, César Batiz, explained that it was a pinball machine, a speedboat about 12 meters long by 2.5 meters wide, equipped with four 200-horsepower engines. "Before it was destroyed, two other boats loaded with drugs left and managed to pass through without being intercepted," said sources involved in the investigation. US President Donald Trump confirmed the attack and asserted that it was part of the naval deployment to stem the flow of drugs in the region. Journalist Sebastiana Barráez stated that information about who was on the boat immediately spread throughout the town: "Everyone in San Juan de Unare knew." She explained that the crew members felt confident because they were not on a large ship or plane, but on a smaller vessel, albeit with a considerable cargo. According to her sources, before being caught by the US military, the men threw some of the merchandise into the sea. Sucre: From Fishing to Drug Trafficking The tragedy once again highlights how drug trafficking looms over the Sucre coast. Towns like Güiria, Puerto Santo, and San Juan de Unare went from being fishing and tourist centers to corridors for organized crime. The lack of opportunities and the economic crisis pushed many fishermen to replace their fishing nets with smuggling gasoline, migrants, and ultimately drug trafficking. Today, according to an investigation by El Estímulo, speedboats loaded with drugs ply the Gulf of Paria bound for Trinidad and Tobago and other Caribbean islands. The operation is constant: the boats travel in flotillas, with the logic that one will make it to their destination. The one destroyed by the United States was part of a group of three. Events El Pitazo / El Siglo. Photos Courtesy of Noticias de Barinas –

“San Juan de Unare de luto, que descansen en paz esos padres de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad, para que su familia viva un poco mejor”, escribió un habitante en TikTok 4 de septiembre, 2025 - 4:34 pm 4 de septiembre, 2025 - 4:34 pm Sucesos.- En San Juan de Unare, estado Sucre, los vecinos lloran a los 11 hombres que murieron cuando una lancha rápida fue destruida por la Armada de Estados Unidos en el mar Caribe el lunes. A través de redes sociales, habitantes de esta zona costera han lamentado el fallecimiento de estas personas, lo que contradice la versión del gobierno, que apunta a que el video del ataque publicado por autoridades estadounidenses fue realizado con inteligencia artificial. Familiares y vecinos de San Juan de Unare, en el estado Sucre, informaron este jueves 4 de septiembre, a través de TikTok, las presuntas identidades de parte de los 11 venezolanos que habrían fallecido durante el ataque de Estados Unidos a una lancha en “aguas internacionales”. “San Juan de Unare de luto, que descansen en paz esos padres de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad, para que su familia viva un poco mejor”, escribió un habitante en TikTok. Los familiares de los tripulantes de la embarcación rechazan la versión del gobierno. Con fotografías y mensajes de despedida, dieron a conocer la identidad de las víctimas: ocho eran de Unare y tres de Güiria, según confirmaron fuentes locales a El Pitazo y la periodista Sebastiana Barráez. Lancha salió desde San Juan de Unare rumbo a Trinidad La embarcación salió la noche del 31 de agosto y tenía como destino Trinidad y Tobago. El director de El Pitazo, César Batiz, explicó que se trataba de un flipper, una lancha rápida de unos 12 metros de largo por 2,5 de ancho, equipada con cuatro motores de 200 caballos de fuerza cada uno. “Antes de que fuera destruida salieron otras dos lanchas con droga que lograron pasar sin ser interceptadas”, dijeron fuentes de la investigación. El presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, confirmó el ataque y aseguró que forma parte del despliegue naval para frenar el flujo de drogas en la región. La periodista Sebastiana Barráez sostuvo que la información sobre quiénes iban en la lancha se conoció de inmediato en el pueblo: “Todos en San Juan de Unare lo sabían”. Detalló que los tripulantes se sintieron confiados porque no iban en un gran buque ni en un avión, sino en una embarcación más pequeña, aunque con un cargamento considerable. Según sus fuentes, antes de ser alcanzados por los militares estadounidenses, los hombres arrojaron parte de la mercancía al mar. Sucre: de la pesca al narcotráfico La tragedia vuelve a poner en evidencia cómo el narcotráfico ronda la costa de Sucre. Localidades como Güiria, Puerto Santo y San Juan de Unare pasaron de ser centros pesqueros y turísticos a corredores del crimen organizado. La falta de oportunidades y la crisis económica empujaron a muchos pescadores a sustituir la red por el contrabando de gasolina, migrantes y finalmente el narcotráfico. Hoy, según una investigación de El Estímulo, lanchas rápidas cargadas con droga surcan el golfo de Paria con destino a Trinidad y Tobago y otras islas del Caribe. La operación es constante: las lanchas viajan en flotillas, con la lógica de que alguna logrará llegar a destino. La destruida por Estados Unidos formaba parte de un grupo de tres. Sucesos El Pitazo / El Siglo. Fotos Cortesía Noticias de Barinas –

Some of the deceased were on board the boat that left San Juan de Unare bound for Trinidad and Tobago.

Unos de los fallecidos , que iban a bordo de la lancha que salió de San Juan de unare con destino Trinidad y Tobago

The true details of the boat destroyed by the US The military operation against a Venezuelan vessel in the Caribbean now has names and specific details: • A 12 m x 2.5 m flipper-type boat with four 200 HP engines. • It set sail on August 31 from San Juan de Unare (Sucre) to Trinidad and Tobago. • Eleven men were on board: eight from Unare and three from Güiria. • The owner's son died in the attack. The owner monitored the route via GPS. • The boat was destroyed on September 1; the following day, the US confirmed the deaths of all 11 crew members. But if all this is already known, why have the Attorney General's Office, the Public Prosecutor's Office, the Interior and Justice Department, the CICPC (Committee for the Protection of the Interior), the National Guard, the Army, and the entire FANB (National Armed Forces of Venezuela) done absolutely nothing? The truth is one: you are accomplices, participants, and beneficiaries of that vessel and the entire criminal network that supports it. @dcabellor YOU NOW HAVE 5 BOATS LEFT #NarcoState #Venezuela #FANB #MaduroNarcoDictator #NarcoRegime

Los verdaderos detalles de la lancha destruida por EE. UU. La operación militar contra una embarcación venezolana en el Caribe ya tiene nombres y datos concretos: •Lancha tipo “Flipper” de 12 m x 2,5 m, con 4 motores de 200 HP. •Zarpó el 31 de agosto desde San Juan de Unare (Sucre) hacia Trinidad y Tobago. •A bordo iban 11 hombres: 8 de Unare y 3 de Güiria. •El hijo del dueño murió en el ataque. El dueño controlaba la ruta por GPS. •La lancha fue destruida el 1 de septiembre; al día siguiente EE. UU. confirmó la muerte de los 11 tripulantes. Pero si ya todo esto se sabe: ¿por qué la Fiscalía, el Ministerio Público, Interior y Justicia, el CICPC, la Guardia Nacional, el Ejército y toda la FANB no han hecho absolutamente nada? La verdad es una sola: ustedes son cómplices, partícipes y beneficiarios de esa embarcación y de toda la red criminal que la sostiene. @dcabellor YA TE QUEDAN 5 LANCHAS #NarcoEstado #Venezuela #FANB #MaduroNarcoDictador #NarcoRégimen

URGENT THE BOAT WAS FROM SAN JUAN DE UNARE, SUCRE We have important information about the US attack on the drug vessel in the Caribbean. The boat left San Juan de Unare, a town in Sucre state taken over by drug traffickers, the Tren del Llano (Tren of the Plains) and the Tren de Aragua (Tren of Aragua). It was bound for Trinidad and Tobago. The boat left on Sunday and was destroyed early Monday morning. Two other boats had previously left but could not be intercepted. The drug shipment the boat was carrying was reportedly valued at $120 million in Miami. There are photos of three of the deceased: Leo Aguilarte, Euclides, and the last known as El Gato (The Cat). So far we only have these photos, but as soon as we receive the others, we will publish them here.

URGENTE LA LANCHA ERA DE SAN JUAN DE UNARE, SUCRE Tenemos importante información sobre el ataque de EE.UU. a la embarcación narco en el Caribe. La lancha salió de San Juan de Unare, población del estado Sucre tomada por el narcotráfico, el Tren del Llano y el Tren de Aragua. Iba con destino a Trinidad y Tobago. La lancha salió el domingo y fue destruida la madrugada de este lunes. Previamente salieron otras dos lanchas que no pudieron ser interceptadas. El cargamento de droga que habría llevado la lancha tendría un valor de 120 millones de dólares en Miami. Hay fotos de tres de los fallecidos: Leo Aguilarte, Euclides y el último conocido como El Gato. Hasta ahora solo tenemos estas fotos pero apenas nos lleguen los otros, estaremos publicándolos por acá.

Cabello questioned the US version and the way the boat's occupants were identified | File Photo A neighbor of one of the victims of the US bombing of a boat in the Caribbean claimed that the deceased were transporting drugs. In an interview with Univisión, the witness—who requested anonymity—said he knew one of the boat's occupants, identified as Che, whose family confirmed his death. The witness told the outlet that the man was dedicated to making deliveries to international cartels. "He wasn't the only one; rather, he was one of the smaller ones. The one who carried the merchandise, delivered it there and back, the one who ran the errands," he said. He added that each boat carries as many people as it carries sacks of drugs. “One hundred sacks is one hundred people going to work, each one carrying a sack. They load it and the boat leaves immediately,” he explained. Two boats had reportedly crossed the same route before the airstrike, reinforcing suspicions that the town of San Juan de Unare is under the control of drug traffickers, according to sources from El Pitazo. Chavismo denies that the boat destroyed by the US was carrying drugs. The Minister of the Interior, Justice and Peace and Secretary General of the PSUV, Diosdado Cabello, acknowledged the bombing that occurred in the Caribbean, in which 11 people died. However, he categorically denied that they were drug traffickers. “We have conducted our investigations in our country, and the families of missing persons are there, claiming their relatives. None of them were from the Aragua Train, nor were they drug traffickers, nor were they carrying drugs. A murder was committed against a group of citizens using lethal force,” Cabello stated during an extraordinary plenary session of the PSUV Congress. He questioned the United States' version and the way in which the boat's occupants were identified. “How did they identify them? Did they have a chip, a QR code, and read it from above, in the dark? They openly confessed to murdering 11 people,” he stated. The device is part of the US military deployment in the Caribbean, which Washington claims seeks to curb drug trafficking from Venezuela and combat the Cartel of the Suns, an organization that the government of Nicolás Maduro denies exists. US military deployment: boat that destroyed US San Juan de Unare

Cabello cuestionó la versión de EE UU y la forma en que se identificó a los ocupantes de la lancha| Foto ArchivoUn vecino de una de las víctimas del bombardeo estadounidense contra una lancha en el Caribe aseguró que los fallecidos trasladaban droga. En entrevista con Univisión, el testigo -que pidió el anonimato- afirmó que conocía a uno de los ocupantes de la embarcación, identificado como el Che, cuya familia confirmó su muerte.El testigo relató al medio que el hombre se dedicaba a hacer entregas a carteles internacionales. “Él no era el único, más bien era uno de los pequeños. El que llevaba la mercancía, entregaba allá y venía, el que hacía los mandados”, dijo.Añadió que en cada lancha viajan tantas personas como sacos de droga cargan. “Cien sacos son cien personas que van a trabajar, cada uno lleva un saco. Lo embarcan y sale de una vez esa lancha”, detalló.Dos embarcaciones habrían cruzado por la misma ruta antes del ataque aéreo, lo que refuerza las sospechas de que la población de San Juan de Unare se encuentra bajo control del narcotráfico, de acuerdo con fuentes de El Pitazo.Chavismo niega que lancha destruida por EE UU llevara drogaEl ministro de Interior, Justicia y Paz y secretario general del PSUV, Diosdado Cabello, reconoció el bombardeo ocurrido en el Caribe, en el que murieron 11 personas. No obstante, rechazó categóricamente que se tratara de narcotraficantes.“Hemos hecho nuestras investigaciones en nuestro país, y allí están las familias de personas desaparecidas que reclaman a sus parientes. Ninguno era del Tren de Aragua, ni narcotraficantes, ni llevaban drogas. Se ha cometido un asesinato contra un grupo de ciudadanos utilizando una fuerza letal”, afirmó Cabello durante una plenaria extraordinaria del Congreso del PSUV.Cuestionó la versión de Estados Unidos y la forma en que se identificó a los ocupantes de la lancha. “¿Cómo los identificaron? ¿Tendrían un chip, un código QR y lo leyeron desde arriba, en la oscuridad? Confesaron abiertamente que asesinaron a 11 personas”, señaló.El dispositivo forma parte del despliegue militar estadounidense en el Caribe, que según Washington busca frenar el tráfico de drogas desde Venezuela y combatir al Cartel de los Soles, organización que el gobierno de Nicolás Maduro niega que exista.Despliegue militar de EE UUlancha que destruyó EE UUSan Juan de Unare

Pain, sadness, and outrage are expressed by the families and residents of San Juan de Unare, in the state of Sucre, over the deaths of the 11 people on the boat allegedly carrying drugs that was attacked by the United States government in the Caribbean, near Venezuela. "San Juan de Unare is in mourning. May those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace, so that their families can live a little better." This is one of the messages being shared by users on social media, primarily on TikTok. Family members and friends deny that the attack was a video created using Artificial Intelligence, as claimed by the Nicolás Maduro administration, and they have given faces to the deceased with photographs they have shared. Sources from El Pitazo confirmed that the boat departed on the night of Sunday, September 1, and was destroyed on Monday in the Caribbean Sea. It was bound for Trinidad and Tobago, and 11 men were on board, eight of them residents of Unare and three from neighboring towns. "How you left us, my brother"; "behind 'that was God's will' there are a lot of tears and a lot of 'I don't understand why you, my precious one'," "you will be missed so much here, you left my heart in a thousand pieces," are the messages with photos and videos that the families of the deceased are posting on TikTok. Social media users are mourning the deaths of the Venezuelans who were on the boat destroyed by the United States. What is known about the drug boat bombed by the US? It left Sucre bound for Trinidad and Tobago. US President Donald Trump stated on Tuesday the 2nd at the White House that his country's Navy destroyed a boat manned by drug traffickers in Caribbean waters where the US has carried out a naval deployment in recent weeks with the purpose of "stopping the flow of drugs," according to Washington. The US government confirmed that the boat originated in Venezuela and departed from San Juan de Unare, a fishing town in Sucre state. "San Juan de Unare is an area that has been dominated by drug trafficking, identified for several years by US authorities," said Ronna Rísquez, journalist, researcher, and author of the book "El Tren de Aragua: La megabanda que revolucionió el crimen organizaci6n en América Latina," in conversation with César Batiz, director of El Pitazo. "It was a pinball machine, a speedboat about 12 meters long by 2.5 meters wide, with four engines of 200 horsepower each," Batiz explained regarding the details of the boat destroyed by the United States, according to sources from El Pitazo. According to sources from El Pitazo, before the boat was destroyed by the US military, two other boats loaded with drugs left the area and traveled along the same route without being intercepted. The Trump administration has assured that it will continue its operations in the Caribbean against drug cartels, while criticism has emerged from other governments, such as Colombia, which reject the killing of suspected drug traffickers instead of arresting them. YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN Petro on US military attack on Venezuelan vessel: "It's murder" Venezuela accuses the US of using Artificial Intelligence to create the video of the attack on a vessel in the Caribbean Thousands of Venezuelans in the most disconnected areas of the country visit El Pitazo to obtain essential information for their daily lives. For them, we are the only source of verified news without political bias. Sustaining the operation of this independent media outlet is increasingly expensive and difficult. That's why we ask you to send us a contribution to fund our work: we don't charge for reporting, but we hope readers will see the value of our work and make a financial contribution, which is increasingly needed. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION It's completely secure and only takes a minute.

Dolor, tristeza e indignación reflejan los familiares y vecinos de San Juan de Unare, en el estado Sucre, por la muerte de las 11 personas que iban en la lancha presuntamente con droga que atacó el gobierno de Estados Unidos en el Caribe, cerca de Venezuela. “San Juan de Unare de luto, que descansen en paz esos padre de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad, para que su familia viva un poco mejor”. Este es uno de los mensajes que replican usuarios en redes sociales, principalmente en TikTok. Los familiares y amigos niegan que el ataque se trate de un video elaborado con Inteligencia Artificial como lo aseguró la administración de Nicolás Maduro y le dieron rostro a los fallecidos con fotografías que difunden. Fuentes de El Pitazo aseguraron que la lancha partió la noche del domingo 1 de septiembre y fue destruida el lunes en el Mar Caribe. Iba con destino a Trinidad y Tobago, y a bordo viajaban 11 hombres, 8 de ellos habitantes de Unare y 3 de pueblos vecinos. “Cómo te nos fuistes mi hermano”; “detrás de un ‘esa fue la voluntad de Dios’ hay un montón de lágrimas y un montón de no entiendo por qué a ti mi precioso”, “aquí vas a hacer demasiada falta, me dejaste con el corazón en mil pedazos”, son los mensajes con fotografías y videos que los familiares de los fallecidos publican en TikTok. Usuarios en redes sociales lamentan la muerte de los venezolanos que iban en la lancha destruida por Estados Unidos. ¿Qué se sabe de la lancha con droga que bombardeó EE. UU.?: salió de Sucre con destino a Trinidad y Tobago El presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, aseguró el martes 2 en la Casa Blanca que la Armada de su país destruyó un barco tripulado por narcotraficantes en aguas del Caribe donde EE.UU. ha hecho en las últimas semanas un despliegue naval con el propósito de «frenar el flujo de drogas», según Washington. El gobierno de EE. UU. aseguró que la lancha procedía de Venezuela y se confirmó que partió de San Juan de Unare, una población pesquera del estado Sucre. «San Juan de Unare es una zona que ha estado tomada por el narcotráfico, identificada desde hace varios años por las autoridades estadounidenses», dijo Ronna Rísquez, periodista, investigadora y autora del libro El Tren de Aragua: La megabanda que revolucionó el crimen organizado en América Latina, en conversación con el director de El Pitazo, César Batiz.  «Se trataba de un flipper, una lancha rápida de unos 12 metros de largo por 2,5 de ancho, con 4 motores de 200 caballos de fuerza cada uno», explicó Batiz sobre los detalles de la embarcación destruida por Estados Unidos, de acuerdo con lo que le especificaron sus fuentes.  Según fuentes de El Pitazo, antes de que fuera destruida por militares estadounidenses esa embarcación, salieron otras dos lanchas cargadas con droga que pasaron por la misma ruta sin ser interceptadas. El gobierno de Trump aseguró que mantendrán sus operativos en el Caribe en contra de los cárteles del narcotráfico, mientras surgen las críticas de otros gobiernos, como Colombia, que rechazan el asesinato de los presuntos narcotraficantes en lugar de detenerlos. TAMBIÉN TE PUEDE INTERESAR Petro sobre ataque militar de EE. UU. contra embarcación venezolana: «Es un asesinato» Venezuela acusa a EE. UU. de crear con Inteligencia Artificial el video sobre ataque a embarcación en el Caribe Miles de venezolanos en las zonas más desconectadas del país visitan El Pitazo para conseguir información indispensable en su día a día. Para ellos somos la única fuente de noticias verificadas y sin parcialidades políticas. Sostener la operación de este medio de comunicación independiente es cada vez más caro y difícil. Por eso te pedimos que nos envíes un aporte para financiar nuestra labor: no cobramos por informar, pero apostamos porque los lectores vean el valor de nuestro trabajo y hagan una contribución económica que es cada vez más necesaria.HAZ TU APORTEEs completamente seguro y solo toma 1 minuto.

A US military operation in the Caribbean Sea has heightened tensions in relations between the United States and Venezuela. In the early hours of September 2, US military forces destroyed a speedboat that, according to reports, was transporting drugs from Venezuela. The attack left 11 dead. Below, we present what is known so far, according to sources consulted by investigative journalist César Batiz, director of El Pitazo, one of the most informed sources on the case, and the information released by the parties involved: *The speedboat set sail from San Juan de Unare, a coastal town in Sucre state, identified as "an area dominated by drug trafficking and identified as such for several years by US authorities," according to journalist Ronna Rísquez, author of the book about the Aragua Train. It left on Monday night, September 1, and was destroyed the following day in the Caribbean. *Journalist Batiz confirmed that eight of the crew members were from Unare and three from neighboring towns. Why were there 11? Because if these people realize they might be intercepted, they have the ability to launch the drugs into the sea at greater speed. *The final destination was allegedly Trinidad and Tobago, a route that has become a common corridor for drug, migrant, and arms trafficking, according to the US. *Sources consulted by El Pitazo revealed that the boat was a "flipper." It was a fast vessel about 12 meters long by 2.5 meters wide, equipped with four 200-horsepower engines. Mourning in San Juan de Unare: Family and friends share messages on social media *The boat had a GPS, and according to local sources, the ship's owner—whose son was on board and died in the attack—monitored the route from land. *Before the United States destroyed this vessel, two other boats loaded with drugs had left and passed the same route without being intercepted, as Batiz revealed in an interview with NTN24 and in reports from El Pitazo. *The operation was part of a US strategy to combat drug trafficking in the Caribbean, which includes the deployment of destroyers, submarines, and reconnaissance aircraft. *The White House claims that the deceased were members of the Tren de Aragua, an organization designated as a terrorist organization by the Donald Trump administration. *In San Juan de Unare, the atmosphere is one of mourning. Many of the dead were well-liked in the community, and some residents claim they became involved in drug trafficking out of economic necessity. *The attack has generated a strong military presence in the area, with National Guard patrols in San Juan de Unare. On Tuesday, September 2, a group of National Guard officers arrived in three vehicles. US vs. UN *Donald Trump justified the attack and stated that his administration is acting decisively against trafficking from Venezuela. *The US president said that "they won't do it again," referring to both the alleged drug traffickers and future attempts to transport narcotics to his country. *US Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted that intercepting drug shipments "no longer works" and warned that Washington will attack vessels again if necessary. *He noted that cartels spend billions of dollars on their operations and "don't care" about the losses caused by interdictions, which is why he considered the use of force necessary. *The UN called on the United States to respect international law. "People should not be killed for using, trafficking, or selling drugs," declared the spokesperson for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. What happened next? *On September 5, the United States reported that two Venezuelan military aircraft flew near a U.S. warship in what it described as "a highly provocative action." *Venezuela reportedly used F-16 fighter jets, and the target of the maneuver was the USS Jason Dunham, an Arleigh Burke-class Aegis guided-missile destroyer, part of the flotilla recently sent by the U.S. to the Caribbean Sea. *Marshall S. Billingslea, former Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing at the U.S. Department of the Treasury, publicly identified the two Venezuelan F-16 pilots as Cruz Alfredo Esteves Silva, 44, and Alfredo Tanzella Rangel, 55. https://twitter.com/M_S_Billingslea/status/1964073570016878944 *Nicolás Maduro criticized the US deployment in the Caribbean and announced that he will declare a "republic in arms" if US forces attack Venezuela. *On September 6, US Vice President JD Vance sent a forceful message: "Killing cartel members who poison our citizens is the highest and best use of our armed forces." YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN Marco Rubio reiterates in Ecuador: "Nicolás Maduro is a drug trafficker and a terrorist." What is known about the drug boat bombed by the US? It left Sucre bound for Trinidad and Tobago. Thousands of Venezuelans in the most disconnected areas of the country visit El Pitazo to obtain essential information for their daily lives. For them, we are the only source of verified news without political bias. Sustaining the operation of this independent media outlet is increasingly expensive and difficult. That's why we ask you to send us a contribution to fund our work: we don't charge for reporting, but we hope readers will see the value of our work and make an increasingly necessary financial contribution. MAKE YOUR CONTRIBUTION It's completely secure and only takes 1 minute.

Una operación militar estadounidense en el Mar Caribe recrudeció la tensión en las relaciones entre Estados Unidos y Venezuela. La madrugada del pasado 2 de septiembre, fuerzas militares de Estados Unidos destruyeron una lancha rápida que, según sus reportes, transportaba droga desde Venezuela. El ataque dejó 11 muertos. A continuación, te presentamos en claves lo que se sabe hasta el momento, según las fuentes consultadas por el periodista de investigación, César Batiz, director de El Pitazo, una de las voces más informadas sobre el caso, y la información divulgada por las partes involucradas: *La lancha zarpó desde San Juan de Unare, una localidad costera del estado Sucre, identificada como «una zona tomada por el narcotráfico e identificada desde hace varios años así por las autoridades estadounidenses» según la periodista, autora del libro sobre el Tren de Aragua, Ronna Rísquez. Salió el lunes 1 de septiembre en la noche y fue destruida al día siguiente en el Caribe. *El periodista Batiz confirmó que ocho de los tripulantes eran de Unare y tres de pueblos vecinos. ¿Por qué eran 11? Porque si estas personas observan que pueden ser interceptadas, tienen la posibilidad de lanzar la droga al mar con mayor velocidad. *El destino final era presuntamente Trinidad y Tobago, una ruta que se ha convertido en corredor habitual para el tráfico de drogas, migrantes y armas, de acuerdo con lo dicho por EE. UU. *Fuente consultadas por El Pitazo revelaron que la lancha era un “flipper”. Se trataba de una embarcación rápida de unos 12 metros de largo por 2,5 de ancho, equipada con cuatro motores de 200 caballos de fuerza. Luto en San Juan de Unare: familiares y amigos comparten mensajes por redes sociales *La barca contaba con GPS y, según fuentes locales, el dueño del navío -cuyo hijo iba a bordo y murió en el ataque- controlaba la ruta desde tierra. *Antes de que Estados Unidos destruyera esta embarcación habían salido otras dos lanchas cargadas con droga que pasaron por la misma ruta sin ser interceptadas, según reveló Batiz en entrevista con NTN24 y en reportajes de El Pitazo. *La operación fue parte de una estrategia de EE. UU. para combatir el narcotráfico en el Caribe, que incluye el despliegue de destructores, submarinos y aviones de reconocimiento. *La Casa Blanca afirma que los fallecidos eran miembros del Tren de Aragua, organización que el gobierno de Donald Trump ha designado como terrorista. *En San Juan de Unare, el ambiente es de luto. Muchos de los muertos eran apreciados en la comunidad y algunos vecinos afirman que se involucraron en el narcotráfico por necesidad económica. *El ataque ha generado una fuerte presencia militar en la zona, con patrullajes de la Guardia Nacional en San Juan de Unare. El martes 2 de septiembre, un grupo de funcionarios de la Guardia Nacional llegó en tres vehículos. EE. UU. Vs. la ONU *Donald Trump justificó el ataque y afirmó que su gobierno está actuando de forma contundente contra el tráfico proveniente de Venezuela. *El presidente de Estados Unidos dijo que «no lo volverán a hacer», refiriéndose tanto a los supuestos narcotraficantes como a futuros intentos de transportar estupefacientes a su país. *El secretario de Estado de Estados Unidos, Marco Rubio, aseguró que interceptar cargamentos de droga «ya no funciona» y advirtió que Washington volverá a atacar embarcaciones si es necesario. *Señaló que los carteles gastan miles de millones de dólares con sus operaciones y «no les importan» las pérdidas que suponen las interceptaciones, por lo que consideró necesario el uso de la fuerza. *La ONU pidió a Estados Unidos respetar derecho internacional. «Las personas no deberían ser asesinadas por usar, traficar o vender drogas», declaró la portavoz de la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos ¿Qué sucedió después? *El 5 de septiembre Estados Unidos aseguró que dos aviones militares venezolanos volaron cerca de un buque de guerra estadounidense en lo que calificó como «una acción altamente provocadora». *Venezuela habría utilizado aviones de combate F-16 y el blanco de la maniobra habría sido el buque USS Jason Dunham, un destructor de misiles guiados Aegis de la clase Arleigh Burke, parte de la flotilla enviada recientemente por EE.UU. al Mar Caribe. *Marshall S. Billingslea, exsecretario adjunto para el Financiamiento del Terrorismo en el Departamento del Tesoro de Estados Unidos, identificó públicamente a los dos pilotos venezolanos de los F-16 como Cruz Alfredo Esteves Silva, de 44 años, y Alfredo Tanzella Rangel, de 55 años.  https://twitter.com/M_S_Billingslea/status/1964073570016878944 *Nicolás Maduro criticó el despliegue de EE. UU. en el Caribe y anunció que declarará una «república en armas» si fuerzas de ese país atacan a Venezuela *El 6 de septiembre el vicepresidente norteamericano JD Vance envió un mensaje contundente: «Matar a miembros de carteles que envenenan a nuestros ciudadanos es el mayor y mejor uso de nuestras fuerzas armadas». TAMBIÉN TE PUEDE INTERESAR Marco Rubio reitera en Ecuador: “Nicolás Maduro es un narcotraficante y un terrorista” ¿Qué se sabe de la lancha con droga que bombardeó EE. UU.?: salió de Sucre con destino a Trinidad y Tobago Miles de venezolanos en las zonas más desconectadas del país visitan El Pitazo para conseguir información indispensable en su día a día. Para ellos somos la única fuente de noticias verificadas y sin parcialidades políticas. Sostener la operación de este medio de comunicación independiente es cada vez más caro y difícil. Por eso te pedimos que nos envíes un aporte para financiar nuestra labor: no cobramos por informar, pero apostamos porque los lectores vean el valor de nuestro trabajo y hagan una contribución económica que es cada vez más necesaria.HAZ TU APORTEEs completamente seguro y solo toma 1 minuto.

The United States government confirmed that the boat came from Venezuela and had departed from San Juan de Unare. Residents of San Juan de Unare, in the state of Sucre, have expressed grief and outrage following the deaths of 11 people aboard a boat that was attacked by the United States government in the Caribbean Sea because it was loaded with drugs. The attack occurred on Monday, a day after the vessel left the fishing village bound for Trinidad and Tobago. Relatives and neighbors have made the victims' names known through social media, refuting claims by the government of Nicolás Maduro, which described the attack as an artificial intelligence-generated video. "San Juan de Unare in mourning, may those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace, so that their families can live a little better," reads one of the messages shared on platforms such as TikTok. The posts include photographs and videos of the deceased, accompanied by emotional farewell messages. "How you left us, my brother"; “Behind ‘that was God’s will’ there are a lot of tears and a lot of ‘I don’t understand why you my precious one’, ‘You will be missed so much here, you left my heart in a thousand pieces’,” are the messages with photos and videos that relatives of the deceased publish on TikTok. Trump confirms the attack On Tuesday, United States President Donald Trump confirmed at the White House that his country’s Navy destroyed a boat manned by drug traffickers in Caribbean waters. This operation is part of a US naval deployment in the region, the objective of which is to stop the flow of drugs. Washington assured that the boat came from Venezuela, and it was confirmed that it had departed from San Juan de Unare. According to sources from El Pitazo, 11 men were traveling on the flipper-type boat: 8 of them from Unare and 3 from neighboring towns. The vessel, approximately 12 meters long with 4 powerful engines, was destroyed on Monday. According to journalist and researcher Ronna Rísquez, cited by El Pitazo, San Juan de Unare is an area identified by US authorities as an area controlled by drug trafficking. It has been reported that two other boats loaded with drugs departed along the same route before the incident and managed to pass without being intercepted. While the Trump administration assures that it will continue the operations, countries like Colombia have expressed their opposition, arguing that the arrest of the alleged drug traffickers should be sought rather than their murder. Caribbean boat that destroyed the US Sucre Unare

El gobierno de Estados Unidos aseguró que la lancha procedía de Venezuela y se confirmó que había partido de San Juan de UnareHabitantes de San Juan de Unare, en el estado Sucre, han expresado dolor e indignación tras la muerte de 11 personas a bordo de una lancha que fue atacada por el gobierno de Estados Unidos en el mar Caribe porque iba cargada de droga. El ataque ocurrió el lunes, un día después de que la embarcación partió del pueblo pesquero con destino a Trinidad y Tobago.Familiares y vecinos han dado a conocer a las víctimas a través de las redes sociales, desmintiendo las afirmaciones del gobierno de Nicolás Maduro, que calificó el ataque de video generado con inteligencia artificial.“San Juan de Unare de luto, que descansen en paz esos padres de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad, para que su familia viva un poco mejor”, se lee en uno de los mensajes compartidos en plataformas como TikTok.Las publicaciones incluyen fotografías y videos de los fallecidos, acompañados de emotivos mensajes de despedida.“Cómo te nos fuistes mi hermano”; “detrás de un ‘esa fue la voluntad de Dios’ hay un montón de lágrimas y un montón de no entiendo por qué a ti mi precioso”, “aquí vas a hacer demasiada falta, me dejaste con el corazón en mil pedazos”, son los mensajes con fotografías y videos que familiares de los fallecidos publican en TikTok.Trump confirma el ataqueEl martes, el presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, confirmó en la Casa Blanca que la Armada de su país destruyó un barco tripulado por narcotraficantes en aguas del Caribe. Este operativo forma parte de un despliegue naval norteamericano en la región, cuyo objetivo es frenar el flujo de drogas. Washington aseguró que la lancha procedía de Venezuela, y se confirmó que había partido de San Juan de Unare.Según fuentes de El Pitazo, en la lancha tipo flipper viajaban 11 hombres: 8 de ellos de Unare y 3 de pueblos vecinos. La embarcación, de aproximadamente 12 metros de largo con 4 potentes motores, fue destruida el lunes. De acuerdo con la periodista e investigadora Ronna Rísquez, citada por El Pitazo, San Juan de Unare es una zona identificada por las autoridades estadounidenses como un área controlada por el narcotráfico.Se ha reportado que otras dos lanchas cargadas con droga partieron por la misma ruta antes del incidente, y lograron pasar sin ser interceptadas. Mientras el gobierno de Trump asegura que continuará con los operativos, países como Colombia han expresado su rechazo, argumentando que se debe buscar la detención de los presuntos narcotraficantes en lugar de su asesinato.Caribelancha que destruyó EE UUSucreUnare

The US attack on a drug-laden boat in the Caribbean left 11 dead, eight of them from San Juan de Unare, a fishing village plunged into mourning. Isolated and affected by drug trafficking, the town faces the tragedy with collective grief and distrust of official discourse. Caracas. A wave of grief shook San Juan de Unare on the afternoon of Tuesday, September 2. The news that at least eight of its inhabitants had lost their lives in the US military attack on a boat in Caribbean waters plunged this fishing community in the state of Sucre into dismay. The boat, which departed on the night of Sunday, August 31, bound for Trinidad and Tobago, had 11 men on board. None survived. The rumor first reached us in whispers. That Tuesday, in the narrow streets of the town, the sound of the boats' engines was replaced by a dense silence. The fishermen, accustomed to the daily grind, did not go out to sea. Since then, the pier has been empty. The attack, announced by the Donald Trump administration around 3:00 p.m. on September 2, was part of recently deployed naval operations. In his brief address to the press, Trump emphasized that the boat was "loaded with drugs" and had set sail from Venezuela. Washington has maintained a military presence in the Caribbean since 2020 to curb drug trafficking to the United States and Europe, but at the end of August, it announced a deployment specifically aimed at halting drug trafficking from Venezuela. Photo: Courtesy of the White House Networks of Mourning Unlike the bellicose rhetoric with which the case was addressed as soon as it became known, at UNARE the news was received with tears, anger, and moving farewell messages on social media. Since the early hours of Wednesday, September 3, TikTok has been filled with photos and videos of some of the deceased, accompanied by phrases like "you left my heart in a thousand pieces" or "may those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace." The names began circulating first in WhatsApp groups and private Facebook profiles. They were well-known fishermen, fathers whom neighbors often saw repairing nets or selling fish on the shore. "They were local boys, from all their lives," one resident told Crónica Uno. The posts weren't anonymous: they had names and faces. A young fisherman in a faded T-shirt, a father posing with his children on the beach, a neighbor who once sold fish in the town square. The tragedy thus took on an intimate dimension, with profiles multiplying on phones throughout Unare. Photo: Courtesy of Minci Official Denial Since the boat's sinking became known, official voices were conspicuous by their absence. For more than four hours, the official statement was replaced by silence from the State. In those first hours, only the Minister of Communication and Information, Freddy Ñáñez, challenged the US maneuvers. In a message on his social media, he denounced, without providing conclusive evidence, that the video with which the White House confirmed the bombing was created using artificial intelligence. For his part, Diosdado Cabello, on his program "Con el Mazo Dando" on Wednesday, September 3, described the attack as "the latest thing they've invented" in the US. Thus, he suggested that it was a setup for political purposes—"regime change," he said—and called the video fake news, in what was a resounding denial of the Trump administration's version. Photo: Screenshot/Secretary of State Conflicting Positions On Thursday, September 4, during an official event, Attorney General Tarek William Saab asserted that the attack "never happened" and criticized the US for presenting only "an animated video" without coordinates or evidence. He pointed out that, if it had happened, the correct thing to do was "to detain, not destroy" the vessel. "If the incident had occurred, which it didn't, the first thing would have been to try to detain, without destroying without prior combat, that alleged vessel, (of which) they haven't disclosed the coordinates, where it came from, how it came out, who was there. Simply an animated video," Saab argued. However, one day before Saab's statements, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended Donald Trump's order in Mexico and warned that the strategy of destroying drug boats "will happen again" because, he said, it is the only way to stop the cartels. “The US has long used established technology to intercept and intercept drug trafficking vessels. But it doesn't work because these drug cartels know they're going to lose 2% of their cargo. What will stop them is if they destroy them,” Rubio explained. Disputed Route The contrast between the silence of local authorities and the speed with which the community flooded social media with photos and messages marked the first major narrative gap in this tragedy. The official version was more of a denial, but the digital memory of the residents had already written the chronicle of grief. San Juan de Unare and its neighbor San Juan de las Galdonas, both in the Arismendi municipality, have been identified as strategic drug trafficking enclaves due to their location on the Paria Peninsula, a maritime corridor that connects directly to the Caribbean islands and with routes to Central America and Europe. InSight Crime—a center specializing in organized crime in Latin America—documented in 2019 that local gangs use speedboats to transport cocaine, weapons, and gasoline to Trinidad and Tobago, with the support of law enforcement agencies. In 2018, the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence identified Sucre as the fifth most violent state in the country, with 97 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Most of these deaths are associated with disputes over these routes. Poverty and Violence: Double Sentence Violence in the area is not new. In September 2018, the so-called "San Juan de las Galdonas massacre" left up to 78 dead in just two days, in a dispute over a drug shipment. Most of the bodies were thrown into the sea or buried in clandestine graves. Only two bodies reached a cemetery in Río Caribe, according to reports from family members at the time. Three years later, in 2021, an operation involving more than 500 officers killed Gilberto Hernández, alias Malony, the leader of a gang linked to the Tren de Aragua—a Venezuelan mega-gang with a presence in several Latin American countries—that controlled the area. The town, with its narrow streets and humble houses, is no stranger to the influence of these mafias. Neighbors confirmed to Crónica Uno that several of the deceased were fishermen, who combined their work with trips linked to smuggling and drug trafficking. The boat owner monitored the route using a GPS; his own son was among the dead, according to journalist Sebastiana Barráez. The other three deceased were from Güiria, another coastal town in Sucre marked by migration, drug trafficking, and precarious conditions. This fact amplifies the tragedy: it wasn't just UNARE, but more communities that live facing the sea and under the same weight of smuggling. Pain mingles with resignation. In San Juan de Unare, everyone knows the fishing is no longer enough. Therefore, the line between fisherman and trafficker blurs with each nighttime trip to the neighboring islands of Trinidad and Tobago. Photo: US Navy. Town Taken Over On Tuesday, the arrival of National Guard officers in three vehicles was reported, and by Wednesday, September 3, the deployment had doubled. But in the community, the military presence does not inspire confidence. Many remember that before the sinking of the destroyed boat, two others had set out on the same route with drug shipments without being intercepted. While Washington has defended the sinking of the boat as a blow to drug trafficking, in San Juan de Unare, the improvised funerals reveal another side: that of a people trapped between poverty, violence, and a lack of alternatives. Where fishing and tourism once reigned—the Paria Peninsula was a tourist enclave with beaches like La Uva and El Cocal, now abandoned due to insecurity—fear and dependence on organized crime now dominate. “How you left us, my brother,” wrote a young woman on TikTok. The message encapsulates the feelings of a people mourning their children and fearing that history will repeat itself. To date, all that is known is that the boat was headed to Trinidad and Tobago when it was intercepted and destroyed in Caribbean waters. This neighboring island, located less than 150 km from the Paria Peninsula, has historically been used as an entry point for cocaine and contraband. The tragedy is experienced in the town amid tears and farewell messages posted on social media. Many of the victims had been fishermen for decades, now trapped in an illicit economy that has replaced fishing and tourism as their main source of income. Drug trafficking in the region pays, according to local residents, up to ten times more than artisanal fishing. The Aragua Train Reports by InSight Crime, Transparencia Venezuela, and the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence have described how local gangs, in collusion with authorities, control the routes to the Caribbean. The violence in the area has had recent and bloody episodes. In 2018, a clash between gangs left up to 78 dead in the two towns. Known as the "San Juan de las Galdonas massacre," it culminated with bodies thrown into the sea and improvised mass graves. In 2021, the operation against criminal leader Malony—head of a gang associated with the Aragua Train, the most powerful mega-gang in Venezuela—exposed the power of organized crime in the region. Today, after the US attack, San Juan de Unare relives that past of blood and silence. Meanwhile, entire families bury their dead and fear that history will repeat itself. This intricate case, then, cannot be understood only in numbers or press releases. It is in the makeshift altars with candles, in the social media that have become virtual cemeteries, in the fear of a population that fears that these deaths will not be the last. Beyond the military report, what remains in San Juan de Unare is a wound that bleeds quietly but constantly. Read also: Trump and Maduro clash over versions of the attack on a boat "loaded with drugs" in the Caribbean

El ataque de EE. UU. a una lancha “cargada de drogas” en el Caribe dejó 11 muertos, ocho de ellos de San Juan de Unare, un pueblo pesquero sumido en el luto. Aislado y afectado por el narcotráfico, el lugar enfrenta la tragedia con dolor colectivo y desconfianza hacia los discursos oficiales. Caracas. Una ola de dolor sacudió a San Juan de Unare la tarde del martes, 2 de septiembre. La noticia de que al menos ocho de sus habitantes habían perdido la vida en el ataque militar estadounidense a una lancha en aguas del Caribe sumió en la consternación a esta comunidad de pescadores del estado Sucre. La embarcación, que partió la noche del domingo, 31 de agosto, rumbo a Trinidad y Tobago, llevaba a bordo a 11 hombres. Ninguno sobrevivió. El rumor llegó primero entre susurros. Ese martes, en las calles angostas del pueblo, el sonido de los motores de las lanchas fue reemplazado por un silencio denso. Los pescadores, acostumbrados a la faena diaria, no salieron al mar. Desde entonces, el muelle quedó vacío. El ataque, anunciado por el gobierno de Donald Trump el alrededor de las 3:00 p. m. del 2 de septiembre pasado, formó parte de los operativos navales desplegados recientemente. En su breve mensaje ante la prensa, Trump recalcó que la lancha estaba “cargada de drogas” y había zarpado de Venezuela. Washington mantiene presencia militar en el Caribe desde 2020 para frenar el tráfico de drogas hacia Estados Unidos (EE. UU.) y Europa, pero a finales de agosto pasado anunció un despliegue específicamente orientado a detener el narcotráfico proveniente de Venezuela. Foto: cortesía Casa Blanca Redes de luto A diferencia de la retórica belicista con la que se abordó el caso apenas se conoció, en Unare la noticia se recibió con lágrimas, rabia y conmovedores mensajes de despedida en redes sociales. Desde la madrugada del miércoles, 3 de septiembre, TikTok se llenó de fotografías y vídeos de algunos de los fallecidos, acompañados de frases como “me dejaste con el corazón en mil pedazos” o “que descansen en paz esos padres de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad”. Los nombres comenzaron a circular primero en grupos de WhatsApp y perfiles de Facebook privados. Eran pescadores conocidos, padres de familia a quienes los vecinos solían ver reparando redes o vendiendo pescado en la orilla. “Eran muchachos de aquí, de toda la vida”, comentó un poblador a Crónica Uno. Las publicaciones no eran anónimas: tenían nombre y rostro. Un joven pescador con camiseta desteñida, un padre que posaba con sus hijos en la playa, un vecino que alguna vez vendió pescado en la plaza del pueblo. La tragedia adquiría así una dimensión íntima, con perfiles que se multiplicaban en los teléfonos de todo Unare. Foto: cortesía de Minci Desmentido oficial Desde que se conoció el hundimiento de la lancha, las voces oficiales brillaron por su ausencia. Por más de cuatro horas, el comunicado institucional fue reemplazado por el silencio del Estado. En esas primeras horas, solo el ministro de Comunicación e Información, Freddy Ñáñez, le salió al paso a las maniobras estadounidenses. A través de un mensaje en sus redes sociales denunció, sin mostrar evidencia concluyente, que el video con el que la Casa Blanca confirmó el bombardeo fue creado con inteligencia artificial. Por su parte, Diosdado Cabello, en su programa “Con el Mazo Dando” del miércoles, 3 de septiembre, calificó el ataque como “lo último que se inventaron” en EE. UU. De esta forma, sugirió que se trataba de un montaje con fines políticos— “un cambio de régimen”, dijo— y calificó el video de fake news, en lo que fue una negación rotunda de la versión de la administración Trump. Foto: captura de pantalla/Secretary of State Posiciones encontradas El jueves, 4 de septiembre, durante un acto oficial, el fiscal general Tarek William Saab aseguró que el ataque “nunca ocurrió” y criticó que EE.UU. presentara solo “un video animado” sin coordenadas ni pruebas. Señaló que, de haber sucedido, lo correcto era “detener y no aniquilar” la embarcación. “De haber ocurrido el hecho, que no ocurrió, lo primero era buscar detener, sin aniquilar sin combate previo, a esa presunta embarcación, (de la) que no han dicho las coordenadas, de dónde salió, cómo salió, quiénes estaban allí. Simplemente un video animado”, adujo Saab. En cambio, un día antes de las declaraciones de Saab, el secretario de Estado de EE. UU., Marco Rubio, defendió en México la orden de Donald Trump y advirtió que la estrategia de destruir barcos con droga “volverá a suceder” porque, dijo, es la única forma de frenar a los cárteles. “EE. UU. ha utilizado durante mucho tiempo tecnología establecida para intervenir y establecer barcos narcotraficantes. Pero no funciona, porque estos cárteles de la droga saben que van a perder el 2 % de su carga. Lo que los detendrá es si los destruyen”, justificó Rubio. Ruta disputada El contraste entre el silencio de las autoridades locales y la rapidez con la que la comunidad llenó redes sociales con fotos y mensajes marcó la primera gran grieta narrativa de esta tragedia. La versión oficial fue más bien un desmentido, pero la memoria digital de los vecinos ya había escrito la crónica del duelo. San Juan de Unare y su vecina San Juan de las Galdonas, ambas en el municipio Arismendi, han sido identificadas como enclaves estratégicos del narcotráfico por su ubicación en la península de Paria, un corredor marítimo que conecta directamente con las islas del Caribe y con rutas hacia Centroamérica y Europa. InSight Crime —centro especializado en crimen organizado en América Latina— documentó en 2019 que las bandas locales emplean lanchas rápidas para movilizar cocaína, armas y gasolina a Trinidad y Tobago, con apoyo de cuerpos de seguridad. El Observatorio Venezolano de Violencia señaló en 2018 a Sucre como el quinto estado más violento del país, con 97 homicidios por cada 100.000 habitantes. La mayoría de estas muertes están asociadas a la disputa de esas rutas. Pobreza y violencia: doble condena La violencia en la zona no es nueva. En septiembre de 2018, la llamada “masacre de San Juan de las Galdonas” dejó hasta 78 muertos en apenas dos días, en una disputa por un cargamento de droga. A la mayoría de los cadáveres los arrojaron al mar o los enterraron en fosas clandestinas. Solo dos cuerpos llegaron a un cementerio en Río Caribe, de acuerdo con denuncias de familiares en su momento. Tres años después, en 2021, en un operativo de más de 500 funcionarios asesinaron a Gilberto Hernández, alias Malony, jefe de una banda ligada al Tren de Aragua —megabanda venezolana con presencia en varios países de América Latina— que controlaba la zona. El pueblo, de calles estrechas y casas humildes, no desconoce el peso de esas mafias. Vecinos confirmaron a Crónica Uno que varios de los fallecidos eran pescadores, que alternaban su oficio con viajes vinculados al contrabando y al narcotráfico. El dueño de la lancha controlaba la ruta a través de un GPS; su propio hijo estaba entre los muertos, según la periodista Sebastiana Barráez. Los otros tres fallecidos eran de Güiria, otro pueblo costero de Sucre marcado por la migración, el narcotráfico y la precariedad. Ese dato amplía la tragedia: no fue solo Unare, sino más comunidades que viven de cara al mar y bajo el mismo peso del contrabando. El dolor se mezcla con la resignación. En San Juan de Unare todos saben que la pesca ya no alcanza. Por eso, la frontera entre pescador y traficante se difumina en cada viaje nocturno hacia la vecinas islas de Trinidad y Tobago. Foto: US Navy. Pueblo tomado El martes se reportó la llegada de funcionarios de la Guardia Nacional en tres vehículos, y para el miércoles, 3 de septiembre, el despliegue se duplicó. Pero en la comunidad la presencia militar no genera confianza. Muchos recuerdan que antes del hundimiento de la embarcación destruida, otras dos partieron la misma ruta con cargamentos de droga sin que las interceptaran. Mientras Washington ha defendido el hundimiento de la embarcación como un golpe al narcotráfico, en San Juan de Unare los funerales improvisados revelan otra cara: la de un pueblo atrapado entre la pobreza, la violencia y la falta de alternativas. Donde antes reinaban la pesca y el turismo —la península de Paria fue un enclave turístico con playas como La Uva y El Cocal, en la actualidad abandonadas por la inseguridad—, actualmente domina el miedo y la dependencia del crimen organizado. “Cómo te nos fuiste, mi hermano”, escribió una joven en TikTok. El mensaje resume el sentir de un pueblo que llora a sus hijos y teme que la historia vuelva a repetirse. Hasta la fecha, solo se sabe que la embarcación se dirigía a Trinidad y Tobago cuando fue interceptada y destruida en aguas del Caribe. Esta isla vecina, situada a menos de 150 km de la península de Paria, ha sido históricamente utilizada como punto de entrada de cocaína y contrabando. La tragedia se vive en el pueblo entre lágrimas y mensajes de despedida publicados en redes sociales. Muchas de las víctimas eran pescadores desde hace décadas, ahora atrapados en una economía ilícita que ha reemplazado a la pesca y al turismo como principal fuente de ingresos. Y es que el narcotráfico en la región llega a pagar, de acuerdo con los propios pobladores, hasta diez veces más que la pesca artesanal. El Tren de Aragua Informes de InSight Crime , Transparencia Venezuela y del Observatorio Venezolano de Violencia han descrito cómo las bandas locales, en complicidad con autoridades, controlan las rutas hacia el Caribe. La violencia de la zona tiene episodios recientes y sangrientos. En 2018, un enfrentamiento entre bandas dejó hasta 78 muertos en las dos poblaciones. Conocida como la “masacre de San Juan de las Galdonas”, culminó con cadáveres arrojados al mar y fosas comunes improvisadas. En 2021, el operativo contra el líder criminal Malony —jefe de una banda asociada al Tren de Aragua, la megabanda más poderosa de Venezuela— evidenció el poder del crimen organizado en la región. Hoy, tras el ataque estadounidense, San Juan de Unare revive ese pasado de sangre y silencio. Mientras, familias enteras entierran a sus muertos y temen que la historia vuelva a repetirse. Este intrincado caso, entonces, no se entiende solo en cifras o comunicados. Está en los altares improvisados con velas, en las redes sociales que se han vuelto cementerios virtuales, en el miedo de un pueblo que teme que estos muertos no sean los últimos. Más allá del parte militar, lo que queda en San Juan de Unare es una herida que sangra en voz baja, pero constante. Lea también: Trump y Maduro chocan por las versiones del ataque contra lancha “cargada de drogas” en el Caribe

A Venezuelan speedboat with 11 crew members, mostly from San Juan de Unare, was destroyed by United States forces in the Caribbean. Among the victims was the son of the boat's owner. The incident has caused shock in the community, while reminding everyone that the area is marked by the presence of gangs like the Tren de Aragua. #USANews #BreakingNews #TikTokNews #ViralNews #NewsUpdate primiciainformativatv The United States Department of Defense sends an ultimatum to the Venezuelan military air force for flying over the area where United States Navy ships are located in the waters of the Caribbean Sea to combat the transfer of illicit substances to their country. #news #today #september5th #planes #venezuelanarmy controversialcontentoffcel Fama masterfully exposes the exact narrative of what happened to the 11 deceased who died from the attack by the United States Army when they were heading to Trinidad and Tobago in a boat loaded with illicit substances from San Juan de Unare in Sucre state. #elfama #news #boat #imagesoftheboat #sanjuandeunare controversialcontentoffcToday marks 120 uninterrupted hours of Hunger Strike in front of the headquarters of the International Criminal Court, incredibly we have not been attended to or heard and not even the Red Cross has given us support, this fight is for freedom, let us not abandon our strikers. ##jonatanpalaciosnews##hungerforfreedom##cpi@@Jonatan Palacios USA@@Jonatan Palaciosjonatanpalaciosnewsrelatives of the 11 victims who were on the boat loaded with illicit substances that was shot down by the United States Army in the Caribbean Sea. #newscontroversialcontentoffcAll the details of what happened in the Caribbean Sea with the Venezuelan boat #elflacowillnoticias #parati #venezuelalibre #unitedstates elflacowill#mceduardo28 #venezuela🇻🇪 #paratii #usa #CapCut mceduardo28#OnVideo📹| Head of State @Nicolás Maduro announced that tomorrow, Friday, #05Sep 2025, all persons enlisted in the Bolivarian National Militia will be summoned to begin the first comprehensive activation cycle. Likewise, he emphasized that the Communal Militia Units will be activated in more than 5,000 communal circuits across the country, as part of the planned territorial deployment. @VTVCanal.8 #Venezuela #video #lastminute matiastwitearTwo armed Venezuelan F-16 fighter jets flew over the U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer Jason Dunham in the southern Caribbean Sea in a show of force on Thursday, the Department of Defense reported, in the latest escalation of tensions between the Trump administration and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The flyover, first reported by CBS News, comes two days after the United States carried out a deadly military strike against a Venezuelan ship in the Caribbean that U.S. officials said was carrying drugs. Read more details in the pinned link.noticiastelemundo#noticiasdehoy #September12,2025 #venezuela🇻🇪 #Noticias lempro_oficialBREAKING NEWS FROM VENEZUELA! LANGB AGENTS ARRESTED INSIDE A MINI SUBMARINE.#breakingnews #venezuela #news #usa #USA user182315346A case shook Santa Lucía del Tuy, Paz Castillo municipality in Miranda. The Criminal Investigation Service confirmed the arrest of four people: the stepfather of a 16-year-old girl, two of her brothers, and the young woman's mother, accused of omission. The incident came to light thanks to a complaint filed by the community itself. All those involved were placed at the disposal of the Public Ministry of the state of Miranda while the investigations progress. This case has sparked outrage in the region and underscores the importance of protecting the most vulnerable, as well as the need to report any situation that threatens them. #Miranda #SantaLucíaDelTuy #News #Justice #Events lempro_oficial

You may likeUna lancha rápida venezolana con 11 tripulantes, la mayoría de San Juan de Unare, fue destruida por fuerzas de Estados Unidos en el Caribe. Entre las víctimas estaba el hijo del dueño de la embarcación. El hecho genera conmoción en la comunidad, mientras se recuerda que la zona está marcada por la presencia de bandas como el Tren de Aragua. #NoticiasUSA #BreakingNews #TikTokNews #NoticiaViral #NewsUpdate primiciainformativatvel departamento de defensa de los estados unidos le envía ultimátum a la fuerza aérea militar de Venezuela, por sobrevolar por la zona donde están los buques de la marina de los estados unidos en aguas del mar Caribe para combatir el traslado de sustancias ilícitas hacia su país. #noticias #hoy #5deseptiembre #aviones #ejercitodevenezuela contenidopolemicooffcel Fama expone de manera magistral la narrativa exacta de lo que sucedió con los 11 fallecidos que murieron por el ataque del ejército de los estados unidos cuando se dirigían a Trinidad y Tobago en una lancha cargada de sustancias ilícitas provenientes de san Juan de Unare en el estado Sucre. #elfama #noticias #lancha #imagenesdelalancha #sanjuandeunare contenidopolemicooffcHoy se cumplen 120 horas ininterrumpidas de Huelga De Hambre frente a la sede de la corte penal internacional, increíblemente no hemos sido atendidos ni se nos ha escuchado y es que ni siquiera la Cruz Roja nos ha brindado el apoyo, esta lucha es por la libertad, no abandonemos a nuestros huelguistas. ##jonatanpalaciosnews##hambrexlibertad##cpi@@Jonatan Palacios USA@@Jonatan Palaciosjonatanpalaciosnewsfamiliares de las 11 víctimas que iban en la lancha cargada de sustancias ilícitas que fue derribada por el ejército de los estados unidos en el Mar Caribe. #noticias contenidopolemicooffcTodos los detalles de lo que pasó en el mar caribe con la lancha de Venezuela #elflacowillnoticias #parati #venezuelalibre #estadosunidos elflacowill#mceduardo28 #venezuela🇻🇪 #paratii #eeuu #CapCut mceduardo28#EnVideo📹| Jefe de Estado @Nicolás Maduro comunicó que mañana viernes, #05Sep de 2025, todas las personas alistadas en la Milicia Nacional Bolivariana serán convocadas para iniciar el primer ciclo de activación integral. Asimismo, acentuó que se activarán las Unidades Comunales de Milicia en más de cinco mil circuitos comunales del país, como parte del despliegue territorial previsto. @VTVCanal.8 #Venezuela #video #ultimominuto matiastwitearDos aviones de combate F-16 venezolanos armados sobrevolaron el destructor lanzamisiles Jason Dunham de la Armada de los Estados Unidos en el sur del mar Caribe en una demostración de fuerza el jueves, según informó el Departamento de Defensa, en la última escalada de tensiones entre la Administración Trump y el mandatario de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro. El sobrevuelo, del que informó primero CBS News, sucede dos días después de que Estados Unidos llevara a cabo un ataque militar mortal contra un barco venezolano en el Caribe que, según funcionarios estadounidenses, transportaba drogas. Lee más detalles en el link anclado.noticiastelemundo#noticiasdehoy #12deseptiembre2025 #venezuela🇻🇪 #Noticias lempro_oficial¡ÚLTIMA HORA DE VENEZUELA! DETUVIERON A AGENTES DE LANGB DENTRO DE UN MINI SUBMARINO.#ultimahora #venezuela #noticias #usa #EEUU user182315346Un caso estremeció a Santa Lucía del Tuy, municipio Paz Castillo en Miranda. El Servicio de Investigación Penal confirmó la detención de cuatro personas: el padrastro de una adolescente de 16 años, dos de sus hermanos y la madre de la joven, señalada por omisión. El hecho salió a la luz gracias a una denuncia realizada por la propia comunidad. Todos los implicados quedaron a la orden del Ministerio Público del estado Miranda mientras avanzan las investigaciones. Este caso genera indignación en la región y resalta la importancia de proteger a los más vulnerables, así como la necesidad de denunciar cualquier situación que atente contra ellos. #Miranda #SantaLucíaDelTuy #Noticias #Justicia #Sucesos lempro_oficial

| BREAKING NEWS — One of the 11 occupants of the boat destroyed by the U.S. in the Caribbean has been identified: Reibys José Gómez Oliveros, alias "El Gato," a resident of San Juan de Unare. His father (left), Richard José Gómez Lugo, alias "El Chapa," charged in 2010 with robbery, is identified as the person who controls the area and has direct ties to the cargo, although he was not on board.

| ÚLTIMA HORA — Identificado uno de los 11 ocupantes de la lancha destruida por EE.UU. en el Caribe: Reibys José Gómez Oliveros, alias “El Gato”, residente en San Juan de Unare. Su padre (a la izquierda), Richarth José Gómez Lugo, alias “El Chapa”, imputado en 2010 por robo, es señalado como quien controla la zona y el enlace directo con la mercancía, aunque no iba a bordo.

You may like#4Sep #MarCaribe #MilitaryDeployment 🚨 US attack on boat in the Caribbean: these are the key points A boat carrying suspected drugs, which left San Juan de Unare, Sucre state, was destroyed by US forces on Monday, September 1, in the Caribbean. 🔹 The boat was carrying 11 people, including the owner's relatives. 🔹 It was a fast pinball machine, with four 200 HP engines. 🔹 Residents of Unare are shocked, and relatives deny that the video was generated by AI. 💬 The US insists: these operations will continue to combat drug trafficking groups and drug trafficking in the region. 🇻🇪 Maduro and his government call the attack a fabrication and denounce foreign interference. 📌 Tensions in the Caribbean are rising as versions of events from Washington and Caracas clash. Source: @elpitazo | @cesarbatizcsomosreporteya El Fama masterfully exposes the exact narrative of what happened to the 11 deceased who died from the attack by the United States Army while they were heading to Trinidad and Tobago in a boat loaded with illicit substances from San Juan de Unare in the state of Sucre. #elfama #news #boat #imagesoftheboat #sanjuandeunare controversialcontentoffc Relatives of the 11 victims who were on the boat loaded with illicit substances that was shot down by the United States Army in the Caribbean Sea. #news controversialcontentoffc A Venezuelan speedboat with 11 crew members, most of them from San Juan de Unare, was destroyed by United States forces in the Caribbean. Among the victims was the son of the boat's owner. The event generates commotion in the community, while remembering that the area is marked by the presence of gangs such as the Tren de Aragua. #USANews #BreakingNews #TikTokNews #ViralNews #NewsUpdate primiciainformativatvTwo armed Venezuelan F-16 fighter jets flew over the U.S. Navy’s guided-missile destroyer Jason Dunham in the southern Caribbean Sea in a show of force Thursday, the Defense Department said, in the latest escalation of tensions between the Trump administration and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The flyover, first reported by CBS News, comes two days after the U.S. carried out a deadly military strike on a Venezuelan ship in the Caribbean that U.S. officials said was carrying drugs. Read more details in the pinned link.noticiastelemundowhat is happening in unare, puerto Ordaz??ernesto_experimentadorMore details about the boat that left Sucre bound for Trinidad with Maduro's merchandise #elflacowillnoticias #greenscreen #venezuelalibre #estadosunidos elflacowill#ciudadguayana🇻🇪 Unare blocks non-stop routesAll the details of what happened in the Caribbean Sea with the boat from Venezuela #elflacowillnoticias #parati #venezuelalibre #estadosunidos elflacowillIn compliance with the Supervision Plan issued by the General Commander of the @pnbvzla, C / M Luis López, Director of Operations, inspected the different areas of the Ccpe #Sucre and the services attached to it, in order to guarantee the well-being of the police officer. The Director of Operations of the Cpnb guided the former personnel and the III process of Police Agents to continue their academic training and strengthen their knowledge in the area of citizen security. @nicolasmaduro @florescilia @remigioceballosichaso @rubensantiagos_ @migueldominguez08 @mijpvzla @pnbvzla @cpnbrediporiental @cpnbsucre #Cpnb #PNB #CitizenSecurity #UOTE #Venezuela #vzla cpnbsucrethe United States Department of Defense sends an ultimatum to the Venezuelan military air force for flying over the area where the United States Navy ships are located in the waters of the Caribbean Sea to combat the transfer of illicit substances to their country. #news #today #September5th #airplanes #venezuelanarmy controversialcontentoffc📌🇻🇪 Department of Defense reports that Venezuelan military aircraft flew over a US ship. Amid growing tension between the United States and Venezuela, the Department of Defense accused the maneuver of occurring in international waters. The incident, which Washington described as a "provocation," comes after an attack on a boat loaded "with drugs," killing 11 people. Reports @Elián Zidán. 📺 More from Univision News at 6:30pm/5:30pm and Nightly Edition at 11:30pm/10:30pm. #Venezuela #USA #drugtrafficking #NicolásMaduro #DonaldTrump uninoticias🚤 Boats with five 350-horsepower engines capable of carrying up to 4 tons have been seized in the Colombian Caribbean. But fishermen claim to have even seen boats with 500-horsepower engines, used only once and then destroyed. This explains how a boat can carry 11 people and tons of cargo without a problem. The left first said the images were fake, then that they were from the Houthis, and now that it's true, but "strange." What happened was not a simple operation: the United States sent a direct message: there will no longer be room for diplomacy on the high seas. #parati #Venezuela #USAchechosanguinothe Carúpano gang fell #paratiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii #ccs #police #venezuela🇻🇪 viejoroberth.7 More information on Sebastiana Barraez's YouTube channel #news #parati #viralvideo #VENEZUELA🇻🇪 #news noticiasvenezuela33

You may like#4Sep #MarCaribe #DespliegueMilitar 🚨 Ataque de EE. UU. a lancha en el Caribe: estas son las claves Una embarcación con presunta droga, que salió de San Juan de Unare, estado Sucre, fue destruida por fuerzas estadounidenses el lunes 1 de septiembre en el Caribe. 🔹 En la lancha viajaban 11 personas, incluyendo familiares del dueño. 🔹 Se trataba de un flipper rápido, con 4 motores de 200 HP. 🔹 Vecinos de Unare están conmocionados y familiares desmienten que el video fuera generado por IA. 💬 EE. UU. insiste: estas operaciones continuarán para combatir grupos narcotraficantes y el tráfico de drogas en la región. 🇻🇪 Maduro y su gobierno califican el ataque como un invento y denuncian injerencia extranjera. 📌 La tensión en el Caribe aumenta mientras se cruzan las versiones de Washington y Caracas. Fuente: @elpitazo | @cesarbatizcsomosreporteyael Fama expone de manera magistral la narrativa exacta de lo que sucedió con los 11 fallecidos que murieron por el ataque del ejército de los estados unidos cuando se dirigían a Trinidad y Tobago en una lancha cargada de sustancias ilícitas provenientes de san Juan de Unare en el estado Sucre. #elfama #noticias #lancha #imagenesdelalancha #sanjuandeunare contenidopolemicooffcfamiliares de las 11 víctimas que iban en la lancha cargada de sustancias ilícitas que fue derribada por el ejército de los estados unidos en el Mar Caribe. #noticias contenidopolemicooffcUna lancha rápida venezolana con 11 tripulantes, la mayoría de San Juan de Unare, fue destruida por fuerzas de Estados Unidos en el Caribe. Entre las víctimas estaba el hijo del dueño de la embarcación. El hecho genera conmoción en la comunidad, mientras se recuerda que la zona está marcada por la presencia de bandas como el Tren de Aragua. #NoticiasUSA #BreakingNews #TikTokNews #NoticiaViral #NewsUpdate primiciainformativatvDos aviones de combate F-16 venezolanos armados sobrevolaron el destructor lanzamisiles Jason Dunham de la Armada de los Estados Unidos en el sur del mar Caribe en una demostración de fuerza el jueves, según informó el Departamento de Defensa, en la última escalada de tensiones entre la Administración Trump y el mandatario de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro. El sobrevuelo, del que informó primero CBS News, sucede dos días después de que Estados Unidos llevara a cabo un ataque militar mortal contra un barco venezolano en el Caribe que, según funcionarios estadounidenses, transportaba drogas. Lee más detalles en el link anclado.noticiastelemundoque está pasando en unare , puerto Ordaz??ernesto_experimentadorMás detalles sobre la lancha que salió desde sucre rumbo a trinidad con la mercancía de Maduro #elflacowillnoticias #greenscreen #venezuelalibre #estadosunidos elflacowill#ciudadguayana🇻🇪 bloques de Unare rutas_sin_escalasTodos los detalles de lo que pasó en el mar caribe con la lancha de Venezuela #elflacowillnoticias #parati #venezuelalibre #estadosunidos elflacowillEn cumplimiento al Plan de Supervisión emanado por el Comandante General del @pnbvzla, el C/M Luis López, director de Operaciones, inspeccionó las distintas áreas del Ccpe #Sucre y los servicios adscritos al mismo, en pro de garantizar el bienestar del funcionario policial. El Director de Operaciones del Cpnb oriento al personal antiguo y al III proceso de Agentes Policiales a continuar formándose académicamente y fortalecer sus conocimientos en materia de seguridad ciudadana. @nicolasmaduro @florescilia @remigioceballosichaso @rubensantiagos_ @migueldominguez08 @mijpvzla @pnbvzla @cpnbrediporiental @cpnbsucre #Cpnb #PNB #SeguridadCiudadana #UOTE #Venezuela #vzla cpnbsucreel departamento de defensa de los estados unidos le envía ultimátum a la fuerza aérea militar de Venezuela, por sobrevolar por la zona donde están los buques de la marina de los estados unidos en aguas del mar Caribe para combatir el traslado de sustancias ilícitas hacia su país. #noticias #hoy #5deseptiembre #aviones #ejercitodevenezuela contenidopolemicooffc📌🇻🇪 Departamento de Defensa denuncia que aeronaves militares de Venezuela sobrevolaron un buque de EEUU. En medio de la creciente tensión entre Estados Unidos y Venezuela, el Departamento de Defensa acusó que esta maniobra ocurrió en aguas internacionales. El incidente que Washington calificó como una "provocación" ocurre tras el ataque a una lancha cargada "con drogas" donde murieron 11 personas. Informa @Elián Zidán. 📺 Más del Noticiero Univision a las 6:30pm/5:30C y Edición Nocturna a las 11:30pm/10:30C. #Venezuela #EEUU #narcotráfico #NicolásMaduro #DonaldTrump uninoticias🚤 En el Caribe colombiano han incautado lanchas con cinco motores de 350 caballos de potencia capaces de cargar hasta 4 toneladas. Pero pescadores aseguran haber visto incluso embarcaciones con motores de 500 caballos, usadas una sola vez y luego destruidas. Eso explica cómo una lancha puede llevar 11 personas y toneladas de carga sin problema. La izquierda primero dijo que eran imágenes falsas, después que eran de los hutíes y ahora que sí es cierto, pero “extraño”. Lo que pasó no fue una simple operación: Estados Unidos mandó un mensaje directo, en altamar ya no habrá espacio para diplomacia. #parati #Venezuela #USAchechosanguinocayó la banda de Carúpano #paratiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii #ccs #policia #venezuela🇻🇪 viejoroberth.7Más información en el canal de YOUTUBE de sebastiana Barraez #noticias #parati #viralvideo #VENEZUELA🇻🇪 #noticias noticiasvenezuela33

More details have emerged about the boat attacked by the United States in the Caribbean Sea this week. This is not due to information provided by authorities in Washington, but rather due to an investigation by local media outlets, which revealed who was on board the small vessel, which, according to the Donald Trump administration, was loaded with drugs, allegedly by members of the transnational gang Tren de Aragua, and which had departed from Venezuela. The new information comes at a time when the Republican administration has assured that it will once again militarily attack drug cartels, while Amnesty International is demanding an investigation into what happened on Tuesday due to the possibility that international law may have been violated. Follow us on our WhatsApp Channel to receive the latest news. Until now, there hasn't been much information about the boat. A video posted by Trump on social media on Tuesday only showed a speedboat, in a grainy image, with several engines and people on board. Instead of being stopped and boarded, the boat explodes and is engulfed in flames. The US president said 11 members of the Aragua Train were killed in the attack, which should "serve as a warning to anyone even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States," but his administration has avoided providing further explanation. In fact, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who claimed to have witnessed the attack live, refused to provide details about how it was carried out during an interview with Fox News. "We knew exactly who was on that boat. We knew exactly what they were doing and who they represented: the Aragua Train," he stated. New information has emerged: El Pitazo, a Venezuelan media outlet, revealed details about the attacked boat. According to reports, the boat left San Juan de Unare, in Sucre state, on Sunday night. The attack, according to sources, occurred on Monday. The boat was apparently traveling to Trinidad and Tobago, a country that has expressed its support for Trump and his plan to combat drug trafficking in the Caribbean. The local media outlet also claims that the boat "had 11 men on board, 8 of them residents of Unare and 3 from neighboring towns." "It was a pinball machine, a speedboat about 12 meters long by 2.5 meters wide, with four engines of 200 horsepower each," explained El Pitazo, which also detailed that the area, San Juan de Unare, is a municipality with a high presence of drug trafficking, so it is common for boats of this type to depart the area. Sometimes they transport drugs, but they also carry migrants or fishermen. Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration -:- Remaining Time 0:00 Close ✕ El Pitazo reports that "the owner of the boat, and it is unknown if the owner of the drug shipment, monitored the route via GPS, and his son was one of the victims because he was on board." It also reveals that "before that boat was destroyed by the US military, two other boats loaded with drugs left and traveled the same route without being intercepted" by the United States. Meanwhile, in San Juan de Unare, there is commotion, as the people who died in the US operation were well-known in that municipality. "San Juan de Unare is in mourning. May those fathers who enter this world out of necessity rest in peace, so that their families can live a little better," reads one of the many messages circulating on the social media platform TikTok from people lamenting what happened. Photographs of the alleged deceased are also circulating, although neither US authorities nor the Venezuelan regime have revealed their identities nor released images of the alleged members of the Tren de Aragua. Why does this operation represent a change in US strategy? Ryan Berg, director of the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, explains that the attack "demonstrates a change in the rules of engagement." "There are no longer boardings of vessels by the US Coast Guard: it's an approach much more similar to how the United States deals with pirates in the Gulf region, or terrorists in the Sahel." In 2008, the United States began actively attacking Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden. The first major confrontation in those waters was in April 2009, under President Barack Obama, when a Navy SEAL special forces team raided a vessel hijacked by pirates and killed three individuals. The United States designated Venezuela's Tren de Aragua, Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel, and several other drug trafficking organizations as terrorist groups earlier this year. Tuesday's attack on the boat comes at a time of rising tensions between the United States and Venezuela over the deployment of U.S. warships in the Caribbean, which Washington says is intended to combat trafficking but which Caracas considers a threat. The United States alleges that Nicolás Maduro heads a cocaine trafficking cartel and recently doubled its reward to $50 million for his capture to face drug trafficking charges. Maduro, for his part, has accused Trump of trying to provoke regime change and has launched a nationwide mobilization campaign. When asked about the potential for escalation with Venezuela as a result of the attack, Berg said that "Maduro is unlikely to say much, given that doing so would essentially confirm the government's claim that he is a drug trafficker and cartel boss." Venezuelan Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez asserted on social media that the video Trump posted "was very likely created using artificial intelligence (AI)." But fact-checkers deny this version. In San Juan de Unare, they also reject the claim and mourn their own people. "What will stop them is blowing them up and getting rid of them," said Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a day after confirming the attack in the southern Caribbean Sea against a boat allegedly linked to the Aragua Train. Like other members of the Trump administration, Rubio defended the need to carry out the strike against the vessel because, among other things, it was headed to his country. WILLIAM MORENO HERNÁNDEZ CARACOL NEWS

Se conocieron más detalles de la lancha que atacó Estados Unidos en el mar Caribe esta semana. No por información que proporcionaron las autoridades en Washington sino por la investigación de medios locales, que revelaron quiénes ocupaban la pequeña embarcación que, según el gobierno de Donald Trump, iba cargada de droga, supuestamente por integrantes de la banda trasnacional Tren de Aragua, y que había salido desde Venezuela. Los nuevos datos aparecen en momentos en los que la administración republicana aseguró que volverá a atacar militarmente a los cárteles de la droga, mientras que Amnistía Internacional exige una investigación sobre lo ocurrido el martes ante la posibilidad de que se haya violado el derecho internacional.Síganos en nuestro WhatsApp Channel, para recibir las noticias de mayor interésHasta ahora no había mucha información sobre la lancha. Un video publicado por Trump en redes sociales el martes solo mostraba una lancha rápida, en imagen granulada, con varios motores y personas a bordo. En lugar de ser detenida y abordada, la embarcación explota y es engullida por las llamas. El presidente de Estados Unidos dijo que 11 miembros del Tren de Aragua murieron en el ataque, que debería "servir de aviso a cualquiera que siquiera piense en introducir drogas en Estados Unidos", pero su gobierno ha evitado dar más explicaciones. De hecho, el secretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos, Pete Hegseth, quien afirmó haber presenciado el ataque en directo, se negó durante una entrevista con Fox News a dar detalles sobre cómo se llevó a cabo. "Sabíamos exactamente quién estaba en esa embarcación. Sabíamos exactamente qué hacían y a quién representaban: el Tren de Aragua", afirmó.Los nuevos datos que se conocen El Pitazo, medio de comunicación venezolano, reveló detalles de la lancha atacada. Según informó, la embarcación salió el domingo en la noche desde la población San Juan de Unare, en el estado Sucre. Y el ataque, apuntan sus fuentes, ocurrió el lunes. La lancha, al parecer, viajaba con destino a Trinidad y Tobago, país que le ha manifestado su apoyo a Trump y su plan para combatir el narcotráfico en el Caribe.El medio local también asegura que en la lancha "a bordo viajaban 11 hombres, 8 de ellos habitantes de Unare y 3 de pueblos vecinos". "Se trataba de un flipper, una lancha rápida de unos 12 metros de largo por 2,5 de ancho, con 4 motores de 200 caballos de fuerza cada uno", explicó El Pitazo, que detalló también que esa zona, San Juan de Unare, es un municipio con alta presencia de narcotráfico, por lo que en la zona es común que salgan lanchas de ese tipo. En ocasiones movilizan droga, pero también lo hacen con migrantes o pescadores. Video Player is loading.Current Time 0:00Duration -:-Remaining Time 0:00 Close ✕ El Pitazo cuenta que "el dueño de la lancha, y no se sabe si del cargamento de droga, controlaba la ruta a través de un GPS y su hijo fue una de las víctimas, porque iba a bordo". También revela que "antes de que esa embarcación fuera destruida por militares estadounidenses salieron otras dos lanchas cargadas con droga que pasaron por la misma ruta sin ser interceptadas" por Estados Unidos.En San Juan de Unare, entretanto, hay conmoción, pues las personas que murieron en el operativo de Estados Unidos eran conocidas en ese municipio. "San Juan de Unare de luto, que descansen en paz esos padre de familia que entran a ese mundo por necesidad, para que su familia viva un poco mejor", se lee en uno de los tantos mensajes que circulan en la red social TikTok de personas que lamentan lo que ocurrió. También circulan fotografías de quienes serían las personas fallecidas, aunque tanto las autoridades estadounidenses como el régimen venezolano no han revelado sus identidades ni han difundido imágenes de los supuestos integrantes del Tren de Aragua.¿Por qué este operativo representa un cambio en la estrategia de Estados Unidos? Ryan Berg, director del Programa de las Américas en el Centro de Estudios Estratégicos e Internacionales, explica que el ataque "demuestra un cambio en las reglas de enfrentamiento". "Ya no hay abordajes de embarcaciones por parte de la Guardia Costera de Estados Unidos: hay un enfoque mucho más parecido a cómo Estados Unidos lidia con piratas en la región del Golfo, o con terroristas en el Sahel". En 2008 Estados Unidos empezó activamente a atacar a los piratas somalíes en el Golfo de Adén. El primer gran enfrentamiento en esas aguas fue en abril de 2009, bajo la presidencia de Barack Obama, cuando un equipo de las fuerzas especiales Navy SEAL asaltó un navío secuestrado por los piratas y mataron a tres individuos.Estados Unidos ha designado al Tren de Aragua de Venezuela, al Cártel de Sinaloa de México y a varias otras organizaciones de narcotráfico como grupos terroristas a principios de este año. El ataque contra la lancha este martes se produce en un momento de crecientes tensiones entre Estados Unidos y Venezuela por el despliegue de buques de guerra estadounidenses en la región del Caribe, que, según Washington, busca combatir el tráfico, pero que Caracas considera una amenaza. Estados Unidos alega que Nicolás Maduro encabeza un cártel de tráfico de cocaína y recientemente duplicó su recompensa a 50 millones de dólares por su captura para enfrentar cargos de narcotráfico. Maduro, por su parte, ha acusado a Trump de intentar provocar un cambio de régimen y ha lanzado una campaña de movilización nacional.Al ser consultado sobre el potencial de escalada con Venezuela como resultado del ataque, Berg dijo que "es poco probable que Maduro diga mucho, dado que hacerlo esencialmente confirmaría la afirmación del gobierno de que es un narcotraficante y el jefe de un cártel". El ministro de Comunicación venezolano, Freddy Ñáñez, aseguró en redes sociales que el video que colgó Trump "es muy probable que se haya creado mediante inteligencia artificial (IA)". Pero verificadores de contenido niegan esa versión. En San Juan de Unare, además, rechazan esa afirmación y lloran a los suyos."Lo que les detendrá es hacerlos explotar y deshacerse de ellos", aseguró el secretario de Estado, Marco Rubio, un día después de confirmar el ataque en el sur del mar Caribe contra una lancha supuestamente vinculada al Tren de Aragua. Como otros miembros de la administración Trump, Rubio defendió la necesidad de llevar a cabo ese golpe contra la embarcación porque, entre otras cosas, se dirigía a su país.WILLIAM MORENO HERNÁNDEZNOTICIAS CARACOL

On the morning of September 2, 2025, a small speedboat skims across open water somewhere in the Caribbean Sea. Suddenly, in a flash of white, it’s destroyed in a U.S.-launched airstrike. All 11 people on board are reportedly killed. Two weeks later, another boat meets the same fate, with reports indicating three more people are killed. Aerial footage of both attacks, posted online by U.S. President Donald Trump, shows more than just a grainy, bird’s-eye view of the missions; it reveals the role that Canadian technology played in these airstrikes. An investigation by Project Ploughshares has confirmed that both operations relied on advanced electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) sensor systems built in Hamilton, Ontario, by L3Harris WESCAM. These sensors, sold in large volumes to the U.S. government, are designed to surveil below aircraft, identify potential targets, and coordinate airstrikes with precision. Their distinctive on-screen interface, visible even in the redacted airstrike footage shared by President Trump, confirms that Canadian technology played a central role in the operations. Human-rights monitors and UN officials have determined that the attacks, which took place in international waters and targeted alleged drug smugglers in the absence of any declared conflict, amount to extrajudicial killings. This, in turn, raises the question of whether Canadian technology will continue to facilitate such unlawful strikes in the region. Canada is legally bound to ensure that its export of military goods does not contribute to violations of international law. But because of a decades-old agreement between Canada and the United States, most military goods that Canada sends to its southern neighbour — including the WESCAM sensors used in these operations — bypass the very export controls designed to prevent Canadian technology from contributing to such abuses.These U.S. airstrikes reveal the consequences of this loophole and signal the immediate need to close it. Read full report below.

The U.S. campaign targeting what it says is drug trafficking from Venezuela has exposed Trinidad to the fallout: unidentified bodies with burn marks and missing limbs showing up in its territory.Cumana in Trinidad and Tobago, where two bodies washed ashore.A Mystery in Trinidad as Bodies Wash Ashore After U.S. StrikesThe U.S. campaign targeting what it says is drug trafficking from Venezuela has exposed Trinidad to the fallout: unidentified bodies with burn marks and missing limbs showing up in its territory.Cumana in Trinidad and Tobago, where two bodies washed ashore.Credit...Simon Romero and Prior BeharryVisuals by Federico RiosSimon Romero and Prior Beharry traveled to Cumana on Trinidad’s northeastern coast to examine the mystery involving bodies cast up by the sea after U.S. attacks.Oct. 23, 2025The first body washed ashore on Trinidad’s northeastern coast soon after the United States carried out its first strike in September on a boat in the Caribbean. Villagers said the corpse had burn marks on its face and was missing limbs, as if it had been mangled by an explosion.The tides deposited another corpse on a nearby beach days later, drawing a wake of vultures. Its face was similarly unrecognizable, and its right leg appeared to have been blown off.The bodies have fueled a mystery that is gripping parts of Trinidad and Tobago, the Caribbean nation that is within sight of Venezuela’s coast: Who were they? Did a U.S. strike kill them? Will more bodies appear on Trinidad’s beaches?Simon Romero is a Times correspondent covering Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. He is based in Mexico City.A version of this article appears in print on Oct. 24, 2025, Section A, Page 9 of the New York edition with the headline: A Grisly Mystery Washes Ashore in Trinidad After U.S. Boat Strikes. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | SubscribeRelated ContentAdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT

GÜIRIA, Venezuela (AP) — One was a fisherman struggling to eke out a living on $100 a month. Another was a career criminal. A third was a former military cadet. And a fourth was a down-on-his-luck bus driver. The men had little in common beyond their Venezuelan seaside hometowns and the fact all four were among the more than 60 people killed since early September when the U.S. military began attacking boats that the Trump administration alleges were smuggling drugs. President Donald Trump and top U.S. officials have alleged the craft were being operated by narco-terrorists and cartel members bound with deadly drugs for American communities. One mother describes the “confusion and anguish” of losing her son, who is believed to have been killed in one of the boats targeted by the U.S. military. (AP video Juan Arraez) The Associated Press learned the identities of four of the men – and pieced together details about at least five others – who were slain, providing the first detailed account of those who died in the strikes. In dozens of interviews in villages on Venezuela’s breathtaking northeastern coast, from which some of the boats departed, residents and relatives said the dead men had indeed been running drugs but were not narco-terrorists or leaders of a cartel or gang. Most of the nine men were crewing such craft for the first or second time, making at least $500 per trip, residents and relatives said. They were laborers, a fisherman, a motorcycle taxi driver. Two were low-level career criminals. One was a well-known local crime boss who contracted out his smuggling services to traffickers. The men lived on the Paria Peninsula, in mostly unpainted cinderblock homes that can go weeks without water service and regularly lose power for several hours a day. They awoke to panoramic views of a national park’s tropical forests, the Gulf of Paria’s shallows and the Caribbean’s sparkling sapphire waters. When the time came for their drug runs, they boarded open-hulled fishing skiffs that relied on powerful outboard motors to haul their drugs to nearby Trinidad and other islands. The residents and relatives interviewed by the AP requested anonymity out of fear of reprisals from drug smugglers, the Venezuelan government or the Trump administration. They said they were incensed that the men were killed without due process. In the past, their boats would have been interdicted by the U.S. authorities and the crewmen charged with federal crimes, affording them a day in court. The U.S. government “should have stopped them,” a man’s relative said.It has been difficult for relatives to learn much about their dead loved ones because criminal gangs and the Venezuelan government have long repressed the flow of information in the region. Venezuelan officials have blasted the U.S. government over the strikes, and the nation’s ambassador to the U.N. called the attacks “extrajudicial executions.” They have also steadfastly denied that drug traffickers operate in the country and have yet to acknowledge that any of its citizens have been killed in boat strikes. Spokespeople for Venezuela’s government did not respond to a request for comment.The Trump administration has justified the strikes by declaring drug cartels to be “ unlawful combatants ” and said the U.S. is now in an “armed conflict” with them. Trump has said each sunken boat has saved 25,000 American lives, presumably from overdoses. The boats, however, appear to have been transporting cocaine, not the far more deadly synthetic opioids that kill tens of thousands of Americans each year. Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, said in a statement to the AP that the Defense Department has “consistently said that our intelligence did indeed confirm that the individuals involved in these drug operations were narco-terrorists, and we stand by that assessment.”So far, the U.S. military has blown up 17 vessels, killing more than 60 people. Nine of the craft were targeted in the Caribbean, and at least three of those had departed from Venezuela, according to the Trump administration. The military is striking the boats at the same time the administration is applying increasing pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The Justice Department doubled a reward for his arrest to $50 million, and the U.S. military has built up an unusually large force in the Caribbean Sea and the waters off Venezuela and has flown pairs of supersonic, heavy bombers along the country’s coast. Relatives and acquaintances said they have confirmed the deaths through word-of-mouth and inexplicit social media posts that sought to convey information about the dead men without drawing the attention of Venezuelan authorities. They have also made what they described as reasonable deductions: The men have not returned phone calls or texts in weeks, or reached out to say they were OK; Venezuelan authorities, residents said, have also searched some of the homes of the dead men. “I want an answer, but who can I ask?” said a relative of one of the men. “I can’t say anything.”The fisherman (AP Illustration / Peter Hamlin) A native of Güiria, a village on the southeast side of the peninsula, Robert Sánchez dropped out of school as a teenager and like many others in the region became a fisherman like his father, according to friends and relatives. The 42-year-old was considered among the peninsula’s best pilots, they said, having spent the better part of three decades mastering the area’s currents and winds, so much so he could navigate the waters at night without instruments. As part of hired crews, the father of four spent his days fishing for snapper, kingfish and dogfish. The fisherman wanted to save enough money to buy a 75-horsepower boat engine so he could operate his own boat and not work for others. It was a dream Sánchez knew he was likely to never realize, relatives said: Most of his income — about $100 a month — went to feed his children.He was not alone in that situation. The peninsula is part of Sucre state, one of Venezuela’s poorest. Sucre was once home to several fish processing plants, an auto assembly plant and a large public university, all of which offered well-paying jobs. Most have shuttered. The peninsula is dotted by the unfulfilled promises of 26 years of a self-described socialist government, including an abandoned shipyard and the rusted infrastructure meant for a natural gas complex. With its proximity to the Caribbean Sea, the area is a popular transit hub for cocaine making its way from Colombia to Trinidad and other Caribbean islands before heading to Europe. Colombian cocaine destined for the U.S. is generally smuggled out of Colombia through the Pacific coast. The larger economic pressures — and Sánchez’s goal of owning a boat engine — are what pushed the fisherman to accept an offer to help traffickers navigate the tricky waters he knew so well, friends and relatives said. Sánchez had just finished offloading a day’s catch last month when he told his mother he would be taking a short trip and would see her in a couple of days. They had no idea where he was going. After seeing clips on social media that mentioned his death, relatives broke the news to his mother, but not until after ensuring she had taken her blood pressure medication. Sánchez’s youngest son, a third grader, could not accept for days that his father was gone. He kept asking adults if his father could have survived the explosion, noting he might still be at sea.No, the adults told the boy. His father was gone. One of the first to die (AP Illustration / Peter Hamlin) Luis “Che” Martínez was killed in the first strike. A burly 60-year-old, Martínez was a longtime local crime boss, and he made most of his living smuggling drugs and people across borders, according to several people who knew him. He had been jailed by Venezuelan authorities on human-trafficking charges after a boat he had operated capsized in December 2020, killing about two dozen people, law enforcement officials said at the time. Among those who died in the accident were two of his sons and a granddaughter, relatives told the AP. The AP was not able to determine the disposition of his criminal case, but Martínez was eventually released from custody and returned to smuggling people and drugs, according to acquaintances. Though they detested what he did for a living — and the control Martínez and similar criminals exerted over their villages — several residents said they appreciated how Martínez contributed annually to the town’s festival of the Virgin of the Valley, the patroness of fishermen, and he spent lavishly in local shops and restaurants. He also bet heavily on cockfights, a popular pastime, a bird breeder said. Martínez was killed, a relative and several acquaintances said, in the first known U.S. strike, which took place Sept. 2. Trump quickly took to social media to claim the vessel had departed from Venezuela and had been carrying drugs. The 11-man crew, the president said, had been members of the Tren de Aragua gang. He said all of the men were killed and also posted a short video clip of a small vessel appearing to explode in flames.Martínez’s relatives said they did not believe the underworld figure was a member of that gang. They said they have been provided no information from the Venezuelan government about his fate. They figured it out when they came across a photo of a body that had washed ashore in Trinidad. The photo had been shared on social media and messaging apps and depicted a badly mutilated body. The people familiar with Martínez said they knew instantly the stout corpse was Martínez because, on his left wrist, was strapped one of his most treasured belongings: an ostentatious watch. The former cadet and bus driver (AP Illustration / Peter Hamlin) Dushak Milovcic, 24, was drawn to crime by the adrenaline rush and money, so much that he dropped out of the country’s National Guard Academy, according to those who knew him. He started as a lookout for smugglers, they said. Though he had no experience at sea, he eventually won a promotion to the more lucrative and coveted jobs on drug-running boats.It’s not clear how many trips he had undertaken before he was killed last month. Juan Carlos “El Guaramero” Fuentes had operated a transit bus for several years but was facing dire financial circumstances when it had broken down. The government had been unable — or unwilling — to fix it. That meant he was losing money because bus drivers in Venezuela typically pocket a portion of the fares, making it nearly impossible for him to feed and clothe his family. (AP Illustration / Peter Hamlin) Villagers said they were not surprised that Fuentes, who had no nautical experience, turned to smuggling to make ends meet. The higher-level traffickers who typically crewed such boats had been staying ashore to avoid being targeted by U.S. missiles. In their place, villagers said, they had been increasingly hiring novices like Fuentes. Fuentes told friends he had been nervous about his first smuggling run, knowing it would be filled with risks from weather, rival gangs, even the U.S. military. The September trip had gone surprisingly smoothly, he told friends, and he readily agreed to join another crew. Fuentes was killed in a missile strike last month, friends said, the precise one unknown. Dotted Line with Center Square —-Konstantin Toropin contributed from Washington.—This story was supported by funding from the Walton Family Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.—-Contact the AP’s global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org or https://www.ap.org/tips/

Exclusive: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave an order to “kill everybody” in the first strike on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean. After two men survived, the mission commander ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, according to two sources.

The longer the U.S. surveillance aircraft followed the boat, the more confident intelligence analysts watching from command centers became that the 11 people on board were ferrying drugs. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation. “The order was to kill everybody,” one of them said. A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck. The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack — the opening salvo in the Trump administration’s war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere — ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water. Hegseth’s order, which has not been previously reported, adds another dimension to the campaign against suspected drug traffickers.AI Icon Some current and former U.S. officials and law-of-war experts have said that the Pentagon’s lethal campaign — which has killed more than 80 people to date — is unlawful and may expose those most directly involved to future prosecution. The alleged traffickers pose no imminent threat of attack against the United States and are not, as the Trump administration has tried to argue, in an “armed conflict” with the U.S., these officials and experts say. Because there is no legitimate war between the two sides, killing any of the men in the boats “amounts to murder,” said Todd Huntley, a former military lawyer who advised Special Operations forces for seven years at the height of the U.S. counterterrorism campaign. Even if the U.S. were at war with the traffickers, an order to kill all the boat’s occupants if they were no longer able to fight “would in essence be an order to show no quarter, which would be a war crime,” said Huntley, now director of the national security law program at Georgetown Law. This report is based on interviews with and accounts from seven people with knowledge of the Sept. 2 strike and the overall operation. Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell declined to address questions about Hegseth’s order and other details of the operation, including Special Operations involvement. “This entire narrative is completely false,” he said in a statement. “Ongoing operations to dismantle narcoterrorism and to protect the Homeland from deadly drugs have been a resounding success.” The elite counterterror group SEAL Team 6 led the attack, according to four people with direct knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing sensitive operations. The commander overseeing the operation from Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley, told people on the secure conference call that the survivors were still legitimate targets because they could theoretically call other traffickers to retrieve them and their cargo, according to two people. He ordered the second strike to fulfill Hegseth’s directive that everyone must be killed. Later in the day, President Donald Trump released a redacted 29-second surveillance drone video showing the attack. The video does not include any footage of the subsequent strike on the survivors. In the weeks following that attack, the Trump administration notified Congress that the U.S. was in a “non-international armed conflict” with “designated terrorist organizations,” supported by an opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel that asserted that because the U.S. was in an armed conflict, personnel taking part in military strikes who were following orders consistent with the laws of war would not be exposed to prosecution. “That’s one of the problems with the law of armed conflict — the state using force is judge, jury and executioner,” Huntley said. Since that first attack, the Pentagon has hit at least 22 more boats, including one semisubmersible, in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing another 71 alleged drug smugglers, according to officials and internal data seen by The Washington Post. A clandestine strike At the time of the Sept. 2 strike, Bradley headed Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, tasked with the military’s most sensitive and dangerous missions, often working with counterparts in the CIA. Since then, Bradley has been promoted to lead U.S. Special Operations Command, JSOC’s parent organization, which oversees elite units across the military. SEAL Team 6, known formally as Naval Special Warfare Development Group and under JSOC command, conducted the intelligence collection and targeting for this attack and several others, according to two people. The protocols were changed after the strike to emphasize rescuing suspected smugglers if they survived strikes, according to three people.AI Icon It is unclear who directed the change in protocol and when exactly it took shape. In one Oct. 16 strike in the Atlantic Ocean that killed two, another two men were captured and repatriated to Colombia and Ecuador. In a series of strikes on four boats in the eastern Pacific on Oct. 27 that killed 14 men, one apparent survivor was left to the Mexican Coast Guard to retrieve. The body was never found. If the video of the blast that killed the two survivors on Sept. 2 were made public, people would be horrified, said one person who watched the live feed. The Intercept first reported that the survivors were killed in a follow-up attack. In briefing materials provided to the White House, JSOC reported that the “double-tap,” or follow-on strike, was intended to sink the boat and remove a navigation hazard to other vessels — not to kill survivors, according to another person who saw the report. A similar explanation was given to lawmakers in two closed-door briefings, according to two congressional aides. That explanation has prompted frustration among some members of Congress who say they believe the Pentagon was deceptive in its description of events, the aides said. “The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal,” said Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Massachusetts), a Marine Corps veteran and vocal Trump critic who received a classified briefing from Pentagon officials on the strikes in late October with other members of the House Armed Services Committee. “Mark my words: It may take some time, but Americans will be prosecuted for this, either as a war crime or outright murder.” The boat in the first strike was hit a total of four times, twice to kill the crew and twice more to sink it, four people familiar with the operation said. In subsequent strikes on alleged traffickers that left no survivors, the U.S. military has also fired multiple missiles to remove boats from the waterways, several people familiar with the matter said. A new lethal modus operandi The Pentagon’s lethal campaign marks a significant and controversial departure from U.S. counterdrug missions in the Western Hemisphere over the last several decades. Typically, Coast Guard ships and personnel have interdicted and boarded vessels believed to be trafficking, confiscating the narcotics and detaining the suspects for further prosecution. Other agencies, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, have relied on informants and court cases to better understand how drugs flow from South America into the United States. Officials have said the current strikes are carried out after monitoring the movement of boats and people, and target suspects only where there is high confidence they are trafficking drugs. Speaking a day after the first strike, Hegseth told Fox News, he watched the “live” video feed. “We knew exactly who was in that boat. We knew exactly what they were doing, and we knew exactly who they represented. And that was Tren de Aragua, a narcoterrorist organization designated by the United States, trying to poison our country with illicit drugs.” But in classified briefings to members of Congress, Pentagon officials have not provided any specific names of traffickers or syndicate leaders they have targeted, lawmakers have said, nor have they publicly released further information beyond surveillance videos of the strikes themselves. Current and former officials within the U.S. military and DEA have expressed doubt that all 11 people aboard the first vessel were complicit in trafficking. The boat in question, a go-fast vessel with four motors, is common in the region and would typically be manned by a small crew — perhaps one mechanic, a driver or two, and another person focused on security, one DEA official said. More people on board means less room for drugs to sell, the official explained. He assessed that the 11 people may have been a mix of drug runners and illegally trafficked migrants. Colombia’s president has accused the U.S. in at least one instance of killing an innocent fisherman. Trump and the Pentagon said the Sept. 2 strike targeted members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua but have not provided evidence to support those claims. In subsequent strikes, the administration has referred to the alleged smugglers as members of “designated terrorist organizations” — a blanket term that lacks detail. There are also gaps in the videos the administration has released of the strikes. Some show little beyond an initial violent explosion. There has been no public release of a subsequent strike video, and the Pentagon has not fulfilled a bipartisan request from lawmakers to see unedited footage — making it impossible to verify any of the administration’s claims. The lack of transparency is a major obstacle to government accountability for its use of force, Huntley said. “Really the only oversight,” he said, “is public and political pressure.”

The War Department provided an update today on the U.S. military's counter-narco-terrorism campaign, Operation Southern Spear, including the casualties inflicted upon suspected narco-terrorists and a reemphasis on how the operation's first kinetic boat strike unfolded. To date, a total of 21 kinetic strikes in U.S. Southern Command's area of operations have taken place, resulting in 82 narco-terrorists having been killed, Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson told the media. "Each strike conducted against these designated terror organizations is taken in defense of vital U.S. national interests and to protect the homeland," Wilson said. She added that the legality of the strikes has been thoroughly vetted by the proper authorities.  "Our operations in the Southcom region are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict. These actions have also been approved by the best military and civilian lawyers up and down the chain of command," Wilson said.  Along the lines of legality, Wilson also underscored White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt's statement yesterday that a "double tap" strike on an alleged Venezuelan narco-terrorism boat on Sept. 2 was ordered by U.S. Special Operations Command's top leader, Navy Adm. Frank "Mitch" Bradley, and not Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. A recent article published late last week claiming that Hegseth ordered the second strike has been a source of contention between President Donald J. Trump's administration, some members of Congress and the media.     "As the White House confirmed yesterday, the decision to restrike the narco-terrorists' vessel was made by Adm. Bradley, operating under clear and long-standing authorities to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States was eliminated," Wilson told the media.   "Let's make one thing crystal clear: Adm. Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and [he] has my 100% support," Hegseth said via a social media post yesterday.   "I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since. America is fortunate to have such men protecting us," he added. Wilson ended the Operation Southern Spear portion of her briefing by reemphasizing the War Department's commitment to protecting the American people.  "This department will defend our homeland. This is not a catchphrase; it's a commitment," she said. "And, as [Hegseth] said: When it comes to killing narco-terrorists, we have only just begun."

.@POTUS: "I want those boats taken out, and if we have to, we'll attack on land also...we're saving hundreds of thousands of lives with those pinpoint attacks." @SecWar: "Admiral Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat...we have his back, and the American people are safer..."

As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland. As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be “lethal, kinetic strikes.” The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people. Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization. The Biden administration preferred the kid gloves approach, allowing millions of people — including dangerous cartels and unvetted Afghans — to flood our communities with drugs and violence. The Trump administration has sealed the border and gone on offense against narco-terrorists. Biden coddled terrorists, we kill them. Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command. Our warriors in SOUTHCOM put their lives on the line every day to protect the Homeland from narco-terrorists — and I will ALWAYS have their back.

Senate Armed Services Committee responds to news stories about the alleged double tap strike:

JUST IN: Adm. Bradley gave the order for the 2nd strike on Venezuela boat, WH Press Sec. Karoline Leavitt says during briefing. Says Bradley was within legal right to order the second strike. So: WH not disputing the second strike, but is disputing Hegseth gave "kill" order.

Let’s make one thing crystal clear: Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made — on the September 2 mission and all others since. America is fortunate to have such men protecting us. When this @DeptofWar says we have the back of our warriors — we mean it.

Lawmakers are apparently being shown the full video of the Sept 2 boat strikes in their meetings with Adm Bradley and Gen Caine. HIMES: “what I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service…you have two individuals and clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel, were killed by the United States.”

Navy Adm. Frank M. “Mitch” Bradley will provide a classified briefing to the senior members of the Senate and House Armed Services committees Thursday about the Trump administration’s controversial strikes on Venezuelan boats suspected of smuggling drugs. Bradley was authorized by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to order a follow-up strike on Sept. 2 against survivors who were clinging to the wreckage of the targeted boat, an action that has triggered an uproar in Washington. Bradley, who was head of the Joint Special Operations Command at the time of the strike, will brief the chairs and ranking members of the Senate and House Armed Services panels on that and other incidents, according to a source familiar with the matter. The Washington Post reported Bradley directed a second strike during a September operation to comply with Hegseth’s order that no one be left alive. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters Tuesday that senators are looking for more information about the incident. “The committee of jurisdiction, the Armed Services Committee, has asked for a briefing by the appropriate administration officials, and I assume we’ll attempt to get all the facts surrounding what happened with that incident,” he said. Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), a member of the Armed Services panel, told reporters Tuesday that the strikes on Venezuelan vessels fall squarely within President Trump’s power as commander in chief. Sign up for the Morning Report The latest in politics and policy. Direct to your inbox. By signing up, I agree to the Terms of Use, have reviewed the Privacy Policy, and to receive personalized offers and communications via email, on-site notifications, and targeted advertising using my email address from The Hill, Nexstar Media Inc., and its affiliates “President Trump is clearly within his Article II powers,” he said. “The fact is, they’re taking out narcoterrorist boats. That’s the truth. So to try to spin this into something else — this is just the constant churning that all the Democrats have. They don’t have a message.” Schmitt disputed The Washington Post’s report that Hegseth ordered that no one be left alive. “The New York Times today even debunked this bogus Washington Post story,” he said, referring to a report published in the Times on Monday citing five anonymous U.S. officials who said Hegseth ordered the Sept. 2 strike on the suspected drug boat but did not specifically order follow-up strikes to eliminate survivors. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Reed statement just now: “I am deeply disturbed by what I saw this morning. The Department of Defense has no choice but to release the complete, unedited footage of the September 2nd strike, as the President has agreed to do. This briefing confirmed my worst fears about the nature of the Trump Administration’s military activities, and demonstrates exactly why the Senate Armed Services Committee has repeatedly requested – and been denied – fundamental information, documents, and facts about this operation. This must and will be the only beginning of our investigation into this incident.”

Lawmakers are apparently being shown the full video of the Sept 2 boat strikes in their meetings with Adm Bradley and Gen Caine. HIMES: “what I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service…you have two individuals and clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel, were killed by the United States.”

Two men who survived a US airstrike on a suspected drug smuggling boat in the Caribbean clung to the wreckage for an hour before they were killed in a second attack, according to a video of the episode shown to senators in Washington.The men were shirtless, unarmed and carried no visible radio or other communications equipment. They also appeared to have no idea what had just hit them, or that the US military was weighing whether to finish them off, two sources familiar with the recording told Reuters.This is not a paywallEnter your email to keep reading - for free. It takes just 30 secondsWe’re committed to keeping our quality reporting open. By registering and providing us with insight into your preferences, you’re helping us to engage with you more deeply, and that allows us to keep our journalism free for all.Not signed in before? Create an accountThe pair desperately tried to turn a severed section of the hull upright before they died. “The video follows them for about an hour as they tried to flip the boat back over. They couldn’t do it,” one source said.The video of the attack on 2 September was seen by senators behind closed doors on Thursday amid growing concern that the US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, and other officials who ordered the attack may have committed a war crime.Later on Thursday, the Pentagon announced another deadly strike on a boat suspected of carrying illegal narcotics, killing four men in the eastern Pacific.This was the 22nd attack the US military has carried out against boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean and took the death toll of the campaign to at least 87 people.Video of the latest incident was posted on social media by the US Southern Command, which described it as a “lethal kinetic strike on a vessel in international waters operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization”.Its statement added: “Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was carrying illicit narcotics and transiting along a known narco-trafficking route in the Eastern Pacific. Four male narco-terrorists aboard the vessel were killed.”It was the first publicly announced strike in nearly three weeks and comes as the Pentagon and the White House have struggled to answer questions about the legal basis for the campaign to kill suspected drug smugglers.Adm Frank Bradley told lawmakers on Thursday there was no order to kill everyone on board the boat. Photograph: Anna Moneymaker/GettyMuch of the debate has focused on the first attack on 2 September after the Washington Post reported that Hegseth had verbally directed the military to “kill them all”.Adm Frank Bradley of the US navy, who commanded the attack, told lawmakers on Thursday there was no such order to kill everyone on board.Donald Trump posted video of the initial strike on his Truth Social platform shortly after the operation, but no footage of the follow-up attack that killed the two remaining crew members has been released. On Wednesday, Trump vowed to make the entire video public, but the Pentagon has not yet done so.Jim Himes, a Democratic congressman who saw the video on Thursday, described it as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service”.He said: “You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel.”Describing those on board as “bad guys” who “were not in the position to continue their mission in any way”, Himes added: “Any American who sees the video that I saw will see the United States military attacking shipwrecked sailors.”The attack began with an airburst munition exploding above the vessel and killing nine crew members. The two men who survived were then visible floating in the water.Bradley, who was the head of the Joint Special Operations Command at the time, concluded that the wreckage was likely being kept afloat because there was cocaine inside and could drift long enough to be recovered, said the sources familiar with the recording.They added that the video shows three additional munitions being fired at the damaged vessel. “You could see their faces, bodies … Then boom, boom, boom,” the first source said.Reactions of the lawmakers who watched the video split along party lines, with Democrats voicing distress and Republicans defending the strike as legal.Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the Republican chair of the Senate intelligence committee, said: “I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs bound for the United States, back over so they could stay in the fight.”Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University and a former Pentagon lawyer, took issue with Cotton’s interpretation in a post on Bluesky. “I’d love to know how Senator Cotton … was able to detect these shipwrecked people were trying to ‘stay in the fight’ versus clinging to dear life in an effort to survive,” he wrote.“Even if you buy all the legal falsehoods (that this is an ‘armed conflict’, that drugs are war-sustaining objects), the two shipwrecked were in no way, shape or form engaged in ‘active combat activities’ (the actual legal test).”The US Department of Defense’s Law of War manual forbids attacks on combatants who are incapacitated, unconscious or shipwrecked, so long as they abstain from hostilities and do not attempt to escape. The manual cites firing upon shipwreck survivors as an example of a “clearly illegal” order that should be refused.The Trump administration has argued that the US is at war with drug traffickers and that such strikes are legal under the rules of war, but most legal experts reject that rationale.Rebecca Ingber, a professor at Cardozo School of Law and a former legal adviser to the US state department, told the Guardian this week: “Even if we buy into their framing that the individuals on these vessels are combatants, it would still be unlawful to kill them if they are hors de combat, which means they’re incapacitated … It is manifestly unlawful to kill someone who’s been shipwrecked.”Marcus Stanley, director of studies at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said the strikes themselves constitute potential war crimes, even before the killing of survivors.“What’s the next step? There’s somebody committing a street crime, or you claim they’re committing a street crime in a United States city, and then you can unleash the military on them without judicial evidence,” he said. “The American people should get as much transparency and information here to judge what’s being done in their name as possible.”

Cai Pigliucci at the US Capitol, James FitzGerald, and Brandon Drenon in WashingtonReutersA US Navy admiral testified that Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth did not give the order to "kill them all" during a controversial second US military strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean, multiple lawmakers have said. The affirmations by Democratic and Republican lawmakers were made after viewing footage of the 2 September double-strike incident and hearing from Adm Frank Bradley in closed-door hearings. The briefing before members of the House of Representatives and later the Senate came as questions continued around the legality of military force used against suspected drug boats.The White House has said Adm Bradley was responsible for the strikes and that he acted within the law.On Thursday evening the US military posted on X that it had killed four people in another boat strike in the eastern Pacific Ocean, at Hegseth's direction.Prior to news of the latest strike, lawmakers reacted to the testimony, with the most senior Democrat on the House intelligence committee, Jim Himes, saying Adm Bradley had his respect and "should have the respect of all of us".He added: "But what I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I've seen in my time in public service." "Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in the position to continue their mission in any way," Himes said. Watch: Lawmakers react to boat strike video showed in classified briefingAfter the briefing, Representative Adam Smith, the highest-ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, released a joint statement with Himes calling for the video to be released publicly."The briefing left us with more questions than answers, and Congress must continue to investigate this matter and conduct oversight," they said.Republican Senator Tom Cotton, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Adm Bradley and Hegseth "did exactly what we would expect them to do". "I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat loaded with drugs bound to the United States back over so they could stay in the fight," Cotton said. Republican House Representative Rick Crawford also defended the strikes and said there was "no doubt in my mind" that they were done in a way that was professional.Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat, said in a statement he was "disturbed" by what he saw, adding that his party would continue to investigate the incident. The revelation there were two strikes when the first left survivors has raised new questions over the legality of the administration's deadly ongoing campaign against boats, due to what the rules of conflict say about targeting wounded combatants.US President Donald Trump has said he has "no problem" with video of the second strike being made public. Footage of the first strike has already been released. During the incident, two survivors of the first strike tried to climb back onto the boat before the vessel was hit a second time, US media including CBS reported. A source said the pair appeared to be trying to salvage drugs.Adm Bradley was also expected to tell the high-ranking US lawmakers on Thursday that the survivors were a legitimate target because their boat was still thought to contain drugs, according to a US official who spoke to the Reuters news agency.The 2 September incident was the first in a series of ongoing US attacks against vessels that have left more than 80 people dead in both the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.While US officials have insisted the 2 September attack was lawful, a full picture is still emerging of what happened that day.The Washington Post was the first last week to report that two people had survived the first strike, and that Hegseth had allegedly ordered a second attack to kill them.At the time, Hegseth immediately condemned the reporting as "fabricated, inflammatory and derogatory", while Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the "entire narrative was false".The existence of a second strike was later confirmed by the White House. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said this week the order came not from Hegseth but from Adm Bradley, who acted "well within his authority and the law".On Tuesday, Hegseth said he had watched the initial strike as it took place before moving on to other meetings. He said he "did not personally see survivors", which he attributed to the flaming wreckage and "the fog of war".Later that day, the defence secretary recalled, he was informed that Adm Bradley decided to "sink the boat and eliminate the threat", a move he considered justified.Watch: "I did not personally see survivors", Hegseth says of second deadly boat strikeThe issue has drawn concern from Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike, many of whom had already criticised the military campaign more generally. As well as the lethal strikes on suspected drug-smuggling boats, the US has expanded its military presence in the Caribbean.Venezuela itself has repeatedly condemned the strikes, and has accused the White House of stoking tensions in the region with the aim of toppling the government.Trump has claimed that the strikes have led to a massive reduction in drug trafficking through maritime routes, without providing evidence.Evidence that the targeted individuals in each case were drug traffickers has likewise not been publicly provided.Multiple experts who spoke to the BBC have raised serious doubts that the second strike on survivors on 2 September could be considered legal under international law.A former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) previously told the BBC that US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats would be treated under international law as crimes against humanity."These are criminals, not soldiers. Criminals are civilians," he said. The survivors may have been subject to protections provided to shipwrecked sailors, or to those given to troops who have been rendered unable to continue fighting.The Trump administration has cast its operations in the Caribbean as a non-international armed conflict with the alleged drug traffickers.The rules of engagement in such armed conflicts - as set out in the Geneva Conventions - forbid the targeting of wounded participants, saying that those participants should instead be apprehended and cared for.Adm Bradley is yet to give any public comment on the matter. One of the dozens of people who have been killed in the ongoing US strikes is believed to be Alejandro Carranza, a Colombian, who was last seen on 14 September.Carranza's family have now filed a complaint with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) in Washington, BBC Mundo has confirmed.

SummaryU.S. military's first strike on drug boat in Caribbean detailedLawmakers' reactions to video split along party linesU.S. frames attacks as war with drug cartels, citing threat to AmericansWASHINGTON, Dec 5 (Reuters) - When the U.S. military carried out its first strike against a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean on September 2, the attack began with an airburst munition exploding above the 11-member crew like an umbrella of shrapnel.A video of the attack, shown to U.S. lawmakers on Thursday and described to Reuters by two sources familiar with the imagery, showed smoke clearing and two men, who had somehow lived through the blast, clinging to a severed section of the front of the vessel in a futile effort to survive.The Reuters Tariff Watch newsletter is your daily guide to the latest global trade and tariff news. Sign up here.They were shirtless, unarmed and carried no visible communications equipment. They also appeared to have no idea what had just hit them, or that the U.S. military was weighing whether to finish them off."The video follows them for about an hour as they tried to flip the boat back over. They couldn't do it," one source said.Admiral Frank Bradley, who was the head of the Joint Special Operations Command at the time, concluded that the wreckage was likely being kept afloat because there was cocaine inside and could drift long enough to be recovered, said the sources.So Bradley decided that, in order to complete the mission assigned by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and neutralize the threat posed by the drug boat, he would need to attack the vessel again.The video showed three additional munitions being fired at the damaged vessel, said the sources."You could see their faces, bodies... Then boom, boom, boom," the first source said.The video was shown behind closed doors on Capitol Hill by Bradley and General Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The reactions of the lawmakers who viewed it split along party lines, with Democrats voicing distress but Republicans defending the strike as legal.It was the first of 22 attacks on drug vessels carried out by the U.S. military as part of the Trump administration's campaign to stem the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. The strikes have killed 87 people, with one carried out in the eastern Pacific on Thursday."I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs bound for the United States, back over so they could stay in the fight," said Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.He said Bradley and Hegseth did exactly what was expected of them.But Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters after the briefing it was "one of the most troubling things" he had seen.Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was "deeply disturbed" by the video and said it should be released to the public.The Defense Department's Law of War Manual forbids attacks on combatants who are incapacitated, unconscious or shipwrecked, as long as they abstain from hostilities and do not attempt to escape. The manual cites firing upon shipwreck survivors as an example of a "clearly illegal" order that should be refused.However, the United States has framed the attacks as a war with drug cartels, calling them armed groups, and says the drugs being carried to the United States kill Americans.Reporting by Phil Stewart; additional reporting by Idrees Ali and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Don Durfee and Michael PerryOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tabPhil Stewart has reported from more than 60 countries, including Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China and South Sudan. An award-winning Washington-based national security reporter, Phil has appeared on NPR, PBS NewsHour, Fox News and other programs and moderated national security events, including at the Reagan National Defense Forum and the German Marshall Fund. He is a recipient of the Edwin M. Hood Award for Diplomatic Correspondence and the Joe Galloway Award.

The alleged drug traffickers killed by the US military in a strike on September 2 were heading to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname — a small South American country east of Venezuela – the admiral who oversaw the operation told lawmakers on Thursday, according to two sources with direct knowledge of his remarks. According to intelligence collected by US forces, the struck boat planned to “rendezvous” with the second vessel and transfer drugs to it, Adm. Frank Bradley said during the briefings, but the military was unable to locate the second vessel. Bradley argued there was still a possibility the drug shipment could have ultimately made its way from Suriname to the US, the sources said, telling lawmakers that justified striking the smaller boat even if it wasn’t directly heading to US shores at the time it was hit. US drug enforcement officials say that trafficking routes via Suriname are primarily destined for European markets. US-bound drug trafficking routes have been concentrated on the Pacific Ocean in recent years. The new detail adds yet another wrinkle to the Trump administration’s argument that striking the boat multiple times, and killing survivors, was necessary in order to protect the US from an imminent threat. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told traveling press in Florida shortly after the strike that the alleged drug boat targeted was “probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean.” However, President Donald Trump said in a post announcing the strike on September 2 that “The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States.” Bradley, who led Joint Special Operations Command at the time of the strike, also acknowledged that the boat had turned around before being struck, because the people on board appeared to see the American aircraft in the air, the sources said. CNN reported in September that the boat turned around before being hit. The US military ultimately struck the boat four times—the first time splitting the boat in half and leaving two survivors clinging to a capsized portion, CNN reported on Thursday. The second, third and fourth strikes killed them and sunk the vessel. The survivors were also waving at something in the air, the sources said Bradley told them and the video showed, although it’s unclear whether they might have been surrendering or asking the US aircraft they had spotted for help. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It is considered a war crime to kill shipwrecked people, which the Pentagon’s law of war manual defines as people “in need of assistance and care” who “must refrain from any hostile act.” Although most Republicans have signaled support for President Donald Trump’s broader military campaign in the Caribbean, the secondary strike on September 2 has drawn bipartisan scrutiny — including, most consequentially, a vow from the Senate Armed Services Committee to conduct oversight. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s role in the secondary strike — including the precise orders he gave Bradley — continues to be a point of scrutiny. Lawmakers were told on Thursday that Hegseth had made clear before the mission began that the strikes should be lethal, CNN has reported, but that he was not made aware of the survivors until after they had been killed, one of the sources with direct knowledge said. Bradley understood the mission objective to be to kill all 11 individuals on board and sink the boat, a US official said. But the order was not specifically an order to kill all and provide no quarter, meaning that someone who surrenders will be killed, which has “specific implications” and is illegal, the US official said. This story was updated with additional information. CNN’s Haley Britzky, Katie Bo Lillis and Evan Perez contributed to this report.

Two survivors clung to the wreckage of a vessel attacked by the U.S. military for roughly 45 minutes before a second strike killed them on September 2. After about three quarters of an hour, Adm. Frank Bradley, then head of Joint Special Operations Command, ordered a follow-up strike — first reported by The Intercept in September — that killed the shipwrecked men, according to three government sources and a senior lawmaker. Two more missiles followed that finally sank the foundering vessel. Bradley, now the chief of Special Operations Command, claimed that he conducted multiple strikes because the shipwrecked men and the fragment of the boat still posed a threat, according to the sources. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth distanced himself from the follow-up strike during a Cabinet meeting at the White House, telling reporters he “didn’t personally see survivors” amid the fire and smoke and had left the room before the second attack was ordered. He evoked the “fog of war” to justify the decision for more strikes on the sinking ship and survivors. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said Hegseth provided misleading information and that the video shared with lawmakers Thursday showed the reality in stark light. “We had video for 48 minutes of two guys hanging off the side of a boat. There was plenty of time to make a clear and sober analysis,” Smith told CNN on Thursday. “You had two shipwrecked people on the top of the tiny little bit of the boat that was left that was capsized. They weren’t signaling to anybody. And the idea that these two were going to be able to return to the fight — even if you accept all of the questionable legal premises around this mission, around these strikes — it’s still very hard to imagine how these two were returning to any sort of fight in that condition.” Three other sources familiar with briefings by Bradley provided to members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate and House Armed Services committees on Thursday confirmed that roughly 45 minutes elapsed between the first and second strikes. “They had at least 35 minutes of clear visual on these guys after the smoke of the first strike cleared. There were no time constraints. There was no pressure. They were in the middle of the ocean and there were no other vessels in the area,” said one of the sources. “There are a lot of disturbing aspects. But this is one of the most disturbing. We could not understand the logic behind it.” The three sources said that after the first strike by U.S. forces, the two men climbed aboard a small portion of the capsized boat. At some point the men began waving to something overhead, which three people familiar with the briefing said logically must have been U.S. aircraft flying above them. All three interpreted the actions of the men as signaling for help, rescue, or surrender. “They were seen waving their arms towards the sky,” said one of the sources. “One can only assume that they saw the aircraft. Obviously, we don’t know what they were saying or thinking, but any reasonable person would assume that they saw the aircraft and were signaling either: don’t shoot or help us. But that’s not how Bradley saw it.” Special Operations Command did not reply to questions from The Intercept prior to publication. During the Thursday briefings, Bradley claimed that he believed there was cocaine in the quarter of the boat that remained afloat, according to the sources. He said the survivors could have drifted to land or to a rendezvous point with another vessel, meaning that the alleged drug traffickers still had the ability to transport a deadly weapon — cocaine — into the United States, according to one source. Bradley also claimed that without a follow-up attack, the men might rejoin “the fight,” another source said. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., echoed that premise, telling reporters after the briefings that the additional strikes on the vessel were warranted because the shipwrecked men were “trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs bound for the United States, back over so they could stay in the fight.” None of the three sources who spoke to The Intercept said there was any evidence of this. “They weren’t radioing anybody and they certainly did not try to flip the boat. [Cotton’s] comments are untethered from reality,” said one of the sources. Sarah Harrison, who previously advised Pentagon policymakers on issues related to human rights and the law of war, said that the people in the boat weren’t in any fight to begin with. “They didn’t pose an imminent threat to U.S. forces or the lives of others. There was no lawful justification to kill them in the first place let alone the second strike,” she told The Intercept. “The only allegation was that the men were transporting drugs, a crime that doesn’t even carry the death penalty.” The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel this summer produced a classified opinion intended to shield service members up and down the chain of command from prosecution. The legal theory advanced in the finding claims that narcotics on the boats are lawful military targets because their cargo generates revenue, which can be used to buy weaponry, for cartels whom the Trump administration claims are in armed conflict with the U.S. The Trump administration claims that at least 24 designated terrorist organizations are engaged in “non-international armed conflict” with the United States including the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua; Ejército de Liberación Nacional, a Colombian guerrilla insurgency; Cártel de los Soles, a Venezuelan criminal group that the U.S. claims is “headed by Nicolas Maduro and other high-ranking Venezuelan individuals”; and several groups affiliated with the Sinaloa Cartel. We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us. Become a member The military has carried out 22 known attacks, destroying 23 boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean since September, killing at least 87 civilians. The most recent attack occurred in the Pacific Ocean on Thursday and killed four people. Since the attacks began, experts in the laws of war and members of Congress, from both parties, have said the strikes are illegal extrajudicial killings because the military is not permitted to deliberately target civilians — even suspected criminals — who do not pose an imminent threat of violence.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the U.S. military on Sept. 2 to kill all 11 people on a suspected drug-smuggling boat in the Caribbean Sea because they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who U.S. intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted, the commander overseeing the operation told lawmakers in briefings this past week, according to two U.S. officials and one person familiar with the congressional briefings.Such a list includes individuals who are eligible for being targeted, including with lethal action, if given the opportunity. The commander who oversaw the Sept. 2 strikes, Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley, told lawmakers that U.S. intelligence officials had confirmed the identities of the 11 people on the boat and validated them as legitimate targets, then the military launched airstrikes as part of President Donald Trump’s military campaign against alleged drug-smuggling vessels, the U.S. officials and person familiar with the congressional briefings said.The detail that the 11 people on the boat were on an internal U.S. military target list has not previously been made public. It adds another dimension to the Sept. 2 operation that has been mired in controversy over the military’s decision to launch a second strike after the first left two survivors in the water.Lawmakers have raised questions about whether the second strike violated international law. Whether Hegseth directed Bradley, who is the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, to kill everyone on the boat has been key question in the controversy over the second strike.An administration official said Bradley made clear in his briefings with lawmakers that he acted in complete compliance with the law throughout the operation. “As with all such actions, a uniformed JAG provided advice and counsel every step of the way,” the official said in a written statement, adding that the boat was targeted because it was “carrying cocaine” and was “affiliated with a cartel designated by the president as a terrorist organization.”“The cumulative impact of these narcoterrorist shipments directly threaten Americans and the national security interests of the United States,” the official said.The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment. U.S. Special Operations Command declined to comment.The Pentagon has said 22 strikes on alleged drug boats have killed 86 people — 11 strikes have been in the Caribbean Sea and 11 in the eastern Pacific. The administration has produced no evidence supporting its allegations about the vessels or the people on board.On Thursday, Bradley spent more than eight hours on Capitol Hill briefing a dozen members of Congress and their staff about what happened during the operation. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine, also attended the briefings.This account of Bradley’s detailed timeline and explanation of events throughout the Sept. 2 operation as told to lawmakers in the private briefings is based on interviews with the two U.S. officials and person familiar with the congressional briefings.Bradley told lawmakers that the orders he received from Hegseth were to kill the individuals on the approved target list, which included everyone on the boat, then destroy the drugs and sink the boat, those sources said.White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday that “Secretary Hegseth authorized Adm. Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes.” She added that Bradley “worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”Bradley told lawmakers the second strike killed the two survivors, but did not sink the boat, so he ordered a third and a fourth strike to complete the mission, the officials and person familiar with the congressional briefings said.Hegseth has said he observed the operation on Sept. 2 but “did not personally see survivors.” During a Cabinet meeting at the White House this past week, he defended the second strike, saying Bradley “made the right call.”“This is called the fog of war,” Hegseth said.During Bradley’s joint briefing Thursday with leaders of the House and Senate armed services committees, he was pressed about whether Hegseth gave an order to kill everybody on board, according to one of the U.S. officials and the person familiar with the briefing. Bradley, referencing the approved list of targets, said Hegseth told him to kill everyone on board and to destroy the vessel, the official and person familiar with the briefing said.In another briefing, Bradley was asked whether Hegseth gave him a “no quarter order,” which is an illegal military directive to kill all enemy combatants and show no mercy, even if they surrender or are gravely injured, one of the U.S. officials and a second person with knowledge of the briefing said. They said Bradley replied that he was not given such an order and would not have followed one if it had been given. The White House and Hegseth have said no illegal orders were given.Unlike a “no quarter order,” an order to kill everyone on a target list is not forbidden under U.S. and international law.The three sources said Bradley said the military struck the boat with a GBU-69, a precision-guided munition that was set to air burst, meaning it detonated in midair rather than on impact. He said the explosion killed nine of the people on board, capsized the boat and damaged the back of it, including the motor.Another part of the boat split off and caught fire, but a major section of the boat was not ablaze. The damage made the boat unlikely to continue navigating, Bradley told lawmakers.For more than 30 minutes, Bradley said, he observed the two survivors among the wreckage.He told lawmakers there were bags of cocaine on the boat that were not ejected during the initial explosion. Because the bags of cocaine were not seen floating in the water, Bradley said he believed they were strapped in and had stayed tied down during the explosion, making it likely the drugs were still under the capsized boat.The cocaine was wrapped in plastic waterproof bundles, which likely made them more buoyant and may have contributed to the boat not sinking, he told lawmakers.The two survivors got on the side of the boat that was not on fire and were able to flip it over and eventually stand on it.Bradley observed them take off their shirts to check each other for wounds and told lawmakers they did not appear to have any visible injuries. He said the military’s overhead surveillance zoomed in to ensure the survivors weren’t injured or bleeding.A U.S. military aircraft overhead spotted the survivors waving their arms but could not say with certainty whether they were signaling to the aircraft, Bradley told lawmakers, according to the three sources.He said he determined that while the boat sustained damage significant enough that it may not be able to navigate, it may still have been able to keep floating or drifting.U.S. intelligence also spotted another larger boat in the area, determining that the damaged boat was supposed to link up with it to transfer the drugs onto the larger vessel.The larger boat was not on the approved target list Bradley had, so he did not have the authority strike it. He said because the U.S. did not have positive identification of who was on the larger boat, waiting to see if it came to try to salvage the damaged boat and two survivors was not a viable option.Bradley explained, the three sources said, that his decision to target the boat with the survivors was because the drugs were not destroyed and the individuals on the boat had not surrendered and were not visibly injured but were still on the list of approved targets. And while the survivors were not armed, he said the mission identified the drugs as the threat to the U.S., effectively deeming the cocaine as the weapon that could endanger Americans.Even so, Bradley acknowledged to lawmakers that U.S. intelligence did not conclude the drugs were heading to the U.S. Rather it showed that the boat was traveling south toward another country in South America, Suriname, which was first reported by CNN. Bradley told the lawmakers the drugs were eventually heading to Europe or Africa.Courtney Kube is a correspondent covering national security and the military for the NBC News Investigative Unit.Julie Tsirkin is a correspondent covering Capitol Hill.Gordon Lubold is a national security reporter for NBC News.

AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTYou have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.The new detail further complicates the military’s explanations for its actions during the Sept. 2 strike in the Caribbean Sea.Adm. Frank M. Bradley, left, the top Special Operations commander, showed senior lawmakers a more complete video of the Sept. 2 strike and described his decision to order follow-up strikes during classified sessions on Thursday.Credit...Tierney L. Cross/The New York TimesDec. 5, 2025The two survivors of the U.S. military’s first boat strike on Sept. 2 climbed atop the overturned hull and waved to something overhead, according to multiple people who have seen video of the attack.The signaling by the survivors has been interpreted in different ways. Some of the people viewing the video thought the waving by the survivors could have been an attempt to surrender, which could raise questions about whether the military had violated the rules of armed conflict during the operation.Others who viewed the video said the most logical explanation was that the two survivors had seen the American aircraft above them and started signaling for a rescue. But it is not clear from the video that the survivors had definitely seen the American aircraft.There were no other unknown aircraft or boats in visual range, according to officials who attended classified sessions on Thursday in which military officers briefed lawmakers.The military officers said the survivors could have been trying to beckon to other alleged drug traffickers in a plane or boat to come get them, communications that could have justified the follow-up strike that killed them.But some lawmakers viewing the video rejected that interpretation.The new detail further complicates the military’s explanations for the actions it took during the Sept. 2 strike in the Caribbean Sea and raises new questions about the propriety of the follow-on attack. That strike has become the focus of congressional oversight, though Democrats and experts continue to question the legality of the entire military campaign.But the latest details also highlight the fundamental paradox that has dogged the campaign since it began. People who accept the Trump administration’s legal premise for the overall military operation are more likely to also accept the administration’s justification for killing the survivors.For these people, the waving of the survivors could be interpreted as waving for assistance from other alleged drug runners, which could, in term, be interpreted as continuing their mission to deliver drugs. The efforts to flip the overturned boat hull could be interpreted as efforts to save any cocaine that might have remained in the boat.On the other hand, as a senior military official acknowledged on Friday, critics who do not accept the premise that Mr. Trump’s orders were legal do not believe that the strikes that killed the survivors were legal.For them, the waving of the two men were seen as cries for help from shipwrecked survivors.The Sept. 2 strike was the Trump administration’s first attack on a boat suspected of carrying drugs, so the people on the vessel would have had no knowledge that the United States was beginning a military campaign against drug trafficking.It was not until October that the Trump administration first disclosed that President Trump had “determined” that the United States was in a formal armed conflict with drug cartels and that the crews of boats suspected of carrying drugs for them were “combatants.” A wide range of legal experts have rejected that contention.In any case, the people killed in the Sept. 2 attack, a month earlier, may not have known that the U.S. military considered them combatants in an purported armed conflict. That is a reason to think it may not have occurred to them that they could “surrender,” so if they were signaling to an American aircraft they may have been merely pleading for rescue.The murkiness of the military campaign against Venezuela and the drug cartels may also have caused the American military to conflate the conflict in the Caribbean with two decades of war against Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan and the Middle East.With the global war against terrorism, “all three branches of the government came around to the view that the United States was engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda,” said Matthew Waxman, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs who is now a law professor at Columbia. “The idea that now we’re engaged in an armed conflict with a set of drug cartels is legally absurd.”The military has not said what type of aircraft launched the first strike, and it is not known if the survivors could have identified it. But officials who have watched the video said it is also not clear if the survivors even knew the initial explosion was an attack.Adm. Frank M. Bradley, the top Special Operations commander, met with various senior lawmakers all day Thursday. He showed them a more complete video of the Sept. 2 strike and described his decision to order follow-on strikes. The video shown to Congress was far more zoomed-in and clearer than the grainy video released soon after the Sept. 2 strike, according to officials who watched it.Admiral Bradley was working off an order from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to sink the boat, destroy the drugs and kill the people transporting the drugs. Mr. Hegseth had approved planning by Admiral Bradley that allowed for follow-on strikes. But in meetings with lawmakers, Admiral Bradley said Mr. Hegseth had not issued a “no quarter” order that would have required killing the survivors in any circumstances.After a day of scrutiny over the boat strikes, U.S. Southern Command announced on Thursday evening that the military had killed four more people in the Eastern Pacific in the 22nd boat attack. In a social media post with an accompanying video, Southern Command said that the strike was carried out at the direction of Mr. Hegseth.Julian E. Barnes covers the U.S. intelligence agencies and international security matters for The Times. He has written about security issues for more than two decades.Charlie Savage writes about national security and legal policy for The Times.A version of this article appears in print on Dec. 6, 2025, Section A, Page 9 of the New York edition with the headline: Video Complicates U.S. Boat Strike Explanation. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | SubscribeRelated ContentAdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTShared with you by a Times subscriberYou have access to this article thanks to someone you know. Keep exploring The Times with a free account.

BERMAN: Did you see any evidence of them trying to use a radio in the video you saw? TOM COTTON: Well I saw lots of evidence of them standing on the boat that had been capsized BERMAN: That wasn't my question. Did you see any evidence? COTTON: No, I didn't

A Venezuelan peñero cruises the Caribbean Sea moments before it was destroyed in a US military airstrike on Sept. 2. (Source: @realdonaldtrump, Truth Social)In a shift with far-reaching implications, the US military is now treating the presence of drugs on vessels as a battlefield threat, a new standard that helped justify the controversial Sept. 2 “double-tap” drone strike that killed two shipwrecked men in the Caribbean.That little-understood directive, contained in orders from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, placed the commander of the military’s secretive Joint Special Operations Command in a difficult position when the smoke cleared from the first strike and two survivors appeared in the water. JSOC, as it’s known, oversees SEAL Team Six, Delta Force, and other elite units typically reserved for counterterrorism missions, not drug interdiction.Hegseth himself gave the order to strike the vessel and its crew of 11. Speaking Saturday at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, California, Hegseth said that he left the room about five minutes after the strike as the boat burned. A couple of hours later, he said he was told that Admiral Frank “Mitch” Bradley, then commander of JSOC, had ordered a second strike because there were survivors who “could still be in the fight.”Attention to the second strike intensified after a Nov. 28 report in The Washington Post that Hegseth had ordered Bradley to “kill everybody” aboard the boat—language many viewed as tantamount to a war crime. The Post also reported that SEAL Team Six led the attack.Now a four-star admiral leading US Special Operations Command, Bradley traveled to Capitol Hill last week to explain his decision in closed-door sessions with a small group of lawmakers. A US official familiar with the closed-door briefings provided to Congress last week described Bradley’s decision-making process in detail to The After-Action Report.Although Hegseth sharply criticized the Post’s reporting, calling it “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory” and complaining Saturday that the paper’s sources “suck,” the US official familiar with the briefings said that the initial story was essentially correct.Hegseth did direct JSOC to kill all 11 individuals on the boat. But that is not the same as the headline’s implication of a blanket order to “kill them all,” a categorical no-quarter directive expressly forbidden under US military law and a war crime under humanitarian law. Admiral Frank “Mitch” BradleyBradley told lawmakers he understood Hegseth’s orders to require killing the 11 individuals on the boat, destroying the drugs, and sinking the vessel. As NBC News first reported, the military knew the identities of all 11 designated “narco-terrorists” on board and had placed them on an approved target list.The wording of a military order matters a great deal, and a difference that might seem semantic is crucial: targeting named individuals on a pre-approved list and issuing an indiscriminate order to leave no survivors are treated very differently under the law of armed conflict.That distinction shaped what happened next. The two survivors remained on the approved target list. But Bradley still had to determine whether the men qualified as protected persons under the law of armed conflict and were therefore off-limits to attack.The US official said Bradley consulted his legal adviser before deciding how to proceed. The adviser, an O-6 officer serving as JSOC’s Staff Judge Advocate, was present at command headquarters at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, when Bradley made his decision. As first reported in The Wall Street Journal, Bradley asked his Staff Judge Advocate for the legal definition of “shipwrecked” to determine whether the men were protected under the laws of armed conflict.The Defense Department’s Law of War Manual states that shipwrecked survivors, like the wounded and the sick, are in a “helpless state” and that it is “dishonorable and inhumane” to make them the object of attack. To qualify as shipwrecked, persons “must be in need of assistance and care, and they must refrain from any hostile act.”Reviewing the surveillance feed of the wrecked vessel, Bradley told lawmakers, the two men did not appear helpless or wounded. They did not appear to be bleeding or concussed. Footage shown to lawmakers depicted the men shirtless, at times standing on an overturned 40-foot speedboat and, at one point, attempting to right it. The men also waved as an aircraft passed overhead, but according to the US official, the gesture was not the two-handed overhead wave generally recognized by military forces as a signal of surrender.The more difficult question was whether the men were still engaged in a “hostile act.” Bradley’s decision to authorize a second strike illustrates the logical end of using the military to combat drug trafficking. According to the US official, it was the presence of drugs that led Bradley to authorize the second strike. Bales of cocaine wrapped in plastic were likely still inside the capsized boat, keeping it afloat, which meant the drugs could potentially be salvaged. Under Hegseth’s order, the drugs remained an active threat that had to be eliminated.Since that initial strike on Sept. 2, the US military has carried out 21 additional airstrikes on suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, killing nearly 90 people. Hegseth said he is no longer making the decision to strike.Instructions for these operations were conveyed through an EXORD, an execute order that lays out the chain of command, who holds strike authority, and how the administration is using intelligence to identify targets. Lawmakers were provided a two-page summary of the EXORD but are demanding the full order. A provision inserted into the Defense authorization bill would compel the Pentagon to release it. The secrecy surrounding the order has kept a fundamental shift in how the military defines threats, targets, and lawful force out of public view. The lethal architecture developed to hunt members of al Qaeda is now being used to destroy suspected drug vessels—but with a critical difference. Operationally, the presence of drugs has replaced the imminent threat of a terrorist attack as the tripwire for lethal action. What once required clear evidence of hostile intent can now be inferred from contraband alone.“To characterize or classify these guys as narco-terrorists is a massive shift,” a recently retired admiral told The After-Action Report. “Mitch [Bradley] is universally admired, so I give him the benefit of the doubt, not having access to the information he has. However, if the argument is that guys floating in the water are still in the fight because the drugs are there, that is very thin reasoning to rely on.”“It’s a very slippery slope we are on, making the case that it is OK to kill people there off Venezuela,” he continued. “Why don’t we kill drug dealers on the street because the President said so? If we find someone selling fentanyl in San Diego, then why not just execute the person right there? No due process, no rule of law.”This shift also explains why two survivors of an Oct. 16 attack on a destroyed narco-sub were spared. The survivors had drifted some distance from the sunken vessel and its cargo of what President Trump later said was “mostly fentanyl.” With the threat in that case—the drugs—eliminated, the men were rescued and repatriated, and at least one was released.“We didn’t change our protocol,” Hegseth said Saturday. “It was just a different circumstance.”In the Sept. 2 case, however, the drugs remained aboard the capsized speedboat, and Bradley concluded the threat had not been removed.The decision has sharply divided lawmakers. Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas and chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, called it a “righteous” strike on two men he said were trying to flip a capsized boat “so they could stay in the fight,” echoing the administration’s position that low-level drug couriers are combatants. Representative Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut and the committee’s ranking member, said watching US forces kill two individuals in “clear distress” was among the most troubling moments of his public service.The Sept. 2 operation now sits at the center of a broader shift in how the United States is pursuing drug interdiction. By treating narcotics as a battlefield threat rather than a law-enforcement problem, the administration has created a legal and operational framework in which military force can be used far from traditional combat zones — and against individuals with no demonstrated ability or intent to attack US personnel.How far that authority extends remains unclear. Key questions, including how individuals are placed on target lists, what intelligence supports those designations, and how “hostile intent” is now defined, have yet to be answered publicly.As US naval and special operations forces continue to mass off the coast of Venezuela, the stakes of those unanswered questions are only growing.

The president sat for an in-depth interview with POLITICO's Dasha Burns. President Donald Trump sat down with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns for a special episode of The Conversation at the White House, Dec. 8, 2025. | Jesse Dittmar for POLITICO This is a full, unedited transcript of POLITICO’s interview with President Donald Trump conducted at the White House on Dec. 8. Dasha Burns: Mr. President, thank you so much for joining the conversation.President Trump: Thank you.Burns: So POLITICO has named you as the most influential person shaping Europe as part of our annual POLITICO 28 list. Past names that have topped the list include President Zelenskyy, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and President Viktor Orbán. This year, POLITICO broke precedent to recognize an American for the first time in the decades-long history of P28. And sir, there is no question that you are having a seismic impact on the continent and its politics.One of the most pressing issues in Europe right now is the war between Russia and Ukraine. Your team has been going back and forth ... Trump: I wouldn’t say one. I would say ... Burns: The ... Trump: ... the most.Burns: The most. You’re right. Um, your team has been going back and forth between Putin and Zelenskyy with various drafts of his peace deal. Which country right now is in the stronger negotiating position? Trump: Well, there can be no question about it. It’s Russia. It’s a much bigger country. It’s a war that should’ve never happened. Frankly, it wouldn’t have happened if I were president, and it didn’t happen for four years. Uh, I watched that taking place, and I said, wow, they’re gonna cause some problems here. And it started and it, uh, could’ve evolved into, uh, World War III, frankly. I think it’s probably not gonna be happening now. I think if I weren’t president, you could’ve had World War III. I think you would’ve had a much bigger problem than you have right now, but right now it’s a big problem. It’s a big problem for Europe. And they’re not handling it well.Burns: The, uh ... last night you said that you weren’t sure if President Zelenskyy was fine with the most recent proposal, that he isn’t ready. I ... I was hearing from your advisers around Thanksgiving that they thought this thing might be wrapped up by the end of the holiday, but it’s still not done. Is Zelenskyy responsible for the stalled progress, or what’s going on there? Trump: Well, he’s gotta read the proposal. He hadn’t re ... really, he hasn’t read it yet.Burns: The most recent draft.Trump: That’s as of yesterday. Maybe he’s read it over the night. It would be nice if he would read it. You know, a lot of people are dying. So it would be really good if he’d read it. His people loved the proposal. They really liked it. His lieutenants, his top people, they liked it, but they said he hasn’t read it yet. I think he should find time to read it.Burns: Is it time for Ukraine to hold an election, do you think? Trump: Yeah. I think so. It’s been a long time. It’s, uh ... hasn’t been doing particularly well. Yeah, I think it’s time. I think it’s an important time to hold an election. They’re using war not to hold an election, but, uh, I would think the Ukrainian people would ... should have that choice. And maybe Zelenskyy would win. I don’t know who would win. But they haven’t had an election in a long time. You know, they talk about a democracy, but it gets to a point where it’s not a democracy anymore.Burns: On Sunday, your son, Donald Trump Jr., responded to a reporter’s question about whether you will walk away from Ukraine, and your son said, I think he may. Is that correct? Trump: No, it’s not correct. But it’s not exactly wrong. We have to ... you know, they have to play ball. If they, uh ... if they don’t read agreements, potential agreements, you know, it’s, uh, not easy with Russia ’cause Russia has the upper ... upper hand. And they always did. They’re much bigger. They’re much stronger in that sense. I give Ukraine a lot of ... a lot of ... I give the people of Ukraine and the military of Ukraine tremendous credit for the, you know, bravery and for the fighting and all of that. But you know, at some point, size will win, generally. And this is a massive size, uh ... you ... when you take a look at the numbers, I mean, the numbers are just crazy.Watch: The ConversationThis is not a war that should’ve happened. This is a war that would’ve never happened if I were president. So sad millions of people are dead, many, many soldiers. You know, last month they lost 27,000 soldiers and some people from missiles being launched into Kyiv and o ... Kyiv and other places. But, uh, what a ... what a s ... what a sad thing for humanity.You know, this doesn’t affect us. Uh, the ... our country is no longer paying any money ever since Biden gave them $350 billion so stupidly. And you know, if he wouldn’t have given it, maybe something else would’ve happened.Burns: But you, sir ... President Trump: But Putin has ... had no respect for Biden, and he had no respect for Zelenskyy, didn’t like Zelenskyy. They really hate each other. And part of the problem is they hate each other really a lot, you know. And it’s very hard for them to try and make a deal. It’s harder than most. I ... I settled eight wars, and this ... I would’ve said this is the ninth. This would’ve been the easiest one, I would’ve said, or one of the easier ones. I mean, I settled one ... one that was going on for 36 years. Uh, I settled Pakistan and India. I settled so many wars. I’m very proud of it. And I do it pretty routinely, pretty easily. It’s not hard for me to do. It’s what I do. I make deals. Uh, this one is tough. One of the reasons is the level of hatred between Putin and Zelenskyy is tremendous.Burns: And you’re right, you’re not spending money, but you, sir, are spending your time and your energy ... Trump: I am. I want to ... Burns: ... on this.Trump: I want to stop saving ... you know, I want to stop seeing people killed.Burns: If ... if this deal ... if Zelenskyy rejects this deal ... Trump: Yeah.Burns: ... is there a ... a ... a timeline, is there a point, at which you say OK? Most ReadTrump: Well, he’s gonna have to get on the ball and start, uh, accepting things. You know, when you’re losing, ’cause he’s losing ... Burns: Do Ukraine has ... do you think Ukraine has lost this war? Trump: Well, they’ve lost territory long before I got here. They lost a whole strip of seafront, big seafront. Uh, I mean, you look at the maps. I ... I’ve been here for 10 months. Uh, but you go back 10 months and take a look, they lost that whole strip. It’s now a bigger strip. It’s a wider strip. But they lost a lot of land, and it’s very good land, too, that they lost.Burns: I want ... Trump: You certainly wouldn’t say it’s a victory. I could show you a chart. It’s uh ... it’s a lot of land they lost.Burns: It’s a lot of land. Uh, I think the ... the ... Trump: You know, think of it, if our election wasn’t rigged ... there was a rigged election. Now everyone knows it. It’s gonna come out over the next couple of months, too, loud and clear ’cause we have all the information and everything. But if the election wasn’t rigged and stolen, uh, you wouldn’t even be talking about Ukraine right now.Burns: The resounding consensus in Europe right now is that they want to keep supporting Ukraine until they can win this war.Trump: Until they drop, yeah.Burns: Is ... is that ... Trump: Well, then they should support it.Burns: ... realistic in your view? Trump: I mean, look, then they should support it. Uh, Europe is ... I’m friendly with all of ’em. I mean, I like all of them. I have no real enemy. I’ve had a couple that I didn’t like over the years. I actually like the current crew. I like ’em a lot. But they ... and I know ’em very well. I know ’em really well. Um, some are friends. Some are OK. I know the good leaders. I know the bad leaders. I know the smart ones. I know the stupid ones. You get some real stupid ones, too. But, uh, they’re not doing a good job. Europe is not doing a good job in many ways. They’re not doing a good job.Burns: Yeah, I want to ask you ... Trump: They talk too much.Burns: ... about that.Trump: And they’re not producing. We’re talking about Ukraine. They talk but they don’t produce. And the war just keeps going on and on. I mean, four years now it’s been going on, long before I got here. This is not my war. This is Joe Biden’s war. And ... in terms of America. It’s a very sad thing. And the only reason I really care about it is because I hate to see young, beautiful people being killed. That’s largely why I got involved. I mean, if you look at the Congo and Rwanda, that’s been going on. Fourteen million people, at least, killed. Nobody has any idea how many killed. Machetes ... a lot of machete killings. Uh, vicious. But if you look at the uh, wars ... and some of the wars that I ... really were ... were going to be millions and millions of people. The prime minister of Pakistan said I saved millions of people by getting involved with the ... you know, stopping India and Pakistan from fighting.Burns: I do want to go back to Europe for a moment, though, because you said they’re not doing a lot of things right in your view. And ... and just last ... Trump: Well, they ... they can’t be doing too right because look what’s happened.Burns: Well, you ... your administration just released a new national security strategy that sent shockwaves throughout Europe. The strategy says a key pillar of American foreign policy should be “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.” How much should European leaders prepare for your administration to ... to push to reshape the continent’s politics? Trump: Well, Europe is a different place.Burns: What do you mean by that? Trump: And if it keeps going the way it’s going, Europe will not be ... in my opinion, uh, many of those countries will not be viable countries any longer. Their immigration policy is a disaster. What they’re doing with immigration is a disaster. Uh, we had a disaster coming, but I was able to stop it. You know, we have no people coming through our borders now, zero, seven months. I mean, who would believe zero? We went from millions of people — in some cases, millions of people a month — but millions of people to no people.Burns: That’s not what Europe looks like.Trump: The opposite. Yeah. Uh ... uh, no. Europe, they’re coming in from all parts of the world. Not just the Middle East, they’re coming in from the Congo, tremendous numbers of people coming from the Congo. And even worse, they’re coming from prisons of the Congo and many other countries. And for some reason, they want to be politically correct, which actually, I think is the opposite of politically correct. But they want to be politically correct, and they don’t want to send ’em back to where they came from.And Europe is ... uh, if you take a look at Paris, it’s a much different place. I loved Paris. Uh, it’s a much different place than it was. If you take a look at London, you have a mayor named Khan. He’s a horrible mayor. He’s an incompetent mayor, but he’s a horrible, vicious, disgusting mayor. I think he’s done a terrible job. London’s a different place. I love London. I love London. And I hate to see it happen. You know, my roots are in Europe, as you know.Burns: Right. Right.Trump: And ... and I hate to see that happen. This is one of the great places in the world, and they’re allowing people just to come in and ... unchecked, unvetted.Burns: So how involved are you going to get? I mean, could we see you getting involved in European elections, for example? Trump: I want to run the United States. I don’t want to run Europe. I’m involved in Europe very much. Uh ... Burns: Might you endorse candidates? Trump: NATO calls me Daddy. I mean, I have a lot to say about it. Look, I raised, you know, GDP from 2 percent to 5 percent; the 2 percent they weren’t paying and the 5 percent they are paying. And they’re paying it because when we send things over, NATO pays for it, and I assume they give it to Ukraine. But, uh, Europe is being destroyed.Burns: Would you consider getting involved in some of those elections to ... to put in leaders that you think are better suited? Trump: Well, I’d endorse ... I’ve endorsed people, but I’ve endorsed people that a lot of Europeans don’t like. I’ve endorsed Viktor Orbán. I endorsed uh ... go back to South America, Latin America ... South America, uh, Milei, Argentina. He was losing in the election, and I endorsed him and he won in a landslide.Burns: Yeah, with Viktor Orbán, uh, beyond endorsing, he recently said that you promised him access to U.S.-backed financial shield worth up to $20 billion. Is that ... that right? Trump: No, I didn’t promise him, but he certainly asked for it. But what I ... Burns: Would you consider giving that to him? Trump: I just think he’s doing a very good job in a different sense on immigration. His country’s landlocked. You know, he’s got a different kind of a country. He doesn’t have the sea, so he can’t have ships coming in with energy. Uh, he’s got a big pipe coming in from Russia. They’ve had it for a long time. It’s a different situation he’s got.Burns: So would you consider some financial ... Trump: But one thing he ... one thing he has really ... Burns: ... assistance there? Trump: ... he’s really gotten right is the immigration because he...he al ... he allows nobody in his country. And Poland has done a very good job in that respect, too. But most European, uh, nations, uh, they’re ... they’re decaying. They’re decaying.Burns: You can imagine some leaders in Europe are a little freaked out by, uh, what ...what, uh, your posture is, and, uh, European ... Trump: No, they should be freaked out by what they’re doing to their countries. They’re destroying their countries and they’re ... Burns: Well, European Council President ... Trump: And they’re people I like. Look, they’re people I like. I get along with ’em. You ... you know that. But they can’t let this happen, and it gets to a point where you can’t really correct it. They’ll be a point, and it’s very close to that point ... Burns: And what will that mean? Trump: It will mean that they’re no longer going to be strong nations or they’ll be ... Burns: Does that mean they ... they won’t be allies anymore? Trump: Or they’ll be uh ... well, it depends. You know, it depends. They’ll change their ideology, obviously, because the people coming in have a totally different ideology. But uh, it’s uh ... it’s gonna make them much weaker. They’ll be a much ... they’ll be much weaker, and they’ll be much different.Burns: What will that mean for our ... Trump: I mean, look at ... look at ... Burns: ... relationship with them? Trump: ... your mayor of London. He’s a disaster. He’s a disaster. He’s got a totally different ideology of what he’s supposed to have. And he gets elected because so many people have come in. They vote for him now because you know, it’s like ... it’s uh, one of those things. But I hate what’s happened to London, and I hate what’s happened to Paris. I hate when I see it.Burns: You know, sir, it’s sometimes hard to tell wh ... when you say these things, do you intend to send kind of a message of ... of tough love to our allies to push them to make reforms? Trump: No. No.Burns: Or do you think that many of them are just weak and ... and you don’t really want to be allies with them? Trump: I think they’re weak, but I also think that they want to be so politically correct. They don’t ... I think they don’t know what to do. Europe doesn’t know what to do. They don’t know what to do on trade either. I mean, I look at a lot of the trade, you know, situation that’s going on over there. It’s a little bit dangerous. But ... but Europe uh, they want to be politically correct, and it makes them weak. That’s what makes them weak.Burns: It sounds like you want to see some pretty massive changes in Europe.Trump: Well, I think they should get the people out that came into the country illegally.Burns: I want to ask about NATO ... Trump: You know, if you take a look at Sweden, Sweden was known as the safest country in Europe ... Burns: Right.Trump: ... one of the safest countries in the world. Now it’s known as very unsafe ... well, pretty unsafe country. It’s not even believable. It’s a whole different country, Sweden.Burns: And Sweden most recently joined NATO. One of the things that y ... the national security strategy says is that the U.S. should work toward ending the perception and preventing the reality of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance. Are there countries in NATO that you think shouldn’t be in the alliance? Trump: Well ... Burns: Sweden, for example.Trump: ... I mean, there are countries that are difficult for NATO. Not that they shouldn’t be. I think it’s good to have them. Turkey’s an example. Erdoğan is a friend of mine. Whenever they have a problem with Erdoğan, they ask me to call because they can’t speak to him. He’s a tough cookie. I actually like him a lot. I think, actually, you know, look, he’s built a strong country, strong military. But they have a hard time dealing with him, and they ask me to call him. And I do call him, and I always work it out with him. You know, he and I work it out right ... really quickly. We had some people that he released that were taken and going through years and years of court cases and everything else. And I said, you know, you gotta release ’em and he did. He ... he is uh, you know, very different than a lot of uh, the other leaders, but they have a hard time with him. But you know, they shouldn’t really have a hard time with him.Burns: Should NATO stop accepting new members? Should NATO end where it is now? Trump: Well, you know, there aren’t that many left when you get right down to it, right? There aren’t that many left. Uh, it was always, uh ... I ... I ... long before Putin, uh, it was an understanding that Ukraine would not be going into NATO. This was long before Putin, in all fairness. And now they pushed ... you know, when, uh, Zelenskyy first went in and first met Putin, he said I want two things. I want Crimea back and we’re gonna be a member of NATO. He didn’t say it in a very nice way either. You know, he’s ... he’s a great salesman. I call him P.T. Barnum. You know who P.T. Barnum was, right? Burns: I do.Trump: One of the greatest on Earth. He could sell any product at any time. That was his expression, I can sell any product at any time. It was true. He said, doesn’t matter whether it works or not. Uh, but he’s P.T. Barnum, you know. He ... he got, uh, crooked Joe Biden to give him $350 billion. And look what it got ... got him. About 25 percent of his country is missing.Burns: Uh ... Trump: And in all fairness to Biden, Obama gave away Crimea.Burns: Right, that all happened in 2014. Trump: Obama ... Obama ... because Crimea was the heart. You know, I’m a real estate person at heart, right? I’m very good at real estate. And when I looked o ... wh ... every time I look at that map, I say, oh, this Crimea’s so beautiful. Wow. It’s surrounded on four sides by ocean. It’s only got a little piece of land to get to ... you know, to the main ... well, the main. I mean, Crimea’s massive. But it connects the part of Ukraine that we talk about now ... Burns: Right.Trump: ... through a small, little jetty. It ... it’s four sides of ocean in the warmest part. It’s got the best weather, best everything, and I know you are Ukrainian and you know Ukraine very well. And Obama forced them to give up Crimea. That was a d ... I ... I remember when it happened, but I wasn’t involved like I am now, you know, to the knowledge that I have now. I have great knowledge of Ukraine now. I have great knowledge of ... Burns: I mean, really ... Trump: ... many countries.Burns: ... this ... this conflict began back in 2014, people forget, long before, uh, the invasion of a few, uh, years ago.Trump: Well, and you know when this conflict really began though? It was simmering for years, but, uh, when Obama gave up Crimea, that was a big thing.Burns: I do want to ask, uh ... Trump: Do you agree with that? That was a big piece to give up.Burns: Uh, I mean, that was ... Trump: You’re ... you are of Ukrainian descent.Burns: That was a major m ... I mean, that was, I remember, you know, when I first moved to the United States, a lot of people didn’t know what Ukraine even was. And it was in 2014 that people suddenly started to realize how significant geopolitically that area really is.Trump: No, I just ... from the standpoint of beauty, weather, everything, Crimea is the warmest. It’s just got such great potential. And Obama forced them ... Obama did this. This is not Biden. Well, maybe he was involved, but I doubt it. He probably didn’t know too much then either. He was never the brightest bulb. But you know, Obama gave away ... he made them give it away.Burns: Well, I do think your approach to Europe is ... is so different than any of your predecessors. And ... and this ... Trump: I just want to see a strong Europe.Burns: And this national security strategy, I mean, says a lot about the changes that you want. Uh ... uh, a crim ... Trump: No, but you ... but you have to understand, here’s my approach to Europe: I want to see a strong Europe. When they allow millions of people to pour into their countries, many of these people are committing tremendous crimes. And again, look at Sweden. I’m not knocking Sweden. I love Sweden. I love the people of Sweden. But they go from a crime-free country to a country that has a lot of crime now. Look at Germany. Germany was crime-free, and Angela made two big mistakes; immigration and energy. But those two are beauties.Burns: Well, one country that is pleased with ... with the change in strategy from the United States, uh, is Russia. A Kremlin spokesperson called the strategy document a “positive step” and said the adjustments they’re seeing are “largely consistent with Moscow’s vision.” Do you think that’s a good thing? Trump: Well, I think he’d like to see a ... a weak Europe, and, uh, so you know, to be honest with you, uh, he’s getting that. That has nothing to do with me.Burns: But he thinks the changes that you’re making and what you laid out in your vision for Europe is ... is what ... what Moscow wants to see.Trump: I have no vision for Europe. All I want to see is a strong Europe. Look, I have a vision for the United States of America first. It’s “Make America Great Again.” Uh, I do explain to Europe ’cause I think, you know, I’m supposed to be a very smart person, I can ... I have eyes. I have ears. I have, uh, knowledge. I have vast knowledge. I see what’s happening. I get reports that you will never see. And I think it’s horrible what’s happening to Europe. I think it’s endangering Europe as we know it. Europe could be a whole different place.Burns: Your impact ... Trump: And I think the European people should do something about it.Burns: Your impact does stretch far beyond Europe. I want to talk about another area where you’re making your mark, which is in Venezuela. You’ve said that Nicolás Maduro’s days are numbered and that the U.S. could soon strike Venezuelan territory. Could we see American troops on the ground in Venezuela? Trump: I don’t comment on that. I wouldn’t say that one way or the other. I can say this, that, uh, he sent us millions of people, many from prisons, many drug dealers, drug lords, uh, mental institution ... people in mental institutions. He sent them into our country, where we have a ... where we had a very stupid president. You know that. Bi ... Biden’s a low-IQ person, especially nowadays. I mean, he was low-IQ 30 years ago, but he’s especially low-IQ now. And, uh, what he did to our country is not good. Tren de Aragua, the gangs, one of the meanest gangs in the world.Burns: Well, you ... you’ve locked down the ... the ... the border now.Trump: No, no, he sent a lot of these people. He also sends in a lot of drugs. So we’ll see how it all works out. But I can’t ... Burns: So do you want to ... Trump: ... talk about strategy.Burns: So how far would you go to ... to take Maduro out of office? Trump: I don’t want to say that. But, uh ... Burns: But you want to see him out? Trump: His days are numbered.Burns: Can you rule out an American ground invasion ... Trump: I don’t want to ... Burns: ... in Venezuela? Trump: ... rule in or out. I don’t talk about it. Why would I talk to you, an extremely unfriendly publication, if you want to call it POLITICO, that got $8 million from Obama to keep it afloat, why would I do that? (Editor’s note: Trump appears to be referring to POLITICO Pro subscriptions that the Trump administration canceled earlier this year as part of the Department of Government Efficiency’s effort to trim government spending. POLITICO received no government grants or subsidies.) Why would I talk about that to POLITICO? I mean, I’m doing this because you picked me as the man for Europe ... Burns: Well, I’m ... I’m ... I’m asking for ... Trump: ... and I thought it was ... I thought it was ... Burns: ... for ... for transparency for the ... Trump: ... an appropriate thing to do.Burns: ... American people because a of folks are ... Trump: Transparency? Burns: Well, people are wondering what is ... Trump: I’ll tell you, I am the most transparent politician maybe in the world, OK? Burns: A lot of folks are wondering what our goals are in Venezuela.Trump: Sure, but I don’t want to ... I don’t want to talk to you about military strategy.Burns: Well, may I ask then, what ... what is your goal in Venezuela? What do you want to see with the actions that you’re taking? Trump: Well, one goal is I want the people of Venezuela to be treated well. I want the people of Venezuela, many of whom live in the United States, to be respected. I mean, they were tremendous to me. They voted for me 94 percent or something. I mean, it’s incredible. I own a big, uh, project, Doral. It’s a great place, Doral Country Club.Burns: Been there.Trump: Yeah. And it’s a, you know, very large, uh, place, beautiful place, right in the middle of they call it Little Venezuela. And I got to know the Venezuelan people very well because, uh, that I’ve owned it for a long time. And they’re unbelievable people. The area is such a successful area. Everybody is successful. It’s amazing. They say if a house is for sale for more than three days, there’s something wrong. I mean, a house ... if somebody wants to sell their house, they sell it in just a matter of moments. People love the area. And I got to know the people well. They’re incredible people. And they were treated horribly by Maduro.Burns: And are those the kind of immigrants that you do want to see in America? Trump: Uh, well, they ... well, they certainly contrib ... yeah, I want to see people ... yeah, I want to see people that contribute. I don’t want to see Somalia. I don’t want to see a woman that, you know, marries her brother to get in and then becomes a congressman and does nothing but complain. All she does is complain, complain, complain, and yet her country’s a mess. You know, it’s, uh, one of the worst in the world. Uh, let her go back, fix up her own country.Burns: Uh, I ... Trump: So ... Burns: ... yeah.Trump: No, Somalia ... and I was right about it. You know, I started complaining about Somalia long before the scandal. Uh, the ... the horrible ... the horrible things they’re doing to Minnesota, it’s incredible. They have an incompetent governor there, too. The democrats are running some bad ships.Burns: Speaking of ships, I do want to talk about the boat strikes. The defense secretary, should he testify, Pete Hegseth, under oath before Congress about that controversial second strike on the alleged drug boat on October ... on Sept. 2? Trump: I don’t care if he does. He can if he wants. I don’t care. You know, let ... Burns: Do you think he should? Trump: I don’t care. I would say do it if you want, Pete.Burns: Have you ... Trump: He’s doing a great job. Uh ... Burns: Have you watched the video ... Trump: ... he was stopping ... uh, I watch everything, yeah. I watch everything. I see a lot of things. Um ... Burns: And do you believe that that second ... Trump: ... it’s not pretty but ... but ... Burns: ... strike was necessary? Trump: Uh, well, it looked like they were trying to turn back over the boat, but I don’t get involved in that. That’s up to them. Uh, the admiral that did that was ... is a highly respected ... as you know, a highly respected man. And we save 25,000 people every time we knock out a boat. On average, they kill 25,000 Americans so you know, I don’t like doing that, but the, uh, the drugs coming in through the sea are down to ... they’re down by 92 percent. And I’m trying to figure out the 8 percent, who are they? Nobody wants to drive boats to America loaded up with drugs anymore.Burns: Well, I do want to ask because ... Trump: And we’re gonna hit ’em on land very soon, too.Burns: ... almost all the illicit fent ... fentanyl in the United States is actually produced in Mexico using precursor chemicals from China, according to the DEA. And Venezuela isn’t a significant source or transit country for fentanyl. It barely appears on the DEA’s trafficking assessments.Trump: Yeah, well, they do send lots of drugs. Those boats come in largely from Venezuela so I would say that’s a significant ... and you can see the drugs. You can see these bags all over the boat, I mean, just bags and bags and bags.Burns: So if it’s about drugs, would you consider ... Trump: But ... but let me tell you what they do do. They send really, really bad people into our country, and they’ve done it better than anybody else. They emptied their prisons into our country, and these prisoners are seriously tough. They entered ... uh, all of their prisons have been emptied into the United States of America. Murderers, 11,888 murderers ... Burns: So is this about making sure Maduro sees justice ... Trump: Well, wait a minute.Burns: ... then? Trump: Eleven thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight murderers were entered into our country, and stupid Joe took all those people. And now we’re getting them out. We’re finding ’em. We found a lot of ’em and we’re getting them out or we’re putting them in jail. Some are so dangerous and so bad that we don’t want to put them back to their country ’cause they’ll find a way to get back in. But these are stone-cold murderers. But every time we knock out a boat, we save 25,000 American lives.Burns: So would you consider doing something similar wi ... with Mexico and Colombia that are even more responsible for fentanyl trafficking into the U.S.? Trump: Yeah, I would. Sure. I would.Burns: You pardoned former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández and let him out of prison even though he was convicted in a massive international drug trafficking scheme. How is that zero tolerance on drug trafficking if ... Trump: Well, I don’t know him. And I know very little about him other than people said it was like, uh, an Obama/Biden type setup, where he was set up. He was the president of the country. The country, uh, deals in drugs, like probably you could say that about every country, and because he was the president, they gave him like 45 years in prison. And there are many people fighting for Honduras, very good people that I know. And they think he was treated horribly, and they asked me to do it, and I said I’ll do it.Burns: Do you think that could send the wrong message to ... Trump: No, I don’t think so.Burns: ... drug dealers? Trump: Look, I think, uh, you know, when you weaponize government ... uh, they’ve weaponized their government just like they did over here. I’m one of the people that survived. But they weaponize the government. We had the most weaponized government. Our ... our election was rigged. They went after me. I was impeached twice. I was indicted. They indicted me. I came out good. Here we are in the White House. Things are looking nice. But they were vicious, uh, and they, uh ... they are vicious. They’re sick people.Burns: We’ve talked a lot about foreign policy. You’ve spent a ton of your first year focused on those conflicts around the world. And that has led to some concerns, even from your own supporters, that there hasn’t been enough focus on some of the issues here at home. I know that this week you’re going back out on ... on the trail, um, giving me flashbacks of ... of covering your rallies here. Um, you’re hitting the road to talk about the economy. I wonder, sir, what grade would you give your economy right now? Trump: Before I answer that, let me just tell you something. I’ve watched stupid people like Marjorie Traitor Greene, or some people call her Taylor Greene. Some people call her Taylor Brown because green sometimes turns to brown, which isn’t nice. But I’ve watched her say that he spends too much time on foreign. Well, by doing that ... first of all, it doesn’t take a lot of time. Uh, I made one trip. I brought back trillions of dollars on that one trip. I stopped in Japan. I stopped in South Korea. I met with President Xi and ended what could’ve been a big ... Burns: You went to the Middle East.Trump: ... problem.Burns: I was on that trip with you. Uh-huh.Trump: Went to the Middle East. I brought back, uh, $3 trillion from the Middle East. I sold many Boeing airplanes on that trip, like 300. Uh, when I go on a trip, I only have one place in mind; it’s the United States. So when, you know, people with low IQs, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, she’s a low IQ person ... when she says it’s too ... but she was a loyal person until I wasn’t able to answer her phone calls ’cause I’m just too busy to answer people’s phone calls. You can’t call me three times a day. And it’s just, you know, not appropriate when I have, you know, over 200 congressmen, 53 senators, 212 countries, you know, all of these people are calling, and a family. Actually, the family suffers. It’s harder for me to call back the family. Uh, but when you think of what I’ve done, remember, uh, rare earth and the problem with magnets and all of these things that was gonna shut down the whole world? I worked it out with President Xi and we have a good relationship. I worked it out with President Xi very favorable ... Burns: Well, so that does ... Trump: ... to the United States.Burns: ... does come back to the economy here in the U.S.Trump: Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute.Burns: Right? Trump: You ... you made a statement, though, that I devote too much time to outside of the United States. Uh, I’ve made a fortune for the United States by focusing on things outside.Burns: And to be clear, that’s not my statement. That’s just what some ... some of your supporters and some others have said.Trump: Well, then, you know, I can’t imagine they’re supporters because, uh, I made a fortune and spend very little time ... all of my time is spent here. Most of my time is spent here. But when I do go outside, it’s only going outside for here. For instance, settling and solving the problem with China, that has a huge effect in the United States. Making deals with Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, all of these countries, you’re talking about trillions and trillions of dollars. So I could ... I guess I could say let’s not deal with anybody. We wouldn’t have much of a country.Burns: Well, so then, sir ... Trump: We ... we wouldn’t have much of an economy. We make a lot of money with these countries. Now in the past, these countries all ripped us off. If you go back, uh, during Biden, if you go back, uh, during Obama, they were ripping us off like nobody’s ... no country’s ever been ripped off. That’s why we owe $38 trillion. I mean, we owe it for a reason. But just remember, uh, when I had ... when we had a problem with China very recently, I was able to work that out. You don’t work that out by not talking to people, by, you know, not answering. With the magnets, with the rare earth, it was a big problem.Burns: And y ... and you’re looking to have impact here back home so ... Trump: Well, no, no. Impact? We would’ve been shut down. China would’ve been shut down. The whole world would’ve been shut down.Burns: So sir ... Trump: So ... wait a minute. So some people would say don’t focus on anything outside of our border. I like that, too. But I’ve made trillions and trillions of dollars and solved problems and solved wars. Do you know most of the wars that I solved were solved sitting behind the Oval Office desk on a telephone? I think that those are worthy phone calls. Even if they didn’t impact us to save millions of lives from another country and if I can do that easily because I have that ability are pretty good.Burns: But ... but I do want to talk about the economy, sir, here at home. And ... and I wonder what grade you would give your economy.Trump: A-plus.Burns: A-plus? Trump: Yeah, A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.Burns: Well, it’s interesting because I ... I talked to a supporter of yours. Her name is Melanie from Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. And she loves you. She gave you overall an A-plus-plus grade. But here’s what she said about the economy. She said, “Groceries, utility, insurance, and the basic cost of running small business keep rising faster than wages.” She also says that not enough is being done. Mr. President, this is one of your supporters.Trump: Okay. Good. And I’m ... I love her because you said I got an A-plus on everything, I guess. I don’t know. But here ... here’s ... Burns: But she’s still worried about the economy. Yeah.Trump: No, no, but ... but what you have to understand, the word affordability ... I inherited a mess. I inherited a total mess. Prices were at an all-time high when I came in. Prices are coming down substantially. Look at energy. You and I discussed before the interview, energy ... energy has come down incredibly. When energy comes down, everything ... ’cause it’s so much bigger than any other subject. But energy has come down incredibly. Prices are all coming down. It’s been 10 months. It’s amazing what we’ve done. If you think of gasoline a gallon, they had it at $4.50, almost $5.00. You go to some of the states, you had it at $6.00. We hit, uh, three states two days ago, $1.99 a gallon. When that happens, everything comes down. Now everything is coming down. Uh, with beef, I’ve just opened that up where beef is gonna start coming down pretty substantially.Burns: Would you consider more carveouts on other goods that Americans find too expensive? Trump: Well, some carveouts, you mean from tariffs? Burns: From tariffs, yeah.Trump: Yeah. Yeah.Burns: Like coffee, like bananas.Trump: Yeah. Sure. And I’ve done that already ... Burns: Beef.Trump: ... with coffee. Uh, they’re very small carveouts. It’s not a big deal. But let me tell you about the real economy. We’ve got $18 trillion coming into our country. Biden had less than a trillion for four years, and he was heading south. Our country was falling apart. Eighteen trillion ... because of tariffs, $18 trillion is coming into our country. I think because of tariffs and November 5 election, if you want to know the truth, but ... Burns: So would you rule out reducing tariffs on any more goods? Trump: On some. And on some I’ll increase tariffs. Because you know what happens is because of tariffs, all of the car companies are coming back. You know, we lost 58 percent of the automobile business. We had a ... we had a monopoly in the world. We had everything. And because we had presidents that either weren’t smart or didn’t have business sense or their people didn’t do a good job ... they could’ve kept that. We could’ve kept the chip market. We had 100 percent of the chip market, Intel, all of these guys. You know, there’s the thing. They came in to see me, Intel. They needed something to be done by the government. I said, I’m gonna do it, but I think you have to give us 10 percent of your company. You know what happened? We made $40 billion on that deal. The price went through the roof. The United States ... in about 10 minutes, I made $40 billion. Nobody talks about that.Burns: I want to ask about interest rates because a lot of Americans agree with you that they’re too high. You’re going to pick a new Fed chair soon. Is it a litmus test that the new chair lower interest rates immediately? Trump: Yes. Well, this guy too ... should too. But I think he’s a combination of not a smart person and doesn’t like Trump. But the reason he doesn’t like Trump ... Burns: So you’ve spoken with your potential ... Trump: Well, the reason he doesn’t like Trump is because I hit him hard because he’s doing a bad job. Interest rates ... Burns: So you’ve talked to your potential candidates ... Trump: We’re fighting through interest rates. Look, he’s a negative, but this country is doing so well. Again, we have $18 trillion being invested. Car companies are moving back that left us years ago. AI is coming in at levels never seen before. Factories are opening up all over the country; $18 trillion of investment in the United States. Again, with Biden, we would’ve lost $10 trillion, okay? Eighteen, that’s a record. You know what’s the second record? China. China had $2 trillion. That’s a lot, $2 trill ... we have $18 trillion, and that ultimately ... you know what it reduces itself to? Jobs. You’re gonna have jobs like you’ve never seen in the United States.Burns: Before I ... I let you go ... Trump: And by the way ... and prices are coming down. Just ... you talk about affordability, the Democrats love to say affordability, afford ... but then they never talk about it. They’re the ones that gave us the high prices. I’m the one that’s bringing them down.Burns: Well, one of the biggest issues on affordability right now is health care, and Obamacare subsidies are set to expire in a couple of weeks, which will lead to higher prices for millions of Americans. I do wonder, Mr. President ... Trump: But you said the word, Obamacare. Obamacare ... Burns: Correct.Trump: ... was conceived by Barack Hussein Obama, who know ... knew nothing about health care.Burns: But we’re in the situation we’re in now where, uh, those subsidies will expire, so I wonder, is letting those subsidies expire acceptable to you, and should Americans ... Trump: What I want on health care is very simple. Uh, Obamacare was set up for insurance companies to become rich, OK? That was why they ... in my opinion, I think the Democrats did it for that reason. Do you know that insurance company stocks have gone up 16, 17, 1,800 percent over a short period of time? They ... they’ve been paid trillions, trill ... not billions, trillions of dollars, and what I’m saying is very simple. I don’t want to pay ’em anything. No money for the insurance companies. Sorry, fellas. I know ’em all. No money for the insurance companies. I want to pay the money directly to the people and let the people get their own health care.Burns: Well, Congress hasn’t put that on the floor yet.Trump: But you know who’s fighting me on that? Burns: Who? Trump: The Democrats.Burns: But in the meantime, I mean, two weeks, Mr. President, people will see those premiums go up. So will you tell Congress to extend those Obamacare subsidies while you work out another deal? Trump: I don’t know. I’m gonna have to see. I’d like to get better health care. I’d like to have people, uh, buy their own health care, get much better health care, and, uh, what I want to do, for example, I want to give the money to the people not to the insurance companies.Burns: So right now, people are buying their holiday presidents ... presents. They’re planning for ... Trump: Look, don’t be dramatic.Burns: No, no.Trump: Don’t be dramatic.Burns: Uh, they’re ... they’re planning their budgets ... Trump: Here ... here’s what I want to ... Burns: ... for next year, Mr. President.Trump: Here’s what I want to ... I know. And what I want to do is help them.Burns: So will their premiums go up? Trump: I want to give ... I’m giving them money. I want to give the money to the people to buy their own health care. That’s a good thing, not a bad thing. The Democrats don’t want to do that. They want the insurance companies to continue to make a fortune. The Democrats are owned by the insurance companies. They want the insurance companies to get these trillions of dollars. We spent ... we spend trillions of dollars goes to the insurance companies. I want that money to go to the people and let the people go out and buy their own health care. It works like magic. But you know who doesn’t want it? The Democrats, because they’re corrupt people because they’re totally owned and bought by the insurance companies.Burns: So at this point, most likely premiums will go up and ... and you will find another ... Trump: Uh, well ... Burns: ... plan? Trump: ... your premiums could go down if you did what I want to do. I want to give the money ... Burns: That’s going to take time, sir.Trump: Ready? I want to give ... I want to give the people better health insurance for less money. The people will get the money and they’re gonna buy the health insurance that they want.Burns: I want to talk about one last really important issue to ... Trump: You know that works really well, right? And you know the Democrats don’t want to do it because they want the insurance companies to make all the money.Burns: Immigration, sir, critical to your agenda. I want to ask, uh, about what, uh, the Pope has said, which is he has called your immigration actions inhumane. Do you take that seriously from the Pope? Trump: I haven’t seen that. I mean ... I mean, he ... maybe he has. I mean, he also didn’t like the wall. You know, they didn’t like the wall. The wall turned out to be great.Burns: Do you plan to meet or speak with him? Trump: You know, I built a wall that, uh, stopped people from flooding into ... we ... I didn’t put up the wall. I built the wall. The wall, nobody talks about that. You know, it’s interesting, uh, two years ago, a year ago under Biden, this country was out of control; millions of people pouring through totally unchecked, totally unvetted. And now we have nobody coming in. We have them coming in only legally. They have to go through a legal process. Nobody ever talks about that anymore. They should talk about that. But I haven’t heard any statements from the Pope. I’m sure he’s a lovely man. His brother’s a lovely man. You know, his brother ... Burns: Yeah, you’ve spoken to him.Trump: Do you know his brother is serious MAGA? Lives in Florida. He’s like ... Burns: So will you meet with the other brother, with the Pope? Trump: I already met with the brother. He came to ... Burns: But with the ... with the Pope, will you meet with him or speak with him? Trump: Sure, I will. Why not? Burns: Um, I ... I have one more question on immigration. Uh, the Supreme Court is going to hear a case that could redefine who is here legally ... Trump: Yeah.Burns: ... in the ... in the United States. I’m talking about the birthright citizenship case.Trump: Yeah.Burns: If the court sides with you and ends birthright citizenship, are you going to try to take away citizenship from people who already have it here? Trump: I ... honestly, I haven’t thought of that, but I will tell you this, the case is very interesting because that case was meant for the babies of slaves. And if you look at the dates on the case, it was exactly having to do with the Civil War. That case was not meant from some rich person coming from another country, dropping ... putting a foot in our country, and all of a sudden their whole family becomes, you know, United States citizens. That case is all about slaves, the babies of slaves, and it was a good reason for doing it. And that’s all it was about, and people now are understanding it. It’s been explained to ’em. And I think the court understands it, too. That would be a devastating decision if we lose that case.Burns: That court you’ve put three ... Trump: Because our country cannot afford to house tens of millions of people that came in through birthright citizenship. When that happened, that was meant for the ... the babies of slaves, and if you look at the exact dates that it was passed, it all had to do with the Civil War and the ending of the Civil War. It’s that little period of time, and people now are starting to understand that.Burns: Do you want to see one of the justices on the Supreme Court retire so you can put in one more before the end of your term? Trump: Well, the Democrats want to ... Burns: I mean ... Trump: ... flood the court. You know the ... Burns: Clarence Thomas is 77. Trump: Yeah.Burns: Samuel Alito is 75. Do you want one more on there? Trump: Uh, well, I hope they stay ’cause I think they’re fantastic, OK? Both of those men are fantastic.Burns: Before I let you go, I want to ask ... Trump: I will say this, the Democrats want to pack the court. They want to have 21 justices. That would be a ... a terrible thing for this country.Burns: The future of the Republican Party, look, I watched you, uh, on all of your campaigns pull together, especially in this last one, an unprecedented coalition to win the presidency. You brought in so many new voters to the Republican Party. You chipped away at some of the core bases of the Democratic Party. Is there anyone else in the GOP that can energize the coalition the way you did? Trump: I hope so. I don’t know. You never know until they’re tested. You know, it’s like, uh, you jump in the water; you can swim or you can’t. Some people can swim and some people can’t. You never know. You have to see. I think we have a very good bench. I must ... we have a lot of good people. We have a great Cabinet. I have a really great Cabinet — better than my first Cabinet. I had some very good people in my first cabinet, but this cabinet, you know, I have much more experience. When I first came to Washington, it was interesting. I didn’t know anything about any of the people. I was in a different ... I was a very successful guy from New York City, real estate and ... and other things. I mean, I had a great show and enter ... a lot of things but basically real estate. And by the way, I’m fixing up the White House, making it beautiful. I’m doing a great ballroom that they’ve tried to do for 150 years and all of that stuff.But you never know. Your question’s such an interesting question. You never really know until they get tested. I hope so.Burns: Mr. President, thank you so much ... Trump: Thank you.Burns: ... for joining the conversation. I really appreciate your time.Trump: Thank you very much.Burns: Thank you.CORRECTION: Due to a transcription error, an earlier version of this report misstated a quote."But if the election wasn’t rigged and stolen, uh, you wouldn’t even be talking about Ukraine right now," Trump said.

The president sat for an in-depth interview with POLITICO's Dasha Burns. President Donald Trump sat down with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns for a special episode of The Conversation at the White House, Dec. 8, 2025. | Jesse Dittmar for POLITICO This is a full, unedited transcript of POLITICO’s interview with President Donald Trump conducted at the White House on Dec. 8. Dasha Burns: Mr. President, thank you so much for joining the conversation.President Trump: Thank you.Burns: So POLITICO has named you as the most influential person shaping Europe as part of our annual POLITICO 28 list. Past names that have topped the list include President Zelenskyy, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and President Viktor Orbán. This year, POLITICO broke precedent to recognize an American for the first time in the decades-long history of P28. And sir, there is no question that you are having a seismic impact on the continent and its politics.One of the most pressing issues in Europe right now is the war between Russia and Ukraine. Your team has been going back and forth ...Trump: I wouldn’t say one. I would say ...Burns: The ...Trump: ... the most.Burns: The most. You’re right. Um, your team has been going back and forth between Putin and Zelenskyy with various drafts of his peace deal. Which country right now is in the stronger negotiating position?Trump: Well, there can be no question about it. It’s Russia. It’s a much bigger country. It’s a war that should’ve never happened. Frankly, it wouldn’t have happened if I were president, and it didn’t happen for four years. Uh, I watched that taking place, and I said, wow, they’re gonna cause some problems here. And it started and it, uh, could’ve evolved into, uh, World War III, frankly. I think it’s probably not gonna be happening now. I think if I weren’t president, you could’ve had World War III. I think you would’ve had a much bigger problem than you have right now, but right now it’s a big problem. It’s a big problem for Europe. And they’re not handling it well.Burns: The, uh ... last night you said that you weren’t sure if President Zelenskyy was fine with the most recent proposal, that he isn’t ready. I ... I was hearing from your advisers around Thanksgiving that they thought this thing might be wrapped up by the end of the holiday, but it’s still not done. Is Zelenskyy responsible for the stalled progress, or what’s going on there?Trump: Well, he’s gotta read the proposal. He hadn’t re ... really, he hasn’t read it yet.Burns: The most recent draft.Trump: That’s as of yesterday. Maybe he’s read it over the night. It would be nice if he would read it. You know, a lot of people are dying. So it would be really good if he’d read it. His people loved the proposal. They really liked it. His lieutenants, his top people, they liked it, but they said he hasn’t read it yet. I think he should find time to read it.Burns: Is it time for Ukraine to hold an election, do you think?Trump: Yeah. I think so. It’s been a long time. It’s, uh ... hasn’t been doing particularly well. Yeah, I think it’s time. I think it’s an important time to hold an election. They’re using war not to hold an election, but, uh, I would think the Ukrainian people would ... should have that choice. And maybe Zelenskyy would win. I don’t know who would win. But they haven’t had an election in a long time. You know, they talk about a democracy, but it gets to a point where it’s not a democracy anymore.Burns: On Sunday, your son, Donald Trump Jr., responded to a reporter’s question about whether you will walk away from Ukraine, and your son said, I think he may. Is that correct?Trump: No, it’s not correct. But it’s not exactly wrong. We have to ... you know, they have to play ball. If they, uh ... if they don’t read agreements, potential agreements, you know, it’s, uh, not easy with Russia ’cause Russia has the upper ... upper hand. And they always did. They’re much bigger. They’re much stronger in that sense. I give Ukraine a lot of ... a lot of ... I give the people of Ukraine and the military of Ukraine tremendous credit for the, you know, bravery and for the fighting and all of that. But you know, at some point, size will win, generally. And this is a massive size, uh ... you ... when you take a look at the numbers, I mean, the numbers are just crazy.Watch: The ConversationThis is not a war that should’ve happened. This is a war that would’ve never happened if I were president. So sad millions of people are dead, many, many soldiers. You know, last month they lost 27,000 soldiers and some people from missiles being launched into Kyiv and o ... Kyiv and other places. But, uh, what a ... what a s ... what a sad thing for humanity.You know, this doesn’t affect us. Uh, the ... our country is no longer paying any money ever since Biden gave them $350 billion so stupidly. And you know, if he wouldn’t have given it, maybe something else would’ve happened.Burns: But you, sir ...President Trump: But Putin has ... had no respect for Biden, and he had no respect for Zelenskyy, didn’t like Zelenskyy. They really hate each other. And part of the problem is they hate each other really a lot, you know. And it’s very hard for them to try and make a deal. It’s harder than most. I ... I settled eight wars, and this ... I would’ve said this is the ninth. This would’ve been the easiest one, I would’ve said, or one of the easier ones. I mean, I settled one ... one that was going on for 36 years. Uh, I settled Pakistan and India. I settled so many wars. I’m very proud of it. And I do it pretty routinely, pretty easily. It’s not hard for me to do. It’s what I do. I make deals. Uh, this one is tough. One of the reasons is the level of hatred between Putin and Zelenskyy is tremendous.Burns: And you’re right, you’re not spending money, but you, sir, are spending your time and your energy ...Trump: I am. I want to ...Burns: ... on this.Trump: I want to stop saving ... you know, I want to stop seeing people killed.Burns: If ... if this deal ... if Zelenskyy rejects this deal ...Trump: Yeah.Burns: ... is there a ... a ... a timeline, is there a point, at which you say OK? Most ReadTrump: Well, he’s gonna have to get on the ball and start, uh, accepting things. You know, when you’re losing, ’cause he’s losing ...Burns: Do Ukraine has ... do you think Ukraine has lost this war?Trump: Well, they’ve lost territory long before I got here. They lost a whole strip of seafront, big seafront. Uh, I mean, you look at the maps. I ... I’ve been here for 10 months. Uh, but you go back 10 months and take a look, they lost that whole strip. It’s now a bigger strip. It’s a wider strip. But they lost a lot of land, and it’s very good land, too, that they lost.Burns: I want ...Trump: You certainly wouldn’t say it’s a victory. I could show you a chart. It’s uh ... it’s a lot of land they lost.Burns: It’s a lot of land. Uh, I think the ... the ...Trump: You know, think of it, if our election wasn’t rigged ... there was a rigged election. Now everyone knows it. It’s gonna come out over the next couple of months, too, loud and clear ’cause we have all the information and everything. But if the election wasn’t rigged and stolen, uh, you wouldn’t even be talking about Ukraine right now.Burns: The resounding consensus in Europe right now is that they want to keep supporting Ukraine until they can win this war.Trump: Until they drop, yeah.Burns: Is ... is that ...Trump: Well, then they should support it.Burns: ... realistic in your view?Trump: I mean, look, then they should support it. Uh, Europe is ... I’m friendly with all of ’em. I mean, I like all of them. I have no real enemy. I’ve had a couple that I didn’t like over the years. I actually like the current crew. I like ’em a lot. But they ... and I know ’em very well. I know ’em really well. Um, some are friends. Some are OK. I know the good leaders. I know the bad leaders. I know the smart ones. I know the stupid ones. You get some real stupid ones, too. But, uh, they’re not doing a good job. Europe is not doing a good job in many ways. They’re not doing a good job.Burns: Yeah, I want to ask you ...Trump: They talk too much.Burns: ... about that.Trump: And they’re not producing. We’re talking about Ukraine. They talk but they don’t produce. And the war just keeps going on and on. I mean, four years now it’s been going on, long before I got here. This is not my war. This is Joe Biden’s war. And ... in terms of America. It’s a very sad thing. And the only reason I really care about it is because I hate to see young, beautiful people being killed. That’s largely why I got involved. I mean, if you look at the Congo and Rwanda, that’s been going on. Fourteen million people, at least, killed. Nobody has any idea how many killed. Machetes ... a lot of machete killings. Uh, vicious. But if you look at the uh, wars ... and some of the wars that I ... really were ... were going to be millions and millions of people. The prime minister of Pakistan said I saved millions of people by getting involved with the ... you know, stopping India and Pakistan from fighting.Burns: I do want to go back to Europe for a moment, though, because you said they’re not doing a lot of things right in your view. And ... and just last ...Trump: Well, they ... they can’t be doing too right because look what’s happened.Burns: Well, you ... your administration just released a new national security strategy that sent shockwaves throughout Europe. The strategy says a key pillar of American foreign policy should be “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.” How much should European leaders prepare for your administration to ... to push to reshape the continent’s politics?Trump: Well, Europe is a different place.Burns: What do you mean by that?Trump: And if it keeps going the way it’s going, Europe will not be ... in my opinion, uh, many of those countries will not be viable countries any longer. Their immigration policy is a disaster. What they’re doing with immigration is a disaster. Uh, we had a disaster coming, but I was able to stop it. You know, we have no people coming through our borders now, zero, seven months. I mean, who would believe zero? We went from millions of people — in some cases, millions of people a month — but millions of people to no people.Burns: That’s not what Europe looks like.Trump: The opposite. Yeah. Uh ... uh, no. Europe, they’re coming in from all parts of the world. Not just the Middle East, they’re coming in from the Congo, tremendous numbers of people coming from the Congo. And even worse, they’re coming from prisons of the Congo and many other countries. And for some reason, they want to be politically correct, which actually, I think is the opposite of politically correct. But they want to be politically correct, and they don’t want to send ’em back to where they came from.And Europe is ... uh, if you take a look at Paris, it’s a much different place. I loved Paris. Uh, it’s a much different place than it was. If you take a look at London, you have a mayor named Khan. He’s a horrible mayor. He’s an incompetent mayor, but he’s a horrible, vicious, disgusting mayor. I think he’s done a terrible job. London’s a different place. I love London. I love London. And I hate to see it happen. You know, my roots are in Europe, as you know.Burns: Right. Right.Trump: And ... and I hate to see that happen. This is one of the great places in the world, and they’re allowing people just to come in and ... unchecked, unvetted.Burns: So how involved are you going to get? I mean, could we see you getting involved in European elections, for example?Trump: I want to run the United States. I don’t want to run Europe. I’m involved in Europe very much. Uh ...Burns: Might you endorse candidates?Trump: NATO calls me Daddy. I mean, I have a lot to say about it. Look, I raised, you know, GDP from 2 percent to 5 percent; the 2 percent they weren’t paying and the 5 percent they are paying. And they’re paying it because when we send things over, NATO pays for it, and I assume they give it to Ukraine. But, uh, Europe is being destroyed.Burns: Would you consider getting involved in some of those elections to ... to put in leaders that you think are better suited?Trump: Well, I’d endorse ... I’ve endorsed people, but I’ve endorsed people that a lot of Europeans don’t like. I’ve endorsed Viktor Orbán. I endorsed uh ... go back to South America, Latin America ... South America, uh, Milei, Argentina. He was losing in the election, and I endorsed him and he won in a landslide.Burns: Yeah, with Viktor Orbán, uh, beyond endorsing, he recently said that you promised him access to U.S.-backed financial shield worth up to $20 billion. Is that ... that right?Trump: No, I didn’t promise him, but he certainly asked for it. But what I ...Burns: Would you consider giving that to him?Trump: I just think he’s doing a very good job in a different sense on immigration. His country’s landlocked. You know, he’s got a different kind of a country. He doesn’t have the sea, so he can’t have ships coming in with energy. Uh, he’s got a big pipe coming in from Russia. They’ve had it for a long time. It’s a different situation he’s got.Burns: So would you consider some financial ...Trump: But one thing he ... one thing he has really ...Burns: ... assistance there?Trump: ... he’s really gotten right is the immigration because he...he al ... he allows nobody in his country. And Poland has done a very good job in that respect, too. But most European, uh, nations, uh, they’re ... they’re decaying. They’re decaying.Burns: You can imagine some leaders in Europe are a little freaked out by, uh, what ...what, uh, your posture is, and, uh, European ...Trump: No, they should be freaked out by what they’re doing to their countries. They’re destroying their countries and they’re ...Burns: Well, European Council President ...Trump: And they’re people I like. Look, they’re people I like. I get along with ’em. You ... you know that. But they can’t let this happen, and it gets to a point where you can’t really correct it. They’ll be a point, and it’s very close to that point ...Burns: And what will that mean?Trump: It will mean that they’re no longer going to be strong nations or they’ll be ...Burns: Does that mean they ... they won’t be allies anymore?Trump: Or they’ll be uh ... well, it depends. You know, it depends. They’ll change their ideology, obviously, because the people coming in have a totally different ideology. But uh, it’s uh ... it’s gonna make them much weaker. They’ll be a much ... they’ll be much weaker, and they’ll be much different.Burns: What will that mean for our ...Trump: I mean, look at ... look at ...Burns: ... relationship with them?Trump: ... your mayor of London. He’s a disaster. He’s a disaster. He’s got a totally different ideology of what he’s supposed to have. And he gets elected because so many people have come in. They vote for him now because you know, it’s like ... it’s uh, one of those things. But I hate what’s happened to London, and I hate what’s happened to Paris. I hate when I see it.Burns: You know, sir, it’s sometimes hard to tell wh ... when you say these things, do you intend to send kind of a message of ... of tough love to our allies to push them to make reforms?Trump: No. No.Burns: Or do you think that many of them are just weak and ... and you don’t really want to be allies with them?Trump: I think they’re weak, but I also think that they want to be so politically correct. They don’t ... I think they don’t know what to do. Europe doesn’t know what to do. They don’t know what to do on trade either. I mean, I look at a lot of the trade, you know, situation that’s going on over there. It’s a little bit dangerous. But ... but Europe uh, they want to be politically correct, and it makes them weak. That’s what makes them weak.Burns: It sounds like you want to see some pretty massive changes in Europe.Trump: Well, I think they should get the people out that came into the country illegally.Burns: I want to ask about NATO ...Trump: You know, if you take a look at Sweden, Sweden was known as the safest country in Europe ...Burns: Right.Trump: ... one of the safest countries in the world. Now it’s known as very unsafe ... well, pretty unsafe country. It’s not even believable. It’s a whole different country, Sweden.Burns: And Sweden most recently joined NATO. One of the things that y ... the national security strategy says is that the U.S. should work toward ending the perception and preventing the reality of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance. Are there countries in NATO that you think shouldn’t be in the alliance?Trump: Well ...Burns: Sweden, for example.Trump: ... I mean, there are countries that are difficult for NATO. Not that they shouldn’t be. I think it’s good to have them. Turkey’s an example. Erdoğan is a friend of mine. Whenever they have a problem with Erdoğan, they ask me to call because they can’t speak to him. He’s a tough cookie. I actually like him a lot. I think, actually, you know, look, he’s built a strong country, strong military. But they have a hard time dealing with him, and they ask me to call him. And I do call him, and I always work it out with him. You know, he and I work it out right ... really quickly. We had some people that he released that were taken and going through years and years of court cases and everything else. And I said, you know, you gotta release ’em and he did. He ... he is uh, you know, very different than a lot of uh, the other leaders, but they have a hard time with him. But you know, they shouldn’t really have a hard time with him.Burns: Should NATO stop accepting new members? Should NATO end where it is now?Trump: Well, you know, there aren’t that many left when you get right down to it, right? There aren’t that many left. Uh, it was always, uh ... I ... I ... long before Putin, uh, it was an understanding that Ukraine would not be going into NATO. This was long before Putin, in all fairness. And now they pushed ... you know, when, uh, Zelenskyy first went in and first met Putin, he said I want two things. I want Crimea back and we’re gonna be a member of NATO. He didn’t say it in a very nice way either. You know, he’s ... he’s a great salesman. I call him P.T. Barnum. You know who P.T. Barnum was, right?Burns: I do.Trump: One of the greatest on Earth. He could sell any product at any time. That was his expression, I can sell any product at any time. It was true. He said, doesn’t matter whether it works or not. Uh, but he’s P.T. Barnum, you know. He ... he got, uh, crooked Joe Biden to give him $350 billion. And look what it got ... got him. About 25 percent of his country is missing.Burns: Uh ...Trump: And in all fairness to Biden, Obama gave away Crimea.Burns: Right, that all happened in 2014.Trump: Obama ... Obama ... because Crimea was the heart. You know, I’m a real estate person at heart, right? I’m very good at real estate. And when I looked o ... wh ... every time I look at that map, I say, oh, this Crimea’s so beautiful. Wow. It’s surrounded on four sides by ocean. It’s only got a little piece of land to get to ... you know, to the main ... well, the main. I mean, Crimea’s massive. But it connects the part of Ukraine that we talk about now ...Burns: Right.Trump: ... through a small, little jetty. It ... it’s four sides of ocean in the warmest part. It’s got the best weather, best everything, and I know you are Ukrainian and you know Ukraine very well. And Obama forced them to give up Crimea. That was a d ... I ... I remember when it happened, but I wasn’t involved like I am now, you know, to the knowledge that I have now. I have great knowledge of Ukraine now. I have great knowledge of ...Burns: I mean, really ...Trump: ... many countries.Burns: ... this ... this conflict began back in 2014, people forget, long before, uh, the invasion of a few, uh, years ago.Trump: Well, and you know when this conflict really began though? It was simmering for years, but, uh, when Obama gave up Crimea, that was a big thing.Burns: I do want to ask, uh ...Trump: Do you agree with that? That was a big piece to give up.Burns: Uh, I mean, that was ...Trump: You’re ... you are of Ukrainian descent.Burns: That was a major m ... I mean, that was, I remember, you know, when I first moved to the United States, a lot of people didn’t know what Ukraine even was. And it was in 2014 that people suddenly started to realize how significant geopolitically that area really is.Trump: No, I just ... from the standpoint of beauty, weather, everything, Crimea is the warmest. It’s just got such great potential. And Obama forced them ...Obama did this. This is not Biden. Well, maybe he was involved, but I doubt it. He probably didn’t know too much then either. He was never the brightest bulb. But you know, Obama gave away ... he made them give it away.Burns: Well, I do think your approach to Europe is ... is so different than any of your predecessors. And ... and this ...Trump: I just want to see a strong Europe.Burns: And this national security strategy, I mean, says a lot about the changes that you want. Uh ... uh, a crim ...Trump: No, but you ... but you have to understand, here’s my approach to Europe: I want to see a strong Europe. When they allow millions of people to pour into their countries, many of these people are committing tremendous crimes. And again, look at Sweden. I’m not knocking Sweden. I love Sweden. I love the people of Sweden. But they go from a crime-free country to a country that has a lot of crime now. Look at Germany. Germany was crime-free, and Angela made two big mistakes; immigration and energy. But those two are beauties.Burns: Well, one country that is pleased with ... with the change in strategy from the United States, uh, is Russia. A Kremlin spokesperson called the strategy document a “positive step” and said the adjustments they’re seeing are “largely consistent with Moscow’s vision.” Do you think that’s a good thing?Trump: Well, I think he’d like to see a ... a weak Europe, and, uh, so you know, to be honest with you, uh, he’s getting that. That has nothing to do with me.Burns: But he thinks the changes that you’re making and what you laid out in your vision for Europe is ... is what ... what Moscow wants to see.Trump: I have no vision for Europe. All I want to see is a strong Europe. Look, I have a vision for the United States of America first. It’s “Make America Great Again.” Uh, I do explain to Europe ’cause I think, you know, I’m supposed to be a very smart person, I can ... I have eyes. I have ears. I have, uh, knowledge. I have vast knowledge. I see what’s happening. I get reports that you will never see. And I think it’s horrible what’s happening to Europe. I think it’s endangering Europe as we know it. Europe could be a whole different place.Burns: Your impact ...Trump: And I think the European people should do something about it.Burns: Your impact does stretch far beyond Europe. I want to talk about another area where you’re making your mark, which is in Venezuela. You’ve said that Nicolás Maduro’s days are numbered and that the U.S. could soon strike Venezuelan territory. Could we see American troops on the ground in Venezuela?Trump: I don’t comment on that. I wouldn’t say that one way or the other. I can say this, that, uh, he sent us millions of people, many from prisons, many drug dealers, drug lords, uh, mental institution ... people in mental institutions. He sent them into our country, where we have a ... where we had a very stupid president. You know that. Bi ... Biden’s a low-IQ person, especially nowadays. I mean, he was low-IQ 30 years ago, but he’s especially low-IQ now. And, uh, what he did to our country is not good. Tren de Aragua, the gangs, one of the meanest gangs in the world.Burns: Well, you ... you’ve locked down the ... the ... the border now.Trump: No, no, he sent a lot of these people. He also sends in a lot of drugs. So we’ll see how it all works out. But I can’t ...Burns: So do you want to ...Trump: ... talk about strategy.Burns: So how far would you go to ... to take Maduro out of office?Trump: I don’t want to say that. But, uh ...Burns: But you want to see him out?Trump: His days are numbered.Burns: Can you rule out an American ground invasion ...Trump: I don’t want to ...Burns: ... in Venezuela?Trump: ... rule in or out. I don’t talk about it. Why would I talk to you, an extremely unfriendly publication, if you want to call it POLITICO, that got $8 million from Obama to keep it afloat, why would I do that? (Editor’s note: Trump appears to be referring to POLITICO Pro subscriptions that the Trump administration canceled earlier this year as part of the Department of Government Efficiency’s effort to trim government spending. POLITICO received no government grants or subsidies.) Why would I talk about that to POLITICO? I mean, I’m doing this because you picked me as the man for Europe ...Burns: Well, I’m ... I’m ... I’m asking for ...Trump: ... and I thought it was ... I thought it was ...Burns: ... for ... for transparency for the ...Trump: ... an appropriate thing to do.Burns: ... American people because a of folks are ...Trump: Transparency?Burns: Well, people are wondering what is ...Trump: I’ll tell you, I am the most transparent politician maybe in the world, OK?Burns: A lot of folks are wondering what our goals are in Venezuela.Trump: Sure, but I don’t want to ... I don’t want to talk to you about military strategy.Burns: Well, may I ask then, what ... what is your goal in Venezuela? What do you want to see with the actions that you’re taking?Trump: Well, one goal is I want the people of Venezuela to be treated well. I want the people of Venezuela, many of whom live in the United States, to be respected. I mean, they were tremendous to me. They voted for me 94 percent or something. I mean, it’s incredible. I own a big, uh, project, Doral. It’s a great place, Doral Country Club.Burns: Been there.Trump: Yeah. And it’s a, you know, very large, uh, place, beautiful place, right in the middle of they call it Little Venezuela. And I got to know the Venezuelan people very well because, uh, that I’ve owned it for a long time. And they’re unbelievable people. The area is such a successful area. Everybody is successful. It’s amazing. They say if a house is for sale for more than three days, there’s something wrong. I mean, a house ... if somebody wants to sell their house, they sell it in just a matter of moments. People love the area. And I got to know the people well. They’re incredible people. And they were treated horribly by Maduro.Burns: And are those the kind of immigrants that you do want to see in America?Trump: Uh, well, they ... well, they certainly contrib ... yeah, I want to see people ... yeah, I want to see people that contribute. I don’t want to see Somalia. I don’t want to see a woman that, you know, marries her brother to get in and then becomes a congressman and does nothing but complain. All she does is complain, complain, complain, and yet her country’s a mess. You know, it’s, uh, one of the worst in the world. Uh, let her go back, fix up her own country.Burns: Uh, I ...Trump: So ...Burns: ... yeah.Trump: No, Somalia ... and I was right about it. You know, I started complaining about Somalia long before the scandal. Uh, the ... the horrible ... the horrible things they’re doing to Minnesota, it’s incredible. They have an incompetent governor there, too. The democrats are running some bad ships.Burns: Speaking of ships, I do want to talk about the boat strikes. The defense secretary, should he testify, Pete Hegseth, under oath before Congress about that controversial second strike on the alleged drug boat on October ... on Sept. 2?Trump: I don’t care if he does. He can if he wants. I don’t care. You know, let ...Burns: Do you think he should?Trump: I don’t care. I would say do it if you want, Pete.Burns: Have you ...Trump: He’s doing a great job. Uh ...Burns: Have you watched the video ...Trump: ... he was stopping ... uh, I watch everything, yeah. I watch everything. I see a lot of things. Um ...Burns: And do you believe that that second ...Trump: ... it’s not pretty but ... but ...Burns: ... strike was necessary?Trump: Uh, well, it looked like they were trying to turn back over the boat, but I don’t get involved in that. That’s up to them. Uh, the admiral that did that was ... is a highly respected ... as you know, a highly respected man. And we save 25,000 people every time we knock out a boat. On average, they kill 25,000 Americans so you know, I don’t like doing that, but the, uh, the drugs coming in through the sea are down to ... they’re down by 92 percent. And I’m trying to figure out the 8 percent, who are they? Nobody wants to drive boats to America loaded up with drugs anymore.Burns: Well, I do want to ask because ...Trump: And we’re gonna hit ’em on land very soon, too.Burns: ... almost all the illicit fent ... fentanyl in the United States is actually produced in Mexico using precursor chemicals from China, according to the DEA. And Venezuela isn’t a significant source or transit country for fentanyl. It barely appears on the DEA’s trafficking assessments.Trump: Yeah, well, they do send lots of drugs. Those boats come in largely from Venezuela so I would say that’s a significant ... and you can see the drugs. You can see these bags all over the boat, I mean, just bags and bags and bags.Burns: So if it’s about drugs, would you consider ...Trump: But ... but let me tell you what they do do. They send really, really bad people into our country, and they’ve done it better than anybody else. They emptied their prisons into our country, and these prisoners are seriously tough. They entered ... uh, all of their prisons have been emptied into the United States of America. Murderers, 11,888 murderers ...Burns: So is this about making sure Maduro sees justice ...Trump: Well, wait a minute.Burns: ... then?Trump: Eleven thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight murderers were entered into our country, and stupid Joe took all those people. And now we’re getting them out. We’re finding ’em. We found a lot of ’em and we’re getting them out or we’re putting them in jail. Some are so dangerous and so bad that we don’t want to put them back to their country ’cause they’ll find a way to get back in. But these are stone-cold murderers. But every time we knock out a boat, we save 25,000 American lives.Burns: So would you consider doing something similar wi ... with Mexico and Colombia that are even more responsible for fentanyl trafficking into the U.S.?Trump: Yeah, I would. Sure. I would.Burns: You pardoned former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández and let him out of prison even though he was convicted in a massive international drug trafficking scheme. How is that zero tolerance on drug trafficking if ...Trump: Well, I don’t know him. And I know very little about him other than people said it was like, uh, an Obama/Biden type setup, where he was set up. He was the president of the country. The country, uh, deals in drugs, like probably you could say that about every country, and because he was the president, they gave him like 45 years in prison. And there are many people fighting for Honduras, very good people that I know. And they think he was treated horribly, and they asked me to do it, and I said I’ll do it.Burns: Do you think that could send the wrong message to ...Trump: No, I don’t think so.Burns: ... drug dealers?Trump: Look, I think, uh, you know, when you weaponize government ... uh, they’ve weaponized their government just like they did over here. I’m one of the people that survived. But they weaponize the government. We had the most weaponized government. Our ... our election was rigged. They went after me. I was impeached twice. I was indicted. They indicted me. I came out good. Here we are in the White House. Things are looking nice. But they were vicious, uh, and they, uh ... they are vicious. They’re sick people.Burns: We’ve talked a lot about foreign policy. You’ve spent a ton of your first year focused on those conflicts around the world. And that has led to some concerns, even from your own supporters, that there hasn’t been enough focus on some of the issues here at home. I know that this week you’re going back out on ... on the trail, um, giving me flashbacks of ... of covering your rallies here. Um, you’re hitting the road to talk about the economy. I wonder, sir, what grade would you give your economy right now?Trump: Before I answer that, let me just tell you something. I’ve watched stupid people like Marjorie Traitor Greene, or some people call her Taylor Greene. Some people call her Taylor Brown because green sometimes turns to brown, which isn’t nice. But I’ve watched her say that he spends too much time on foreign. Well, by doing that ... first of all, it doesn’t take a lot of time. Uh, I made one trip. I brought back trillions of dollars on that one trip. I stopped in Japan. I stopped in South Korea. I met with President Xi and ended what could’ve been a big ...Burns: You went to the Middle East.Trump: ... problem.Burns: I was on that trip with you. Uh-huh.Trump: Went to the Middle East. I brought back, uh, $3 trillion from the Middle East. I sold many Boeing airplanes on that trip, like 300. Uh, when I go on a trip, I only have one place in mind; it’s the United States. So when, you know, people with low IQs, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, she’s a low IQ person ... when she says it’s too ... but she was a loyal person until I wasn’t able to answer her phone calls ’cause I’m just too busy to answer people’s phone calls. You can’t call me three times a day. And it’s just, you know, not appropriate when I have, you know, over 200 congressmen, 53 senators, 212 countries, you know, all of these people are calling, and a family. Actually, the family suffers. It’s harder for me to call back the family. Uh, but when you think of what I’ve done, remember, uh, rare earth and the problem with magnets and all of these things that was gonna shut down the whole world? I worked it out with President Xi and we have a good relationship. I worked it out with President Xi very favorable ...Burns: Well, so that does ...Trump: ... to the United States.Burns: ... does come back to the economy here in the U.S.Trump: Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute.Burns: Right?Trump: You ... you made a statement, though, that I devote too much time to outside of the United States. Uh, I’ve made a fortune for the United States by focusing on things outside.Burns: And to be clear, that’s not my statement. That’s just what some ... some of your supporters and some others have said.Trump: Well, then, you know, I can’t imagine they’re supporters because, uh, I made a fortune and spend very little time ... all of my time is spent here. Most of my time is spent here. But when I do go outside, it’s only going outside for here. For instance, settling and solving the problem with China, that has a huge effect in the United States. Making deals with Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, all of these countries, you’re talking about trillions and trillions of dollars. So I could ... I guess I could say let’s not deal with anybody. We wouldn’t have much of a country.Burns: Well, so then, sir ...Trump: We ... we wouldn’t have much of an economy. We make a lot of money with these countries. Now in the past, these countries all ripped us off. If you go back, uh, during Biden, if you go back, uh, during Obama, they were ripping us off like nobody’s ... no country’s ever been ripped off. That’s why we owe $38 trillion. I mean, we owe it for a reason. But just remember, uh, when I had ... when we had a problem with China very recently, I was able to work that out. You don’t work that out by not talking to people, by, you know, not answering. With the magnets, with the rare earth, it was a big problem.Burns: And y ... and you’re looking to have impact here back home so ...Trump: Well, no, no. Impact? We would’ve been shut down. China would’ve been shut down. The whole world would’ve been shut down.Burns: So sir ...Trump: So ... wait a minute. So some people would say don’t focus on anything outside of our border. I like that, too. But I’ve made trillions and trillions of dollars and solved problems and solved wars. Do you know most of the wars that I solved were solved sitting behind the Oval Office desk on a telephone? I think that those are worthy phone calls. Even if they didn’t impact us to save millions of lives from another country and if I can do that easily because I have that ability are pretty good.Burns: But ... but I do want to talk about the economy, sir, here at home. And ... and I wonder what grade you would give your economy.Trump: A-plus.Burns: A-plus?Trump: Yeah, A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.Burns: Well, it’s interesting because I ... I talked to a supporter of yours. Her name is Melanie from Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. And she loves you. She gave you overall an A-plus-plus grade. But here’s what she said about the economy. She said, “Groceries, utility, insurance, and the basic cost of running small business keep rising faster than wages.” She also says that not enough is being done. Mr. President, this is one of your supporters.Trump: Okay. Good. And I’m ... I love her because you said I got an A-plus on everything, I guess. I don’t know. But here ... here’s ...Burns: But she’s still worried about the economy. Yeah.Trump: No, no, but ... but what you have to understand, the word affordability ... I inherited a mess. I inherited a total mess. Prices were at an all-time high when I came in. Prices are coming down substantially. Look at energy. You and I discussed before the interview, energy ... energy has come down incredibly. When energy comes down, everything ... ’cause it’s so much bigger than any other subject. But energy has come down incredibly. Prices are all coming down. It’s been 10 months. It’s amazing what we’ve done. If you think of gasoline a gallon, they had it at $4.50, almost $5.00. You go to some of the states, you had it at $6.00. We hit, uh, three states two days ago, $1.99 a gallon. When that happens, everything comes down. Now everything is coming down. Uh, with beef, I’ve just opened that up where beef is gonna start coming down pretty substantially.Burns: Would you consider more carveouts on other goods that Americans find too expensive?Trump: Well, some carveouts, you mean from tariffs?Burns: From tariffs, yeah.Trump: Yeah. Yeah.Burns: Like coffee, like bananas.Trump: Yeah. Sure. And I’ve done that already ...Burns: Beef.Trump: ... with coffee. Uh, they’re very small carveouts. It’s not a big deal. But let me tell you about the real economy. We’ve got $18 trillion coming into our country. Biden had less than a trillion for four years, and he was heading south. Our country was falling apart. Eighteen trillion ... because of tariffs, $18 trillion is coming into our country. I think because of tariffs and November 5 election, if you want to know the truth, but ...Burns: So would you rule out reducing tariffs on any more goods?Trump: On some. And on some I’ll increase tariffs. Because you know what happens is because of tariffs, all of the car companies are coming back. You know, we lost 58 percent of the automobile business. We had a ... we had a monopoly in the world. We had everything. And because we had presidents that either weren’t smart or didn’t have business sense or their people didn’t do a good job ... they could’ve kept that. We could’ve kept the chip market. We had 100 percent of the chip market, Intel, all of these guys. You know, there’s the thing. They came in to see me, Intel. They needed something to be done by the government. I said, I’m gonna do it, but I think you have to give us 10 percent of your company. You know what happened? We made $40 billion on that deal. The price went through the roof. The United States ... in about 10 minutes, I made $40 billion. Nobody talks about that.Burns: I want to ask about interest rates because a lot of Americans agree with you that they’re too high. You’re going to pick a new Fed chair soon. Is it a litmus test that the new chair lower interest rates immediately?Trump: Yes. Well, this guy too ... should too. But I think he’s a combination of not a smart person and doesn’t like Trump. But the reason he doesn’t like Trump ...Burns: So you’ve spoken with your potential ...Trump: Well, the reason he doesn’t like Trump is because I hit him hard because he’s doing a bad job. Interest rates ...Burns: So you’ve talked to your potential candidates ...Trump: We’re fighting through interest rates. Look, he’s a negative, but this country is doing so well. Again, we have $18 trillion being invested. Car companies are moving back that left us years ago. AI is coming in at levels never seen before. Factories are opening up all over the country; $18 trillion of investment in the United States. Again, with Biden, we would’ve lost $10 trillion, okay? Eighteen, that’s a record. You know what’s the second record? China. China had $2 trillion. That’s a lot, $2 trill ... we have $18 trillion, and that ultimately ... you know what it reduces itself to? Jobs. You’re gonna have jobs like you’ve never seen in the United States.Burns: Before I ... I let you go ...Trump: And by the way ... and prices are coming down. Just ... you talk about affordability, the Democrats love to say affordability, afford ... but then they never talk about it. They’re the ones that gave us the high prices. I’m the one that’s bringing them down.Burns: Well, one of the biggest issues on affordability right now is health care, and Obamacare subsidies are set to expire in a couple of weeks, which will lead to higher prices for millions of Americans. I do wonder, Mr. President ...Trump: But you said the word, Obamacare. Obamacare ...Burns: Correct.Trump: ... was conceived by Barack Hussein Obama, who know ... knew nothing about health care.Burns: But we’re in the situation we’re in now where, uh, those subsidies will expire, so I wonder, is letting those subsidies expire acceptable to you, and should Americans ...Trump: What I want on health care is very simple. Uh, Obamacare was set up for insurance companies to become rich, OK? That was why they ... in my opinion, I think the Democrats did it for that reason. Do you know that insurance company stocks have gone up 16, 17, 1,800 percent over a short period of time? They ... they’ve been paid trillions, trill ... not billions, trillions of dollars, and what I’m saying is very simple. I don’t want to pay ’em anything. No money for the insurance companies. Sorry, fellas. I know ’em all. No money for the insurance companies. I want to pay the money directly to the people and let the people get their own health care.Burns: Well, Congress hasn’t put that on the floor yet.Trump: But you know who’s fighting me on that?Burns: Who?Trump: The Democrats.Burns: But in the meantime, I mean, two weeks, Mr. President, people will see those premiums go up. So will you tell Congress to extend those Obamacare subsidies while you work out another deal?Trump: I don’t know. I’m gonna have to see. I’d like to get better health care. I’d like to have people, uh, buy their own health care, get much better health care, and, uh, what I want to do, for example, I want to give the money to the people not to the insurance companies.Burns: So right now, people are buying their holiday presidents ... presents. They’re planning for ...Trump: Look, don’t be dramatic.Burns: No, no.Trump: Don’t be dramatic.Burns: Uh, they’re ... they’re planning their budgets ...Trump: Here ... here’s what I want to ...Burns: ... for next year, Mr. President.Trump: Here’s what I want to ... I know. And what I want to do is help them.Burns: So will their premiums go up?Trump: I want to give ... I’m giving them money. I want to give the money to the people to buy their own health care. That’s a good thing, not a bad thing. The Democrats don’t want to do that. They want the insurance companies to continue to make a fortune. The Democrats are owned by the insurance companies. They want the insurance companies to get these trillions of dollars. We spent ... we spend trillions of dollars goes to the insurance companies. I want that money to go to the people and let the people go out and buy their own health care. It works like magic. But you know who doesn’t want it? The Democrats, because they’re corrupt people because they’re totally owned and bought by the insurance companies.Burns: So at this point, most likely premiums will go up and ... and you will find another ...Trump: Uh, well ...Burns: ... plan?Trump: ... your premiums could go down if you did what I want to do. I want to give the money ...Burns: That’s going to take time, sir.Trump: Ready? I want to give ... I want to give the people better health insurance for less money. The people will get the money and they’re gonna buy the health insurance that they want.Burns: I want to talk about one last really important issue to ...Trump: You know that works really well, right? And you know the Democrats don’t want to do it because they want the insurance companies to make all the money.Burns: Immigration, sir, critical to your agenda. I want to ask, uh, about what, uh, the Pope has said, which is he has called your immigration actions inhumane. Do you take that seriously from the Pope?Trump: I haven’t seen that. I mean ... I mean, he ... maybe he has. I mean, he also didn’t like the wall. You know, they didn’t like the wall. The wall turned out to be great.Burns: Do you plan to meet or speak with him?Trump: You know, I built a wall that, uh, stopped people from flooding into ... we ... I didn’t put up the wall. I built the wall. The wall, nobody talks about that. You know, it’s interesting, uh, two years ago, a year ago under Biden, this country was out of control; millions of people pouring through totally unchecked, totally unvetted. And now we have nobody coming in. We have them coming in only legally. They have to go through a legal process. Nobody ever talks about that anymore. They should talk about that. But I haven’t heard any statements from the Pope. I’m sure he’s a lovely man. His brother’s a lovely man. You know, his brother ...Burns: Yeah, you’ve spoken to him.Trump: Do you know his brother is serious MAGA? Lives in Florida. He’s like ...Burns: So will you meet with the other brother, with the Pope?Trump: I already met with the brother. He came to ...Burns: But with the ... with the Pope, will you meet with him or speak with him?Trump: Sure, I will. Why not?Burns: Um, I ... I have one more question on immigration. Uh, the Supreme Court is going to hear a case that could redefine who is here legally ...Trump: Yeah.Burns: ... in the ... in the United States. I’m talking about the birthright citizenship case.Trump: Yeah.Burns: If the court sides with you and ends birthright citizenship, are you going to try to take away citizenship from people who already have it here?Trump: I ... honestly, I haven’t thought of that, but I will tell you this, the case is very interesting because that case was meant for the babies of slaves. And if you look at the dates on the case, it was exactly having to do with the Civil War. That case was not meant from some rich person coming from another country, dropping ... putting a foot in our country, and all of a sudden their whole family becomes, you know, United States citizens. That case is all about slaves, the babies of slaves, and it was a good reason for doing it. And that’s all it was about, and people now are understanding it. It’s been explained to ’em. And I think the court understands it, too. That would be a devastating decision if we lose that case.Burns: That court you’ve put three ...Trump: Because our country cannot afford to house tens of millions of people that came in through birthright citizenship. When that happened, that was meant for the ... the babies of slaves, and if you look at the exact dates that it was passed, it all had to do with the Civil War and the ending of the Civil War. It’s that little period of time, and people now are starting to understand that.Burns: Do you want to see one of the justices on the Supreme Court retire so you can put in one more before the end of your term?Trump: Well, the Democrats want to ...Burns: I mean ...Trump: ... flood the court. You know the ...Burns: Clarence Thomas is 77.Trump: Yeah.Burns: Samuel Alito is 75. Do you want one more on there?Trump: Uh, well, I hope they stay ’cause I think they’re fantastic, OK? Both of those men are fantastic.Burns: Before I let you go, I want to ask ...Trump: I will say this, the Democrats want to pack the court. They want to have 21 justices. That would be a ... a terrible thing for this country.Burns: The future of the Republican Party, look, I watched you, uh, on all of your campaigns pull together, especially in this last one, an unprecedented coalition to win the presidency. You brought in so many new voters to the Republican Party. You chipped away at some of the core bases of the Democratic Party. Is there anyone else in the GOP that can energize the coalition the way you did?Trump: I hope so. I don’t know. You never know until they’re tested. You know, it’s like, uh, you jump in the water; you can swim or you can’t. Some people can swim and some people can’t. You never know. You have to see. I think we have a very good bench. I must ... we have a lot of good people. We have a great Cabinet. I have a really great Cabinet — better than my first Cabinet. I had some very good people in my first cabinet, but this cabinet, you know, I have much more experience. When I first came to Washington, it was interesting. I didn’t know anything about any of the people. I was in a different ... I was a very successful guy from New York City, real estate and ... and other things. I mean, I had a great show and enter ... a lot of things but basically real estate. And by the way, I’m fixing up the White House, making it beautiful. I’m doing a great ballroom that they’ve tried to do for 150 years and all of that stuff.But you never know. Your question’s such an interesting question. You never really know until they get tested. I hope so.Burns: Mr. President, thank you so much ...Trump: Thank you.Burns: ... for joining the conversation. I really appreciate your time.Trump: Thank you very much.Burns: Thank you.CORRECTION: Due to a transcription error, an earlier version of this report misstated a quote. "But if the election wasn’t rigged and stolen, uh, you wouldn’t even be talking about Ukraine right now," Trump said.

Two men clung to what remained of their capsized boat. One moment, they had been cutting through the warm waters of the Caribbean Sea at a rapid clip. The next, their vessel exploded and was engulfed in fire and shrouded in smoke. The men were shipwrecked, helpless or clearly in distress, six witnesses who saw video of the attack say. The survivors pulled themselves onto the overturned hull as an American aircraft filmed them from above. The men waved their arms. Minutes ticked by. Ten. Twenty. Thirty. As the men bobbed along, drifting with the current, for some 45 minutes, Adm. Frank Bradley — then the head of Joint Special Operations Command — sought guidance from his top legal adviser. At Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on September 2, he turned to Col. Cara Hamaguchi, the staff judge advocate at the secretive JSOC, The Intercept has learned. Could the U.S. military legally attack them again? How exactly she responded is not known. But Bradley, according to a lawmaker who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified briefing, said that the JSOC staff judge advocate deemed a follow-up strike lawful. In the briefing, Bradley said no one in the room voiced objections before the survivors were killed, according to the lawmaker. Five people familiar with briefings given by Bradley, including the lawmaker who viewed the video, said that, logically, the survivors must have been waving at the U.S. aircraft flying above them. All interpreted the actions of the men as signaling for help, rescue, or surrender. “Obviously, we don’t know what they were saying or thinking,” one of the sources said, “but any reasonable person would assume that they saw the aircraft and were signaling either: don’t shoot or help us.” Raising both hands is a universal sign of surrender for isolated members of armed forces. Under international law, those who surrender — like those who are shipwrecked – are considered hors de combat, the French term for those out of combat, and may not be attacked. The Pentagon’s Law of War Manual is explicit in this regard. “Persons who have been incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck are in a helpless state, and it would be dishonorable and inhumane to make them the object of attack,” reads the guide. But that’s not how Bradley — now the chief of Special Operations Command, or SOCOM — saw it. Bradley declined to comment to The Intercept, but a U.S. official familiar with his thinking said he did not perceive their waving to be a “two-arm surrender.” Some 45 minutes after the men had been plunged into the water, a second missile screamed down from the sky on Bradley’s order. Two more missiles followed in rapid succession, sinking the remnants of the boat. Nothing remained of the men. Special Operations Command refused to make Hamaguchi available for an interview and declined to answer questions about Hamaguchi’s legal guidance or Bradley’s statements to the member of Congress. “ He did inform them that during the strike he sought advice from his lawyer and then made a decision.” “We are not going to comment on what Admiral Bradley told law makers in a classified hearing. He did inform them that during the strike he sought advice from his lawyer and then made a decision,” Col. Allie Weiskopf, the director of public affairs at Special Operations Command, told The Intercept. Multiple military officials attempted to dissuade The Intercept from naming Hamaguchi in this article, citing safety concerns. Four former judge advocates — better known in the military as JAGs, as they are lawyers within the judge advocate general’s corps — blasted the supposed defense that the survivors’ waving hands did not constitute a two-arm surrender. Two used the word “ridiculous” to describe it. “Waving is a way to attract attention. There was no need to kill them,” said Eugene Fidell, who served as a judge advocate in the Coast Guard and is now a senior research scholar at Yale Law School focused on military justice. “We don’t kill people who are doing this. We should have saved them. None of it makes any sense.” The lawmaker who watched the video footage of the attack expressed skepticism about the U.S. official’s claim. “My impression is that these were two shipwrecked individuals,” they said after viewing the video. “I do think at least one of them used two arms.” The Intercept was the first outlet to report that the U.S. military killed survivors of the September 2 boat strike in a follow-up attack. Since then, questions have swirled around the exact roles of President Donald Trump, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and Bradley in the operation, and how they arrived at the conclusion that their monthslong campaign of killings in the Caribbean and Pacific is lawful. Military and legal experts have said the strikes are tantamount to murder. But until now, less attention has been paid to the legal guidance Bradley sought. The legal underpinnings for the campaign of extrajudicial killings that have so far taken the lives of at least 105 civilians began taking shape over the summer, when Trump signed a secret directive ordering the Pentagon to use military force against certain Latin American drug cartels. A classified opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel claims that narcotics on supposed drug boats are lawful military targets because their cargo generates revenue for cartels whom the Trump administration claims are in a “non-international armed conflict” with the United States. Government officials told The Intercept that the memo was not actually signed by Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser until days after the September 2 attacks. Attached to that secret memo is a similarly secret list of designated terrorist organizations, or DTOs, and an annex containing pertinent findings from the U.S. intelligence community. In August, Hegseth, the “target engagement authority,” signed an execute order, or EXORD, directing Special Operations forces to sink suspected drug smuggling boats, destroy their cargo, and kill their crews, according to government officials. Pentagon briefers have told U.S. officials that they do not need to positively identify all of those killed in strikes and only need to show a connection to a DTO or affiliate. Those sources say the affiliate label is “quite broad” and some of those killed may have only a tenuous link to a drug smuggling cartel. Hegseth gave the go-ahead order to Bradley, who presided over the September 2 mission from the JSOC joint operations center at Fort Bragg, according to four government sources. Present with him was Hamaguchi and other JSOC personnel, including his top deputies, and specialists in intelligence, targeting, and munitions. “I wish everybody could be in the room watching our professionals … Adm. Mitch Bradley and others at JSOC. … The deliberative process, the detail, the rigorous, the intel, the legal … that make sure that every one of those drug boats is tied to a designated terrorist organization,” said Hegseth later. Before the initial strike, Bradley consulted with Hamaguchi, then gave the order to elite SEAL Team 6 operators to attack the four-engine speedboat, according to government sources. Some 45 minutes after that strike, Bradley issued the order for the follow-up attacks after again consulting with Hamaguchi. Hamaguchi has been present in the JSOC war room for all the boat strikes, unless she delegated to a deputy, according to a SOCOM official. Most of the campaign has been conducted since Lt. Gen. Jonathan Braga took command of JSOC in September. During a recent briefing, Bradley explained that the JSOC staff judge advocate specifically said that the second strike on September 2 was lawful, according to the lawmaker. Bradley said that after initial debate, there was no dissent in the room before the follow-up strike that killed the survivors, that member of Congress told The Intercept. Trump posted edited footage of that strike on his Truth Social account on September 2. He wrote that the attack was conducted “on my Orders.” After the killings sparked a congressional firestorm, however, Trump and Hegseth distanced themselves from the attack on the survivors. “I wouldn’t have wanted that. Not a second strike,” said the president. The war secretary claimed that he “did not personally see survivors” amid the fire and smoke and had left the room before the second attack was ordered. Bradley apparently has no reservations about having ordered the attacks. “He’s happy to take responsibility for those decisions,” a SOCOM official told The Intercept. We’re independent of corporate interests — and powered by members. Join us. Become a member Hamaguchi, a former communications officer who served in the Army for nine years before she became a judge advocate, is well known within the small group of lawyers who advise special operations units. She was publicly identified as JSOC’s staff judge advocate in materials published by the U.S. Naval War College earlier this year. Hamaguchi boasts an impeccable reputation according to seven former colleagues, who praised her as “sharp,” “smart,” and “a good person and attorney.” Only two years into her career as an attorney and days after being promoted to major, Hamaguchi found herself providing legal advice concerning a 16-count homicide in Afghanistan. Back in the U.S., she acted as a prosecutor at the sentencing proceedings of Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales. A military jury handed Bales the stiffest sentence possible for his massacre: life in prison without parole. Most former colleagues of Hamaguchi who spoke with The Intercept expressed surprise or dismay at the prospect of her playing a role in the boat strikes. It’s possible Hamaguchi voiced some objection or wrote a memorandum delineating her concerns about the September 2 attacks or subsequent strikes. “Without hearing directly from the JAG, it’s impossible to know to a certainty what she said or did,” said Todd Huntley, a former Navy judge advocate who served as a legal adviser on Joint Special Operations task forces conducting drone strikes in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and called Hamaguchi “fantastic, very smart, experienced and professional.” JAGs are expected to speak up when they have legal concerns. But Huntley said that if someone repeatedly disputed the legal underpinnings of a monthslong campaign, they would not remain in that post long. “When the relationship between a commander and his JAG has broken down to the point where the commander no longer trusts or listens to the JAG’s advice, that JAG would typically be reassigned to a different unit or role within the command. Such a situation might arise if the JAG is seen as always saying ‘no’ to the commander,” he told The Intercept. Former colleagues also told The Intercept that Hamaguchi is scheduled to retire when her JSOC tour ends in 2026 — but stressed her departure was not premature. “I would be completely shocked if she thought these strikes were lawful,” said one former Defense Department colleague. “I’m sure she knows this is illegal. She knows that you can’t summarily execute criminal suspects in peacetime and can’t summarily execute criminal suspects during war. Any JAG worth their salt knows this.” “I’m sure she knows this is illegal. She knows that you can’t summarily execute criminal suspects in peacetime and can’t summarily execute criminal suspects during war.” That colleague and four others said specifically that they were saddened to hear Hamaguchi was involved in attacks that all said were extrajudicial killings. Another former colleague said Hamaguchi had previously exhibited a “strong moral compass.” That person added: “I can’t tell you how sad this makes me.” Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., the chair of the House Armed Services Committee, apparently called for a briefing by the judge advocate present with Bradley during the strike. “I want the lawyer there, too,” Rogers said earlier this month. Rogers’s office did not respond to questions by The Intercept about whether a briefing with Hamaguchi ever occurred. Six other lawmakers or congressional staff said they were unaware of any briefings by Hamaguchi. Most did not know her by name. Lawmakers are growing frustrated with what they describe as the War Department’s consistent failure to disclose key information about the attacks. “For months, in multiple briefings, the Department omitted the fact that there were two survivors in the initial September 2nd strike,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, last week. “We learned the circumstances of the strike from press reports.” Reed called for the committee to be provided EXORDs; unedited video of all boat strikes; and all audio, transcripts, and chat logs of communications between commanders, aircraft, and others involved in the September 2 strike, among other pertinent information. Since the execution of the men on September 2, the U.S. has appeared to refrain from killing survivors of subsequent boat strikes. Following an October 16 attack on a semisubmersible in the Caribbean Sea that killed two civilians, two other men were rescued by the U.S. and quickly repatriated to Colombia and Ecuador, respectively. Following three attacks on October 27 that killed 15 people aboard four separate boats, a survivor of a strike was spotted clinging to wreckage, and the U.S. alerted the Mexican Navy. Search teams did not find the man, and he is presumed dead. “This tells you all you need to know,” said one government official briefed on the strikes. “They didn’t kill the later survivors because they know it was wrong. The first strike was obviously bad. They know it was not just immoral, it was illegal.”

The Pentagon used a secret aircraft painted to look like a civilian plane in its first attack on a boat that the Trump administration said was smuggling drugs, killing 11 people last September, according to officials briefed on the matter. The aircraft also carried its munitions inside the fuselage, rather than visibly under its wings, they said. The nonmilitary appearance is significant, according to legal specialists, because the administration has argued its lethal boat attacks are lawful — not murders — because President Trump “determined” the United States is in an armed conflict with drug cartels. But the laws of armed conflict prohibit combatants from feigning civilian status to fool adversaries into dropping their guard, then attacking and killing them. That is a war crime called “perfidy.” Retired Maj. Gen. Steven J. Lepper, a former deputy judge advocate general for the United States Air Force, said that if the aircraft had been painted in a way that disguised its military nature and got close enough for the people on the boat to see it — tricking them into failing to realize they should take evasive action or surrender to survive — that was a war crime under armed-conflict standards. “Shielding your identity is an element of perfidy,” he said. “If the aircraft flying above is not identifiable as a combatant aircraft, it should not be engaged in combatant activity.” The aircraft swooped in low enough for the people aboard the boat to see it, according to officials who have seen or been briefed on surveillance video from the attack. The boat had turned back toward Venezuela, apparently after seeing the plane, before the first strike. Two survivors of the initial attack later appeared to wave at the aircraft after clambering aboard an overturned piece of the hull, before the military killed them in a follow-up strike that also sank the wreckage. It is not clear whether the initial survivors knew that the explosion on their vessel had been caused by a missile attack. The military has since switched to using recognizably military aircraft for boat strikes, including MQ-9 Reaper drones, although it is not clear whether those aircraft got low enough to be seen. In a boat attack in October, two survivors of an initial strike swam away from the wreckage and so avoided being killed by a follow-up strike on the remnants of their vessel. The military rescued them and returned them to their home countries, Colombia and Ecuador. U.S. military manuals about the law of war discuss perfidy at length, saying it includes when a combatant feigns civilian status so the adversary “neglects to take precautions which are otherwise necessary.” A U.S. Navy handbook says lawful combatants at sea use offensive force “within the bounds of military honor, particularly without resort to perfidy,” and stresses that commanders have a “duty” to “distinguish their own forces from the civilian population.” Questions about perfidy have arisen in closed-door briefings of Congress by military leaders, according to people familiar with the matter, but have not been publicly discussed because the aircraft is classified. The public debate has focused on a follow-up strike that killed the two initial survivors, despite a war-law prohibition on targeting the shipwrecked. The press office for the U.S. Special Operations Command, whose leader, Adm. Frank M. Bradley, ran the operation on Sept. 2, declined to comment on the nature of the aircraft used in the attack. But the Pentagon insisted in a statement that its arsenal has undergone legal review for compliance with the laws of armed conflict. “The U.S. military utilizes a wide array of standard and nonstandard aircraft depending on mission requirements,” Kingsley Wilson, the Pentagon press secretary, said in response to questions from The New York Times. “Prior to the fielding and employment of each aircraft, they go through a rigorous procurement process to ensure compliance with domestic law, department policies and regulations, and applicable international standards, including the law of armed conflict.” A White House spokeswoman, Anna Kelly, issued a statement that did not specifically engage with the perfidy issues but defended the strike as having been directed by Mr. Trump to go after “narcotics trafficking and violent cartel activities.” She added: “The strike was fully consistent with the law of armed conflict.” It is not clear what the aircraft was. While multiple officials confirmed that it was not painted in a classic military style, they declined to specify exactly what it looked like. Editors’ Picks How a Travel Writer Became Timothée Chalamet’s Ping-Pong Nemesis ‘The Man and I Both Immediately Lost Our Composure’ Why Doesn’t My Boss Respect Sick Days? Amateur plane-spotting enthusiasts posted pictures on Reddit in early September of what appeared to be one of the military’s modified 737s, painted white with a blue stripe and with no military markings, at the St. Croix airport in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Regardless of the specific aircraft at issue, three people familiar with the matter acknowledged that it was not painted in the usual military gray and lacked military markings. But they said its transponder was transmitting a military tail number, meaning broadcasting or “squawking” its military identity via radio signals. Several law-of-war experts said that would not make the use of such an aircraft lawful in these circumstances since the people on the boat probably lacked equipment to pick up the signal. Among the legal specialists who said the use of a military transponder signal would not solve a perfidy problem was Todd Huntley, a retired Navy captain who formerly deployed with the Joint Special Operations Command as a judge advocate general, or JAG, and directed the Navy’s national security law division. Captain Huntley said he could think of legitimate uses for such an aircraft that would make it lawful to have in the arsenal for other contexts, including a hostage rescue scenario in which munitions might be needed for self-defense but were not intended for launching offensive attacks. The Trump administration kept planning for the boat attacks operation closely held, excluding many military lawyers and operational experts who would normally be involved. Moreover, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has sought to undercut the role of military lawyers as an internal check, including by firing the top service JAGs in February. The U.S. military operates several aircraft that are built on civilian airframes — including modified Boeing 737s and Cessna turboprops — and can launch munitions from internal weapons bays without visible external armaments. Such aircraft are usually painted gray and have military markings, but military and plane-spotting websites show that a few are painted white and have minimal markings. The U.S. military has killed at least 123 people in 35 attacks on boats, including the Sept. 2 strike. A broad range of specialists in laws governing the use of force have said the orders by Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth to attack the boats have been illegal and the killings have been murders. The military is not allowed to target civilians who pose no imminent threat, even if they are suspected of crimes. The administration has argued that the strikes are lawful and the people on the boats are “combatants” because Mr. Trump decided the situation was a so-called noninternational armed conflict — meaning a war against a nonstate actor — between the United States and a secret list of 24 criminal gangs and drug cartels he has deemed terrorists. The legitimacy of that claim is widely disputed. Still, it has put attention on ways particular attacks might have violated the laws of war. Like General Lepper and Captain Huntley, Geoffrey Corn, a retired lieutenant colonel JAG officer who was the Army’s senior adviser for law-of-war issues, said he does not believe that the Sept. 2 attack took place in an armed conflict. He is now a law professor at Texas Tech University. But he noted that the United States considers perfidy to be a crime in noninternational armed conflicts: It charged a Guantánamo detainee before a military commission with that offense over Al Qaeda’s 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole, in which militants in a small boat floated a hidden bomb up to the side of the warship while waving in a friendly manner. Professor Corn said an assessment of whether the Sept. 2 attack counted as perfidy would turn on whether the military was trying to make the people on the boat think the aircraft was civilian to “get the jump” on them. “The critical question is whether there is a credible alternative reason for using an unmarked aircraft to conduct the attack other than exploiting apparent civilian status to gain some tactical advantage,” he said.

Remarks Homestead Air Reserve Base Homestead, FL September 2, 2025 QUESTION:  Were you at SOUTHCOM today? SECRETARY RUBIO:  Yeah.  Not today.  I was there Friday. QUESTION:  So any additional details — SECRETARY RUBIO:  I was – I had a – the Polish Government foreign ministry did the Lech Walesa Award today for a Cuban dissident.  So obviously she’s not here, so I attended that this morning.  QUESTION:  And what can you tell us about Venezuela? QUESTION:  (Inaudible.) QUESTION:  Any details to share about the Venezuela strike now?  (Inaudible.) SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, the President made – the President made the announcement and said it was a lethal strike.  I think the Pentagon will have more details and other things to offer you here in the next few hours (inaudible). QUESTION:  What kind of vessel was it? QUESTION:  Yeah, vessel — SECRETARY RUBIO:  The drug vessel – carrying drugs. QUESTION:  Size? SECRETARY RUBIO:  Huh?  Well, I’ll refer you to the Pentagon.  They’ll give you more details on that when – in the next – I anticipate shortly, at any – probably while we’re in the air. QUESTION:  How many deaths are believed to have — QUESTION:  What types of drugs were on board?  Can you tell us, is it — SECRETARY RUBIO:  Again, look, I’m not trying to be evasive.  I’ll let the Pentagon answer that.  Suffice it to say that the President is going to be on offense against drug cartels and drug trafficking into the United States.  It destabilizes not just the country but the entire Caribbean Basin.  These particular drugs were probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean, at which point they just contribute to the instability these countries are facing. So the President has been very clear that he is going to use the full power of America, the full might of the United States, to take on and eradicate these drug cartels no matter where they’re operating from and no matter how long they have been able to act with impunity.  Those days are over. QUESTION:  The vessels are still in the region.  Do you plan those operations to – do you expect those operations to continue? SECRETARY RUBIO:  I think as long as those vessels are in the region and as long as the President’s in the White House, he’s made very clear he’s not going to allow the United States to continue to be flooded with cocaine and fentanyl and other drugs coming from different places – this one is from Venezuela, which is a common route.  But by the way, some of it ends up in Europe.  A lot of it ends up in Puerto Rico and then on into the United States mainland.  So no one should be surprised.  That’s why they’re there on a counterdrug mission, and they’re going to continue to operate.  As far as specifics and future operations, I have to refer you to the Pentagon on that.  This is a DOD operation. QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, have you — QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)  You said that it was operated by a cartel.  Can you share which cartel was operating the vessel? SECRETARY RUBIO:  Again, I’ll let the operators discuss all of that.  But I thought it was – the President was very clear, and that is we destroyed a drug boat that left Venezuela operated by a designated narcoterrorist organization, which is what these are, and he’s been clear that the days of acting with impunity and having an engine shot down or a couple drugs grabbed off a boat, the – those days are over.  Now it is we are going to wage combat against drug cartels that are flooding American streets and killing Americans. QUESTION:  Will you take out the Maduro regime? QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, what is the legal authority for this strike? SECRETARY RUBIO:  The legal authority?  QUESTION:  Yeah. SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well look, again, I’m not going to answer for the White House Counsel.  Suffice it to say that all of those steps were taken in advance.  The President has designated these as terrorist organizations, which is what they are.  When you flood American streets with drugs, you are terrorizing America, and that’s going to end. QUESTION:  Will you act on Venezuelan soil against the Maduro regime? SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, this is a counterdrug operation and we’re going to take on drug cartels wherever they are and wherever they’re operating against the interest of the United States.  The President’s top obligation is to secure the national interest and the national security of our people.  I know of no president that means that more than this one – our President now, President Trump.  And so, but we’ll – I’m not going to speculate about what might come down the road.  Let’s get in the air, guys.  Thank you.

NIne months into the Trump administration’s deadly campaign against so-called drug boats, there is a pattern to the strikes. And a glaring anomaly. The U.S. military has conducted more than 60 attacks, resulting in over 200 extrajudicial killings in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. In almost all the strikes, between one and four people lost their lives. In only one strike did the death toll of a single boat reach double digits: the first attack on September 2, 2025. Since then, experts, lawmakers, and even military officials behind the scenes have been asking a simple but haunting question: Why was that boat packed with 11 people? “Why would 11 people be on board a boat carrying drugs?” said a government source who attended a classified briefing where the large crew on the first boat attacked was discussed. “It’s a high risk for the cartels. That always stood out.” One top military officer provided a plausible explanation, behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, The Intercept has learned. His admission raises even more questions about a strike that a high-ranking Pentagon official called a criminal attack on civilians and resulted in a firestorm in Congress last year. In the briefing, the high-ranking officer on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff stated that some of the people killed by the U.S. military may have been the victims of human trafficking. A 40-foot go-fast boat with four 200-horsepower engines sped off from San Juan de Unare on Venezuela’s Paria Peninsula deep in the night of September 1. It was “probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio would later say. As the peñero cut through the warm waters of the Caribbean Sea, a secret U.S. Special Operations plane flew high above. Its transponder was “squawking” its military identity by radio. But to the 11 people on the boat below, the plane — a secret Special Operations aircraft with a non-military appearance — would have looked like a civilian aircraft. Its munitions were hidden inside the fuselage, rather than affixed visibly under its wings. A month earlier, War Secretary Pete Hegseth signed an execute order directing Special Operations forces to attack suspected drug smuggling boats and kill their crews, according to three government officials who spoke with The Intercept. Hegseth gave the go-ahead order to attack the boat to Adm. Frank Bradley — then the head of the secretive Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, who presided over the September 2 mission — according to four sources. Now, Hegseth and numerous military officers were watching live video of the boat as it plowed through the Caribbean waters. The Americans gathered at the JSOC joint operations center at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, could see the men in the boat clearly, according to three government officials briefed on the matter. The secret plane dove low enough that those on the boat noticed it, said three government officials familiar with the operation. It apparently unnerved the men aboard so much that they turned the boat around and headed back toward Venezuela.   Adm. Frank M. Bradley, left, accompanied by Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, right, walks to a meeting with senators on Capitol Hill on Dec. 4, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Photo:Mark Schiefelbein/AP Bradley — now the four-star chief of Special Operations Command — consulted with Col. Cara Hamaguchi, JSOC’s staff judge advocate, before ordering SEAL Team 6 operators to attack the packed speedboat, according to government sources. In an instant, the vessel exploded and was engulfed in fire and shrouded in smoke. Two survivors pulled themselves onto a fragment of the overturned hull as the Americans watched from above. According to officials, Bradley explained in briefings that because the September 2 attack was the initial strike of the campaign and was conducted by the secret plane, the survivors would have had no idea they were attacked by the aircraft. They probably believed the explosion was caused by a catastrophic engine malfunction, Bradley said in the briefing. The two men were shipwrecked, helpless, or clearly in distress, six people who saw video of the attack said. Bradley watched as the injured men clung to what remained of the boat. “You had two shipwrecked people on the top of the tiny little bit of the boat that was left that was capsized,” Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said on CNN after viewing video of the attack. Three sources familiar with briefings by Bradley provided to members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as well as the Senate and House Armed Services committees confirmed that the men bobbed along, drifting with the current, for roughly 45 minutes. “They had at least 35 minutes of clear visual on these guys after the smoke of the first strike cleared. There were no time constraints. There was no pressure. They were in the middle of the ocean and there were no other vessels in the area,” said one of the sources. Bradley again turned to Hamaguchi for guidance on whether he could legally attack the shipwrecked men. Bradley, according to a lawmaker who spoke to The Intercept on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified briefing, said that the JSOC staff judge advocate deemed a follow-up strike lawful. In the briefing, Bradley said no one in the room voiced objections, according to the lawmaker. Five people familiar with briefings given by Bradley, including that lawmaker who viewed the video, said that the survivors waved their arms and, logically, must have been waving at the U.S. aircraft flying above them. All believed the men were signaling for help, rescue, or surrender. “Obviously, we don’t know what they were saying or thinking,” said one of the sources, “but any reasonable person would assume that they saw the aircraft and were signaling either: don’t shoot or help us.” Raising one’s hands is a universal sign of surrender for members of armed forces. Under international law, those who surrender — like those who are shipwrecked — are considered hors de combat, the French term for those no longer in the fight, and may not be attacked. The Pentagon’s Law of War Manual is explicit on this point. “Persons who have been incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck are in a helpless state, and it would be dishonorable and inhumane to make them the object of attack,” reads the guide. Bradley found a workaround. While he declined to comment to The Intercept, a U.S. official familiar with his thinking said he did not perceive their waving to be a “two-arm surrender.” About 45 minutes after the men had been thrown into the water, a second missile screamed down on Bradley’s order, killing them. Two more missiles followed in rapid succession, sinking the remnants of the boat. In the immediate aftermath of the attack, President Donald Trump claimed in a Truth Social post that those killed by U.S. forces were “positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists,” and members of a “designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.” But from the very beginning, questions swirled among members of Congress and their staffers about the identities of those killed in the attack — and why there were so many of them. During a classified briefing on Capitol Hill last fall, Rear Adm. Brian H. Bennett — a military officer overseeing Special Operations for the Pentagon’s Joint Staff — was asked if any of the people aboard the boat on September 2 could have been human trafficking victims. “They could be,” Bennett replied, according to two people present at the briefing.  One of the government officials at the briefing explained that questions arose about the few boats targeted by the U.S. with greater-than-expected numbers of people on board; the September 2 strike was singled out due to the especially large number of passengers. Out of more than 60 strikes since, only four involved boats with six or more people aboard, almost all of them in the initial wave of attacks. In October 2025, there were two strikes on boats with six crew members and one with eight people on board. Since then, just one other vessel has had as many as six crew. Sources and methods of identification were a major topic of the fall briefing, where it became increasingly clear that JSOC did not positively identify everyone on the boats, said the official. “Questioning then led to trying to understand who these people could be,” that official said. “I was surprised. But only by the admission.” The second source at the briefing said they were astonished by Bennett’s candor that victims of human trafficking might have been among those killed. “I was surprised. But only by the admission,” said that official. Military officials with knowledge of the strikes also discussed the likelihood that some of those on board were being trafficked, were part of a more generalized smuggling operation, or had simply hitched a ride on the vessel, said another government official who was not at that briefing. In later classified briefings, the Pentagon’s story of who was aboard the vessel changed — but only marginally, said two government officials. Just one person aboard the go-fast boat on September 2 was a member of a so-called “designated terrorist organization,” while 10 were “DTO affiliates,” according to the officials who received those later briefings. Both said that they were under the impression that little more than a conversation with a DTO member might confer affiliate status but said that the military’s explanations were vague.   For weeks, The Intercept has sought to speak to Bennett, the deputy director for Special Operations on the Joint Staff, about the strikes and his briefings. “RADM Bennett is unavailable for an interview,” Maj. Annabel Monroe, a spokesperson for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Intercept. “As a matter of policy, the Joint Staff does not confirm specific operational details or comment on ongoing or potential future military actions.” Asked specifically for comment from Bennett and the Joint Staff about the trafficking remark and about how many victims of U.S. boat strikes may have been passengers of any sort, such as trafficking victims, smuggled persons, or paid passengers, Monroe replied: “Nothing further to add.”  Col. Allie Weiskopf, the director of public affairs at Special Operations Command, said the command was unaware of any allegations of victims of trafficking being killed on September 2 or in subsequent strikes. “Targeting decisions are based on comprehensive assessments and reviewed through established processes,” a spokesperson for U.S. Southern Command told The Intercept. “Every narco-terrorist killed … was an affiliated member of a Designated Terrorist Organization actively transporting illicit material along known trafficking routes in international waters.” A classified opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel — drawn up by an interagency lawyers working group including representatives of the CIA, the State Department, White House counsel, Department of Justice, and the Department of War — claims that narcotics on supposed drug boats are lawful military targets because they generate revenue for cartels with whom the Trump administration claims they are in a “non-international armed conflict.” Government officials told The Intercept that the memo was not actually signed by Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser until days after the September 2 attack. Attached to that secret memo is a similarly secret list of designated terrorist organizations. Six current and former government officials briefed on the boat strikes or with experience in counter-narcotics smuggling efforts said that while the vessel struck on September 2 might have had cocaine on board, the sole intent of its voyage was not drug trafficking. “No one would smuggle cocaine with 11 people on board their drug-running boat.” “No one would smuggle cocaine with 11 people on board their drug-running boat,” said one of the current officials, noting that it was a waste of space, fuel, and created security risks. “It just is not done. Full stop.” That official, who talked with The Intercept on the condition of anonymity to speak freely, said that the vessel’s profile more closely matched that of a ship smuggling various types of cargo, including people.  Retired Rear Adm. William Baumgartner, the former commander of the Seventh Coast Guard District who oversaw drug-interdiction operations in the Southeast U.S. and the Caribbean Basin, said the number of passengers was an obvious red flag. “I’m disappointed in the quality of planning for this operation,” he told The Intercept. “There appears to have been a lack of knowledge and expertise in what cocaine smuggling operations look like.” Join Our Newsletter Thank You For Joining! Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you. Will you take the next step to support our independent journalism by becoming a member of The Intercept? Become a member The vessel that would become the target of the first Trump administration boat strike reportedly left San Juan de Unare in Venezuela on the night of September 1. The 11 men aboard all hailed from that town or nearby Güiria, coastal communities on the Paria peninsula in Venezuela’s Sucre state. It’s an impoverished region where 90 percent of the population is food insecure; the nongovernmental organization Transparencia Venezuela identified the area as the country’s prime center of, and transit hub for, human trafficking. Reporting by Venezuela’s El Nacional identified Güiria and San Juan de Unare as having gone from fishing and tourist centers to “corridors of organized crime,” as the economic crisis in the country “drove many fishermen to replace fishing with smuggling gasoline, migrants, and eventually, drugs.” Some boats are known to carry mixed cargos of drugs, weapons, and people. A 2020 report on human trafficking in the Caribbean found that Venezuela was “the greatest supplier of trafficking victims to Trinidad and Tobago” — and that 43 percent of those trafficked from Venezuela to Trinidad and Tobago travel from Sucre. It cited a Venezuelan government official who drew specific attention to Güiria due to its proximity to Trinidad and Tobago, stating it was “frequently used clandestinely for human trafficking.” A 2025 U.S. State Department report also highlighted the “long-standing allegation that national guard and coast guard members active in coastal states, such as Sucre and Falcon, facilitated the transport of trafficking victims to Aruba, Curaçao, and Trinidad and Tobago.” A recent investigation by a consortium of journalists from Venezuelan outlets noted immigrant transport, people smuggling, and human trafficking is integral to the desperately poor population of Güiria and “as ordinary a job as teaching school — only far better paid.” The journalists wrote: In this Venezuelan town, people do not call the illicit transportation of drugs and other goods … to neighboring Caribbean islands or Colombia’s Guajira Peninsula “drug trafficking” or “smuggling.” They call them vueltas—literally “runs” or “jobs”—borrowing the slang Colombian traffickers use for narcotics shipments, contract killings, or debt collections. For many people in Güiria, those vueltas are the only path to a decent life. According to a 2025 analysis by InSight Crime, a think tank that studies organized criminal activity in the Americas, gangs from Sucre are involved in “cocaine trafficking, human trafficking and smuggling, arms trafficking, and the contraband of animals and minerals.” Roughly 30 percent of trafficking victims who pass through the region wound up in sexual exploitation networks, Transparencia Venezuela found. While trafficking victims are often assumed to be women and girls forced into sexual slavery — and many are — men and boys represent nearly half of the total number of human trafficking victims worldwide. And males are frequently mentioned in reports on Venezuela. A 2019 State Department investigation of human trafficking, for example, noted Venezuelan men were “increasingly vulnerable to forced labor in destination countries, including islands of the Dutch Caribbean.” A 2023 State Department report noted “an increase in male Venezuelan labor trafficking victims” in Trinidad and Tobago. It also details “migrant smuggling, which serves as traffickers’ primary method of transportation of victims from Venezuela.” Between 2019 and 2022, 69 percent of Venezuelan immigrants in South America interviewed by the Mixed Migration Center reported having hired smuggling services to leave their country. In 2023, the Curaçao Public Prosecutor’s Office also put out a warning about child trafficking, particularly from Venezuela: “Trafficked children range in age from 4 to 15 years old and are often transported in boats that also carry drugs and firearms on board.” An investigation by The Associated Press into the lives of nine of those slain in boat strikes examined the life of one of the men killed in the September 2 attack: Luis “Che” Martínez. The AP found that Martínez, a 60-year-old local crime boss, made his living smuggling both drugs and people across borders, according to several people who knew him. He had been incarcerated in late 2020 on human trafficking charges after a boat he had operated capsized, killing almost 25 people — including two of his sons and several other relatives, according to local reporting at the time. He was eventually released from custody and returned to smuggling people and narcotics, acquaintances told the news outlet. In the aftermath of Trump’s first boat strike, the size of the death toll immediately surprised those knowledgeable about illicit trade in the region. “With 11 people on board, there could have been a human smuggling element as well,” InSight Crime observed just after the September 2 attack, noting that such go-fast boats generally have a crew of two or three people. “You do not need 11 people on board a single vessel to smuggle drugs, even for a very big consignment.” “I would have expected much more attention to what smuggling operations look like and how to distinguish serious bulk cocaine smuggling boats from inter-island smugglers that might be primarily carrying passengers,” said Baumgartner, the retired Coast Guard rear admiral. When questioned just a day after the initial strike, at a press conference in Mexico City, Rubio explained the reasons for the attack by first mentioning human trafficking. “The President of the United States has determined that narcoterrorist organizations pose a threat to the national security of the United States,” he explained. “They are traffickers of people, they are traffickers of deadly drugs,” he said. A boat sits stranded along the shore in Cumana, the capital of Venezuela’s Sucre state, on Sept. 12, 2025.  Photo: Ariana Cubillos/AP File Facing outrage over the extrajudicial killings, Bradley has attempted to quiet questions about who the U.S. has targeted. In recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Bradley confirmed significant involvement in the boat strikes by the National Security Agency. He has also reportedly told lawmakers that U.S. intelligence officials had verified the identities of the 11 people on the boat on September 2 and validated them as legitimate targets. But Special Operations Command would not confirm what Bradley told lawmakers about the identities of the 11 people killed. And numerous government officials who spoke to The Intercept said that claims that intelligence “confirms who these people are” — as Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson asserted in December — is a rhetorical sleight of hand, if not an outright lie. JSOC did not know the names or supposed affiliations of all persons aboard the vessel struck on September 2, numerous government sources told The Intercept. Two sources specifically mentioned that some passengers were identified only by an obvious nom de guerre. “I don’t think we knew the identities of any of the people in the boat. We might have known one or two. … But we certainly didn’t know the identities of all 11,” Democratic Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., said in December. “I don’t think we have any idea, who precisely, any of the individuals in these boats are.” “Srikes [sic] are deliberate, lawful, and precise — aimed squarely at narco-terrorists and their enablers, not civilians,” a Southern Command spokesperson told The Intercept by email. “SOUTHCOM has full confidence in the operational and intelligence professionals who inform our missions.” SOUTHCOM routinely claims, in fact, that “intelligence” confirms that targeted vessels are “engaged in narco-trafficking operations.” But last week, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, revealed that “the presence of narcotics on a boat is not one of the targeting criteria” involved in the boat strikes. Behind closed doors, in fact, Pentagon officials don’t even pretend that they need to know who they are attacking. “They said that they do not need to positively identify individuals on the vessels to do the strikes,” Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations, told The Intercept in October. “They just need to show a connection to a DTO or affiliate.” Most of the government officials, including lawmakers briefed on the attacks, who spoke with The Intercept said that they believed the vessels targeted in the campaign are involved in illicit trafficking and are not simply fishing boats. But without stopping and searching boats, many said it was impossible to know for certain who and what is aboard a particular vessel. In late April, Bradley told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that the boat strikes are built upon the targeting procedures of the post-9/11 drone wars. “It is based off of the lessons learned and the processes perfected over the last 25 years of persona targeting,” he said, referring to strikes targeting people. Over that span, the U.S. has consistently killed civilians the world over — from Afghanistan to Iraq, Pakistan to Somalia and Libya to Yemen — due to intelligence failures and targeting errors. “There has never been a ‘perfecting’ of persona targeting.” “There has never been a ‘perfecting’ of persona targeting. Just because the U.S. military — and other U.S. forces — conducted many strikes against known targets under the moniker of counterterrorism does not mean that they became significantly better at it over time,” said Sarah Yager, a former senior adviser to the chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. “Over those same two decades being lauded as a time of learning lessons for the U.S. military, human rights groups documented repeated civilian deaths tied to flawed intelligence or assumptions or bias.” A 2023 investigation by The Intercept, for instance, revealed a raft of errors leading up to a drone strike in Somalia that killed three, and possibly five, civilians, including 22-year-old Luul Dahir Mohamed and her 4-year-old daughter, Mariam Shilow Muse. The Pentagon’s inquiry found that the Special Operations forces who conducted the strike were confused, despite months of “target development,” and argued about basic details, like how many passengers were in the targeted vehicle. They mistook a woman and child for an adult male and never even knew how many people they killed. “When Adm. Bradley references ‘the lessons learned and the processes perfected over the last 25 years of persona targeting,’ he’s actually invoking an architecture that human rights groups criticized regularly for overconfidence in the intelligence, confirmation bias and assumptions, and institutional incentives to interpret ambiguity as threat confirmation,” Yager said. Five experts, including current and former government officials, say that it’s impossible that the U.S. has not killed innocent people in its boat strike campaign given the long-standing limitations of U.S. targeting procedures, such as an overreliance on signals intelligence, or SIGINT. In recent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Rubio admitted that the U.S. has erroneously identified boats as possible targets, only to pull back. “I can tell you they do walk away from strikes,” he said. “There are multiple times that I’ve been aware of … because it doesn’t meet the criteria or because there’s doubt.” “Secret planes and SIGINT aren’t the answer. Confirmation bias continues to be a problem,” one government official briefed on the boat strikes told The Intercept. That official said it was far more likely that U.S. forces had misidentified or outright failed to notice a person aboard one of the boats that have been struck than that they knew the names and affiliations of everyone they had killed. Government statistics confirm the limitations of intelligence, profiling, and the ability of U.S. personnel to identify supposed drug traffickers from afar. Between September 1, 2024, and October 7, 2025, the Coast Guard interdicted 212 boats headed toward the U.S. that it suspected of drug-trafficking. Forty-one of them, or about 20 percent, had no illicit contraband on board, according to official statistics. As for ships just off the coast of Venezuela, the amount wrongly suspected of carrying drugs was a shade higher: 21 percent. When asked about the statistics showing 1 in 5 vessels had no drugs aboard, Yager told The Intercept that “positive identification of both targets and civilians has been a known problem in the U.S. military kill chain.” “In the case of the boat strikes, that’s a high rate of mistaken identity,” she said. “My guess is that the U.S. military has no idea who these people actually are before moving to kill them.”

“The passing of the popular Pichirilo, a great sports talent from Valdés, has been reported. Our condolences to his family,” posted @elshowderuben, a Facebook page for the program of the same name on Radio Güiria Internacional in Venezuela, on October 15, 2025. Their post received 483 reactions, mostly crying emojis or expressions of grief. “Pichirilo, you have no idea how much your news hurts, I will never forget you,” wrote a friend. “Rest in peace, Eduardo, popular Pichirilo,” “Rest in peace, my friend Pichirilo, excellent athlete. Great talent in front of the goal,” others commented. The day before, on October 14, a missile fired by the U.S. military had destroyed a boat off the Venezuelan coast near Güiria, a town in the municipality of Valdés, Sucre state, and a departure point for Trinidad and Tobago. According to the official US government video, the vessel was stationary when it was attacked. It was the fifth US attack on ships in the Caribbean. With the six people killed there, the death toll reached 27. US President Donald Trump stated on his social media that his Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, had given the order to strike on a known drug trafficking route in international waters, and that US intelligence “confirmed that the boat was trafficking narcotics” and was associated with narco-terrorist networks. The radio host of @showderuben told reporters from this journalistic alliance that he published the news about Pichirilo because he knew he was well-known in Güiria. “This is a small town and everyone knows each other here,” he explained, although he denied knowing anything about the circumstances of his death. Reporters from Rebel Alliance Investigates (ARI)—a coalition of the Venezuelan independent media outlets Runrunes, Tal Cual, and El Pitazo—allied with this investigation, confirmed in Güiria that Pichirilo's name was Eduardo Jaime, and that he was a beloved futsal player in that coastal town on the Venezuelan Caribbean coast. A family member later confirmed to this alliance by phone that Eduardo Jaime was on the boat that was shot down on October 14. From September 2015 until April 26 of this year, in what was called Operation Southern Spear, U.S. military forces destroyed 58 vessels with missile strikes and caused the deaths of 172 people like Eduardo Jaime—according to confirmation from the U.S. Southern Command in response to questions sent by this journalistic team via email. Since then, and until May 5, when this story was finalized, the U.S. government has publicly announced that it carried out two more attacks that killed five more people. US authorities also counted a total of 12 other missing persons, presumed dead. However, this journalistic alliance verified with sources in Costa Rica that of three presumed survivors of a March bombing at sea off the coast of that country, two died before reaching land. Thus, the death toll reached 179 as of May 5. In its written response, the US Southern Command stated that “every action taken during Operation Southern Spear is deliberate, legal, and precise, directed squarely against narco-terrorists and their facilitators. We have full confidence in the operations and intelligence professionals who inform our missions.” (See the full response here) However, days after the attack in which Pichirilo was killed that same October, Trump administration officials acknowledged in reports to members of Congress and their staff that they did not know the identity or background of the people they killed, as revealed by The Intercept. “It’s a double tragedy, not only because of the illegal killings, but also because the victims are erased, rendered anonymous,” said John Walsh of WOLA, a Washington-based human rights organization in Latin America, in a telephone interview with CLIP. Agreeing with Walsh and many others, including human rights experts, members of Congress, former U.S. government officials, and civil society organizations, who have questioned the legality of killing these men on the mere suspicion that they might be transporting drugs, a transnational journalistic alliance has been working since last December to identify these dead men, convinced that by revealing their faces and stories, their humanity will emerge. The alliance, coordinated by the Latin American Center for Investigative Journalism (CLIP), brings together media outlets from the ARI region of Venezuela; 360, Casa Macondo, and Verdad Abierta of Colombia; and Guardian of Trinidad and Tobago. And freelance journalists in the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Mexico, with technical and financial support from Airwars, today release the first findings of the investigation, "Bombed, Without the Right to Defense." This collaborative investigation has been a painstaking task, weaving together the loose threads of many tragedies. To this end, we have visited hamlets and coastal towns in La Guajira and Nariño, Colombia, and Sucre, Venezuela; interviewed family members, friends, and acquaintances of victims, as well as local authorities and reporters in five countries; tracked and verified hundreds of social media posts; identified dozens of publications from recognized media outlets in multiple countries and languages; made dozens of information requests to authorities; contacted prosecutors' offices, hospitals, morgues, and embassies; and verified public and judicial records. With all this information, we built a database that, we hope, will contribute to raising awareness that these men were human beings who deserved to be tried if they were suspected of committing any crime. Most sources are anonymous because everyone is afraid to speak. Some relatives of victims in Venezuela and Santa Marta, Colombia, according to sources consulted by this alliance, say they have received threats. Others don't want to say anything because they fear reprisals from their governments or, worse, from the drug lords who rule where they live. Government agencies have been tight-lipped, and officials who respond only do so off the record because they don't want to cause problems for their countries with the United States. Adding the names of the people other media outlets and organizations have managed to identify, along with the new fatalities identified by this journalistic alliance, we have been able to obtain the full names of 16 of those killed in these attacks. We identified the nationality of two more, and the nickname of another. We have information about the identities of two other people whose remains washed ashore on a beach in northern Colombia days after an attack, but we don't know for sure if they were killed in a bombing. We have the full name of another possible victim. We have identified three wounded survivors. It's like looking for needles in a haystack of 179 people killed between September 2nd and May 5th, and the count continues… Each explosion shatters the ship and its crew—whether traffickers, passengers, or fishermen—into a thousand pieces. Their identities are blown to bits across vast oceans. This cross-border journalistic collaboration also found that the destructive wave doesn't stop there. As the on-the-ground reporting will show, Operation Southern Spear has further unraveled the fabric of communities already broken and broken by organized crime and the absence of the state, and has terrorized fishermen and travelers to the point of paralyzing the economy of a town in Nariño. We also verified that it disrupted at least 18 commercial flights in the Colombian Caribbean. Furthermore, we documented how it has fragmented international cooperation in the fight against illegal drugs, because other democracies fear being involved in actions that disregard international agreements governing the sea and international human rights law. The shockwave of the bombing reverberates with the fear among officials and prosecutors of revealing details of the rescues or their coordinates, as the neighbor to the North could retaliate with new tariffs or personal attacks on the government. Often, they don't even respond to those asking about their dead. The Bombed On the same boat as 'Pichirilo,' the soccer player, were Chad Joseph and Rishi Samaroo, two Trinidadians, whose relatives are now suing the U.S. government for their extrajudicial killings. The world learned of Chad and Samaroo because their families filed a legal complaint last January in a federal court in Massachusetts, seeking compensation for damages related to their deaths. According to the Trinidad & Tobago Guardian, a member of this alliance, last December, in the village where Joseph was born—he was 26 years old at the time of the October 14 bombing—everyone had known him since childhood as a fisherman. He had left his hometown of Matelot, a fishing village on the Trinidadian coast, to live with an aunt in Las Cuevas, a community with lifelong ties to Venezuela. “It was Joseph’s family, being among the first to identify him among more than 100 people who have lost their lives in the attacks, who shone a human light on the people who have died as a result of the United States’ attacks in the Caribbean Sea. The human stories prompted members of Congress to begin putting pressure on the Trump administration, demanding transparency about these attacks and attempting to question and stop them,” wrote the Trinidad & Tobago Guardian, two months after his presumed death. That same publication interviewed Lenore Burnley, Chad’s mother, who said that “since hearing the news, her life has been characterized by the contradictory storm of having a faint hope and the stark reality of Joseph’s sudden death, without a body to bury.” And when The Guardian asked her why she thought Joseph had risked going out, she replied: “I know the law of the sea; I’ve known it since I was young. If it’s a ship, or something like that, you’re supposed to stop it, you see? The law isn’t about killing people. Wherever you are, you shouldn’t kill people like that. This is the first time in my life, and I’m 51 years old. I’ve never heard of anything like this.” The local newspaper reported that, according to Chad Joseph’s partner, he had called her to say he was returning home from Venezuela. Sallycar Korasingh, Rishi Samaroo’s sister, said he was a hard-working man who had paid his debt to society and was just trying to get back on his feet and earn a decent living in Venezuela by raising cows and goats to help support his family, the ACLU said in a statement. “If the U.S. government believed Rishi had done something wrong, they should have arrested, charged, and detained him, not killed him. They must be held accountable,” said Korasingh. Representing Joseph’s mother and Samaroo’s sister in their case before the U.S. courts are the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Professor Jonathan Hafetz of Seton Hall Law School. The lawyers filed the suit under admiralty law, which allows individuals to seek compensation for damages from those responsible for wrongful death, as defined by the Death at Sea Act (DOHSA), recognized by the United States. They also invoked the Alien Torts Statute, which allows foreigners to sue in the United States for extrajudicial killings, prohibited under international human rights law. “The deaths of Joseph and Samaroo were clearly extrajudicial killings,” Steven Watt, one of the ACLU lawyers, explained to this journalistic alliance. They cannot be justified with arguments like those put forward by the Trump administration, that being in a war on drugs justifies the use of violent attacks, he said. Watt also said that his legal team, in a separate request based on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), requested the legal memorandum produced by the Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice, which outlines the official legal rationale for these attacks, because the government has not made it public to date. The relatives of the Trinidadians maintain that neither of them was carrying drugs, that they were ordinary citizens returning to their homes in Las Cuevas, Trinidad, after working in Venezuela. According to local sources who spoke to ARI, the Venezuelan media coalition allied with this investigation, a man named Dushak Milovcic had traveled on the same boat attacked on October 14. An AP report stated that Milovcic, 24, “started as a lookout for smugglers,” had been at the Venezuelan National Guard Academy, and, according to sources who spoke to the AP reporter, was now involved with drug traffickers. The boat attacked on October 14 was not the only one suspected of carrying illegal drugs due to the high number of passengers. Several news outlets and observers also expressed doubts about the first boat bombed on September 2, 2025, which had 11 passengers on board. According to some people interviewed on the ground, who are familiar with the movement of the boats and spoke with allies of this investigation in La Guajira, Colombia, and Sucre, it is common for the same boats that carry drugs on their way to Venezuela to bring passengers back. The “captains,” as those who pilot these boats are called, sign up for any job that comes up. Reported by: Vera Ferrari “To all the narco-terrorists who threaten our homeland: if you want to stay alive, stop trafficking drugs. If you continue trafficking lethal drugs, we will kill you,” threatened Pete Hegseth, U.S. Secretary of War, on November 7, the day after a deadly attack on a speedboat with three occupants in the Caribbean, off the coast of Colombia. With statements like these, anyone would imagine that multiple Pablo Escobars and Chapo Guzmans had just been killed. Reporters from this alliance found a very different reality. The remains of two people, presumably killed on November 6, appeared in Puerto López, Uribia, in La Guajira, Colombia. Various sources in La Guajira said the two men came from Pedernales, Dominican Republic, a province bordering Haiti in the Enriquillo region, where 72% of households live in poverty. A Dominican reporter confirmed to this alliance that dozens of young people leave from there to make a living in Colombia or elsewhere, and many are recruited to smuggle cocaine from the Colombian Caribbean coast back to the island in small boats. Since no one came to claim the bodies that washed ashore on the Colombian beach, because they had no relatives there, the Wayuu indigenous community living in that region buried them, as reported at the time by The New York Times. A month later, forensic technicians from the Colombian Institute of Legal Medicine arrived and exhumed them. According to the Colombian news outlet 360-grados.co, a partner in this journalistic collaboration, this occurred between December 12 and 13, and as of this writing, the bodies remain refrigerated at the Forensic Medicine Institute in Barranquilla. Sources from the Colombian Attorney General's Office indicated that one of the bodies exhumed in La Guajira likely did not come from the attacked boats, given its state of decomposition. Local sources stated that they knew that the remains of another Dominican man who died on the boat on November 6 were not found in Colombia. The body had been dragged beyond Castilletes, some 20 kilometers inland into Venezuelan territory, where it is believed that members of the Wayuu community buried it. We were unable to confirm this version. (See “The victims of the Southern Command who were buried in La Guajira”). These young Dominicans are not very different from those in Uribia, in the Colombian region of La Guajira, where they went to look for work. Uribia is the poorest municipality in Colombia: 92% of its residents lack education, healthcare, and basic public services. This makes it easy to recruit them to transport cocaine, and they are paid for it, according to a boatman interviewed by the news outlet 360. “Most of the people here aren't owners; most of the owners of the merchandise are always from outside, we could even say internationally: they buy the merchandise here [in Colombia] and then wait for it at its destination,” the boatman explained to this journalistic alliance. Dozens of Dominicans have fallen into this trap of hope for a better life, and many have disappeared. Now the uncertainty is even worse for their relatives because they don't know if they were killed by U.S. missiles. This is what a Dominican woman, who spoke with this alliance but prefers not to give her name, fears. She hasn't heard from her brother Francisco—who worked various jobs in the tourism sector and had agreed to transport a shipment of drugs—since he called her from a boat about to set sail for home. It was mid-November, and he was using a satellite phone. It was a short conversation. He asked about his parents and told her he was coming back. He never returned. The bombings have also led many victims not to report disappearances. The reason? According to Dominican journalist Manuel González Feliz, it's a mixture of fear and shame among family members. As in Pedernales or La Guajira, Colombia, for many communities on the Colombian Pacific coast, transporting cocaine is not a criminal choice, but a survival strategy. The isolation of this region of jungles and mangroves, which stretches 1,300 kilometers from north to south of the country, contributes to its poverty. In Tumaco, Colombia's second-largest Pacific port and the departure point for many transporters, 84% of the population lives in multidimensional poverty. Drug trafficking groups exploit this situation by offering jobs in laboratories, shipyards, and as transporters. “It's the only source of employment that keeps these communities going. I know it's illegal, but it's what we have,” explains Duván Caicedo, a community leader in the small village of Pital de Costa, nestled between a river and the jungle on Colombia's Pacific coast. The 1,200 inhabitants of the hamlet live without potable water or a health clinic, a two-hour boat ride from Tumaco and the nearest hospital. A cocaine processing lab is the only source of work. In Sucre, the Venezuelan state where Güiria is located, 90% of the population lacks food security. According to ARI, almost no one is exclusively involved in cocaine trafficking. These boats are the lifeblood of the people on that coast: they bring and take away food, fish, and medicine. They carry workers from Venezuela to Trinidad and back, fishermen going out to bring in the day's catch, migrants fleeing authoritarianism, and also traffickers. (See story "All the 'turns' in Güiria"). When they carry drugs, there are usually two or at most three people on board: a driver and two assistants. This investigation reveals that the victims of the US bombings who came from Güiria worked as fishermen, motorcycle taxi drivers, bus drivers, and some of them had risked making a trip with cocaine because they couldn't support their families. Thus, Juan Carlos Fuentes, 43, a lifelong driver, and Luis Ramón Amundaraín, a 36-year-old fisherman and motorcycle taxi driver, had been in Trinidad and Tobago since September 28, 2025. Juan Carlos, his wife says, was desperate for money. A Yutong bus he used for his livelihood was damaged, and he couldn't afford to repair it. He called her from Trinidad the day before the October 3 bombing in which he presumably died and told her he was about to leave; that he wasn't carrying drugs. Ramón, his partner says, "went to look for more income" because the earnings from fishing and motorcycle taxis were no longer enough for his family of seven. She told ARI reporters that her husband was a fisherman. "They say he's a narco-terrorist," she said, but she maintains that if he were, they would have assets, and they don't even own a house. His family believes he died with Juan Carlos on October 3. What the women say makes sense, because their husbands were coming from Trinidad and Tobago to Venezuela, and the drugs flow in the opposite direction. Another man, Eduard Hidalgo, 46, had been a skilled fisherman and had left for the United States at the end of 2014. He was deported a year later. A friend maintains that although he had transported various goods for the criminal bosses in the area, he didn't want to make any more trips, "but they forced him." She believes he died in the bombing of a boat on February 23. (See story "The gringos exploited them": How three Venezuelans ended up on the boats attacked by the United States) Fear and hunger It's not just the families of the dead who mourn them today. The shockwaves are also impacting the communities. For example, for several days, fishermen in the rural area of Buenaventura, Colombia's main Pacific port, suspended their work for fear of not returning home, although they gradually resumed fishing later. The municipality of Olaya Herrera, in Nariño, was the most affected. A person working in the region's humanitarian sector, who asked to remain anonymous, told this alliance that many people there depend on the money collected by truckers after completing a trip. "When they return, money comes into the community, commerce picks up, and everyone benefits," they said. With the fear of making trips transporting drugs, money stopped coming into the families. "We are experiencing a very difficult situation," says Father Luis Carrillo. "It started to be felt in November, but it became critical in February." In coordination with the Mayor's office, the priest requested assistance from the Food Bank in Bogotá, and in March, 700 food baskets arrived by boat from Buenaventura and were distributed in the town of Bocas de Satinga and the surrounding rural area. “Obviously, that doesn’t alleviate even one percent of the needs,” says the parish priest. Who is investigating? Authorities in no country, from the United States to Colombia or Mexico, reveal how much drug was lost, how many of those killed in bombings were transporting it, or their names. They haven’t even reported how they gathered the intelligence that led them to identify these victims as military targets. This journalistic alliance sent a questionnaire with these and other questions to the United States Southern Command. They responded that “for reasons of operational security and the protection of forces, we do not discuss intelligence or details about our operational processes and planning.” His spokesperson also said that “the threat that narco-terrorists and cartels pose to human life cannot be ignored. They have escalated their violence to unprecedented levels, going beyond mere criminal conduct by committing unspeakable acts of terror. It is not only their criminal rivals who are in their sights; they are waging war against law-abiding citizens, entire communities, and government institutions, carrying out atrocious acts to impose their will and satisfy their insatiable thirst for illicit income.” Sources at the Dominican Republic embassy in Colombia confirmed to this news team that the only information received regarding the possible deaths of two of their citizens came from a speech by Colombian President Gustavo Petro; however, no official steps have been taken to identify them. They described the matter as “politically sensitive.” In Ecuador, the Navy's Coast Guard Service has not released any details about the search and rescue operations for possible survivors that—according to the U.S.—began after a bombing in the Pacific on February 9, 2026, as confirmed by a reporter supporting this investigation in that country. In the Costa Rican Pacific, authorities recovered two bodies and one survivor. The two deceased were Ecuadorian. Reporters from this alliance were able to confirm with security sources in Ecuador that one of them, Pedro Ramón Holguín Holguín, owned a fish retail business in Manta, a coastal city that is now a center of drug trafficking activity in the country. They also established that the Ecuadorian embassy in Costa Rica assisted with the identification of the remains, but their bodies are still in a morgue in San José, the Costa Rican capital. Casa Macondo, an ally of this investigation in Colombia, sent information requests to various authorities. DIMAR, the Colombian maritime authority, asserted that no one had reported any bombings in its territorial waters. Last November, the Foreign Ministry convened a meeting with the Ministry of Defense, the Navy, and the National Intelligence Directorate. The result was that all entities stated they had no official information beyond what had been reported in the media. The written conclusion, signed by the Director of Territorial Sovereignty, Javier Pava Sánchez, was that “our sovereignty has not been violated.” Thirteen days after that meeting, the Colombian ambassador to the OAS addressed the Permanent Council to denounce these same attacks as violations of international law. On December 23, Colombia reiterated this denunciation at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. The President of Colombia himself, Gustavo Petro, publicly stated that he had visited the home of Alejandro Andrés Carranza, a fisherman whose house was bombed on September 15, in Santa Marta, and had seen that he was living in poverty. He denounced these attacks as extrajudicial executions. Furthermore, he facilitated a meeting between a US lawyer and Carranza's family so they could consider filing a lawsuit for damages, according to the lawyer in question, Daniel Kovalik, who spoke to reporters from this alliance. Kovalik ultimately filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the OAS, arguing that Carranza's death was an extrajudicial execution and that the United States therefore violated the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. The verbal attacks between Presidents Trump and Petro, which had been escalating for some time, became heated after these statements. Finally, President Petro met with Trump at the White House, and the accusations subsided. Sources at the Colombian Foreign Ministry now claim that the issue is so sensitive that they neither mention it nor provide any information about it. One of Casa Macondo's requests for information did bear fruit and revealed an effect of these bombings that had gone unnoticed: that coinciding with the aerial attacks on the suspected boats, the number of disruptions to commercial flights in Colombia increased in 2025. Using information from Aerocivil (the Colombian civil aviation authority), Casa Macondo determined that between January and July 2025, between four and five incidents involving the GPS systems of commercial aircraft were reported monthly, a level within the expected range for any airspace. But from August onward, coinciding with the eve of the bombing campaign, the reports increased fivefold. For the year, it recorded a total of 251 reports of GPS failures and classified them as unrelated to its systems. It closed the case without investigating the cause. Aerocivil reported that during 18 commercial flights over the northern Caribbean, pilots experienced GPS malfunctions while crossing AMBAS—the name given to an air navigation coordinate system over the Caribbean Sea, north of Colombia, where routes connecting Bogotá and Medellín with Miami, New York, Santo Domingo, and Curaçao converge. The signal was lost for between eight minutes and an hour—while the aircraft were flying at altitudes between 30,000 and 40,000 feet (approximately nine to twelve kilometers)—and was restored upon leaving Colombian airspace. The GPS always shut down in the same location and always reconnected once the aircraft had moved away. In one of the cases reported by Aerocivil, a pilot's GPS failed, and then, due to another malfunction, the transponder—the device that tells ground radar where the aircraft is—stopped transmitting. In the cockpit, the anti-collision system alarms activated, as if the ground were close, when in reality the aircraft was thousands of feet in the air. The pilot, who spoke with this news alliance on condition of anonymity, said he was frightened because it had never happened to him before, but that airplanes have at least three redundant navigation systems, and there is always a backup when one fails. "There was no danger to the passengers," he said. By providing these records, the aviation authority acknowledged that these incidents constitute a "disruption to civil air navigation" and officially classified them under its "hazard identification" protocol for airspace safety. (See Story: Commercial planes flew with interference coinciding with US bombings of the boats) Attacks that undermine the fight against drug trafficking Missile strikes may be more spectacular and violent than the quiet, regular interception and seizure that President Trump had been denigrating as useless, but no less effective for that. Thus, while Trump celebrated his first bombing on September 2nd of the boat with 11 crew members, as an attack against terrorists from the Tren de Aragua gang “identified with certainty” and claimed that it was carrying “massive quantities of drugs,” the Vice President asserted that it was the best and highest use of the armed forces. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, echoing these statements the following day, asserted that intercepting drug-carrying boats had not worked. “Instead of intercepting them, we blew them up, following the President’s order. And it’s going to happen again,” he said. What the US government officials failed to mention is that on that same September 2nd, Operation Zeus took place, which, however, did not involve lightning from the sky like the bombing that killed the 11 crew members. In Operation Zeus, the Colombian Aerospace Force had detected a suspicious vessel in the same Caribbean waters and shared the coordinates with the Dominican Air Force. The latter, in coordination with the US Joint Interagency Task Force-South (JIATF-S) at Naval Air Station Key West in Florida, dispatched naval units to intercept it. They boarded the vessel, arrested its two crew members, and seized 448 kilograms of cocaine, turned over evidence to a criminal case, and there were no fatalities. It wasn't the only one. A CLIP investigation tracked regular counternarcotics interdictions in the Caribbean and Pacific conducted by U.S. entities in cooperation with European and Latin American countries between September 2025 and February 2026. The investigation relied on information from law enforcement and press reports in various languages and countries, and consulted public records available through Global Fishing Watch's API v3 and Vesseltracker. It found that, thanks to this international cooperation, at least 140 tons of cocaine were seized and 160 crew members were arrested and subsequently brought to justice without a single shot being fired. The investigation also revealed that, coinciding with the operation targeting speedboats, the Tasmanian-flagged tugboat Little Girls, the Greek fishing vessel Ourania A, and the older Turkish-owned vessel United S all passed through the Atlantic loaded with drugs. None of these vessels were destroyed by missiles. They waited until the vessels reached a safe location to immobilize them, seize the drugs they were carrying, and arrest their crews. Furthermore, the operation against the Ourania A led to the arrest of a known Greek drug trafficker. Regular anti-narcotics operations and lethal attacks were carried out in the same waters, during the same weeks, with intelligence coordination that in several cases passed through the same institutional nodes: the MAOC-N in Lisbon, the Joint Interagency Task Force-South (JITF-S) in Key West, and the DEA. (See story: For large shipments, justice; for small ones, bombs). Who makes the decisions? Who ordered which vessel to blow up and which to let pass and then detain civilly? That's what we asked Southern Command. He did not answer the question, but instead sent the following comment: “Operation Southern Spear is being conducted under the orders of our Commander-in-Chief to defend U.S. homeland, protect regional partners, and maintain law and order by preventing narco-terrorists, cartels, and their network of accomplices from gaining a foothold in the Western Hemisphere through an overwhelming presence. The objective of the operation is to detect, disrupt, and dismantle the networks of cartels and other transnational organizations that the President of the United States, by executive order, has designated as terrorist organizations.” Legal experts have already raised concerns about the meaning of the term “narco-terrorist,” but Brian Finucane, senior advisor to the U.S. Program at the International Crisis Group and a former lawyer in the Office of the General Counsel at the U.S. Department of State, told this alliance that the U.S. military’s comments in response to this report take those concerns a step further. “The law of war permits violence that would otherwise be prohibited, but only during a genuine armed conflict—a threshold the Trump administration has failed to reach, as it hasn’t even identified who the United States is supposed to be fighting,” he said. “Beyond that fundamental problem, the administration’s suggestion that vaguely defined ‘facilitators’ can be targeted raises further concerns that it is violating the rules of its own flawed legal paradigm.” While international cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking proceeded normally and without fatalities during the six months from September to February, the multiple attacks carried out by the U.S. government left 140 dead, with no publicly reported cocaine seizures and destroying the forensic evidence that could lead to identifying the major drug traffickers who control the routes. In fact, the Colombian Attorney General's Office only opened a preliminary inquiry against survivor Jonathan Obando Pérez, according to El País América, "but does not foresee turning it into a formal investigation, as it lacks evidence to indicate that Obando Pérez committed any crime in Colombia." Therefore, after leaving the hospital, he was released. A source cited by AP from the Ecuadorian Attorney General's Office also stated that it "did not find sufficient evidence to initiate legal action" against Andrés Fernando Tufiño, a survivor of an attack in the Caribbean on October 16. Due to potential violations of human rights and the law of the sea, authorities in the United Kingdom and Canada said they would not share intelligence with their counterparts in the United States, as reported by Time. British sources told the magazine last November that "British officials believe that the US military strikes that have killed 76 people violate international law" and, therefore, suspended cooperation on these types of attacks in October. And Canadian sources said that their government “does not want its intelligence to help locate ships as targets for deadly strikes.” Last January, the Dutch Defense Minister said in Aruba that interdiction operations would continue in his country's territorial waters, but they would not use their naval station ship for operations related to the United States' Operation Southern Spear (the bombing operation). “No European country, including France, will send operational intelligence to the Americans in the current situation if it could be used as a basis for a military attack on a ship,” Dimitro Zoulas, head of the French police's anti-drug service, told Radio Caraibes (RCI). And Euractiv confirmed with a French security source that “it is 100 percent clear that the Europeans are not giving the United States any intelligence that could lead to a strike (against the ships).” The Colombian government had announced something similar, but a high-ranking diplomatic official who spoke with CLIP and asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue, said that Colombia continues to share its intelligence with its U.S. counterpart as usual, but did not specify for which operations. In response to these criticisms, the Southern Command sent to this journalistic alliance, stating: “U.S. forces operate under rules of engagement that are consistent with international maritime law against activities that pose a direct threat to U.S. security and the lives of U.S. citizens. As a military organization entrusted with the defense of our homeland, we are fully committed to missions that directly support the health and safety of the American people.” Last April, a coalition of 125 civil society organizations from around the world (including Airwars, which provided expert information to this journalistic alliance, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International, among others) issued an urgent public appeal for countries to “immediately stop or refrain from supporting extrajudicial killings by the United States in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean.” “We must remember that all these individuals have names, families, and lives that will never be the same,” said Jamil Dakwar, director of the ACLU’s Human Rights Program, at a hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the OAS (IACHR) on April 13. That organization, in addition to representing the two Trinidadian victims before a U.S. federal court, asked the IACHR to declare that missile strikes on vessels violate international law and proposed the creation of a special group to investigate the implications these strikes have had in the hemisphere. Why do they do it, then? It's difficult to understand why the Trump administration insists on continuing the bombings, despite their failure to stem the flow of drugs. Even Admiral Nathan Moore, commander of the U.S. Coast Guard's Atlantic Area, a proponent of using all methods, including bombings, acknowledged that they haven't seen any noticeable difference in the flow of cocaine. Moore stated, after 21 bombings in November 2025, that neither the traffickers' routes, nor the pace, nor the purity of the drug have changed. It's likely they succeeded in getting traffickers to stop using some routes, especially those used by go-fast boats—according to an analysis by InSight Crime, a media outlet specializing in organized crime—but the operation didn't "prevent traffickers from moving cocaine by other means," such as increasing their use of the Amazon route. Nor is it difficult for major drug traffickers to replace the dead with other men drawn into their networks by desperation, poverty, and unemployment, as these are plentiful along Latin American coasts. Attacking the weakest link in the multibillion-dollar drug trafficking business is nothing new. Our countries have been doing it without solving the problem for over 50 years. This new strategy of blowing up boats and killing unknown suspects takes this policy to the extreme. Missiles have caused tremendous suffering and plunge poor families and communities into even greater hardship, unable to defend themselves against the majestic U.S. military power or its omnipresent rhetoric. Furthermore, as discussed here, it alienates international cooperation and leaves the United States more isolated in the face of crime. Why then persist on such a risky and fruitless path for more than eight months? “The Trump administration believes in the show of force for reasons that have very little to do with effective interdiction,” says Walsh of WOLA. “They want to impress citizens, making them believe that they are finally putting an end to the terrible problem of drug trafficking, something other governments failed to do. The profound cruelty and callousness with which they order these systematic and intentional killings allows them to project the threatening nature of nameless ‘narco-terrorists.’ In this way, they shock many Americans while numbing the notion that the U.S. officials responsible for these killings must be held accountable.” The figure of President Trump and his top War and State officials, accompanying their bombings with explosive videos and triumphant social media posts, orchestrates a spectacle of disproportionate power against humble men, mostly poor, and in any case, only suspected of transporting drugs. As a Venezuelan woman, the wife of a man killed in a bombing, said, “Donald Trump didn’t stop to think; he’s killing a father and doesn’t know why this man got on that boat.” Do you have more information about this story? Write to us at investigaciones@elclip.org

“Reportan el fallecimiento del popular Pichirilo, gran talento deportivo Valdeciano. Nuestras palabras de condolencias a sus familiares”, publicó el 15 de octubre de 2025 @elshowderuben, una página de Facebook del programa del mismo nombre en la Emisora Radio Güiria Internacional de Venezuela. Su comentario tuvo 483 reacciones de emojis llorando, o de personas lamentando su muerte.  “Pichirilo no sabes cómo me duele tu noticia, nunca te voy a olvidar”, escribió una amiga. “Descansa en paz, Eduardo popular pichirilo”, “que en paz descanses pana pichirilo excelente deportista. Gran talento frente al arco.”, dijeron otros.  El día anterior, el 14 de octubre, un misil disparado por militares estadounidenses había volado una lancha fuera de la costa venezolana, frente a Güiria, un pueblo en el municipio de Valdés, del estado Sucre y  punto de salida hacia Trinidad y Tobago. Según se vio en el video oficial del gobierno estadounidense, la embarcación estaba quieta cuando la atacaron. Era el quinto golpe que propinaba Estados Unidos a barcos en el Caribe. Con las seis personas que cayeron ahí, completaban ya 27 muertos.   El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump  aseguró en su red social que su secretario de Guerra, Pete Hegseth, había dado la orden de asestar ese golpe en una ruta conocida de tráfico de drogas, en aguas internacionales, y que inteligencia de su país “confirmó que la lancha traficaba narcóticos” y estaba asociada a redes de narcoterroristas. El locutor radial del @showderuben le dijo a reporteros de esta alianza periodística que él publicó la noticia de Pichirilo porque sabía que era muy conocido en Güiria. “Este es un pueblo pequeño y aquí todo el mundo se conoce”, explicó, aunque negó saber nada acerca de las circunstancias en las que murió.  Reporteros de Alianza Rebelde Investiga (ARI) –una coalición de los medios independientes venezolanos Runrunes, Tal Cual y El Pitazo –, aliados a esta investigación, confirmaron en Güiria que el nombre de Pichirilo era Eduardo Jaime, y que era un jugador de fútbol de sala, querido en ese pueblo costero del Caribe venezolano. Una familiar le confirmó luego por teléfono a esta alianza que Eduardo Jaime venía en la lancha volada el 14 de octubre.  Desde septiembre de 2025 y hasta el 26 de abril pasado, en la llamada Operación Lanza del Sur (Southern Spear), las fuerzas militares de Estados Unidos llevaban 58 embarcaciones destruidas a golpes de misil y habían causado la muerte a 172 personas como Eduardo Jaime –según confirmó el Comando Sur de los Estados Unidos en respuesta por correo a las preguntas que envió este equipo periodístico.  Desde entonces, y hasta el 5 de mayo, cuando se cerró esta historia, el gobierno de ese país ha anunciado públicamente que realizó otros dos ataques donde mataron otras cinco personas.  Las autoridades estadounidenses además contabilizaron en total a otros 12 desaparecidos, que se presumen muertos. No obstante, esta alianza periodística verificó con fuentes en Costa Rica, que de tres presumidos sobrevivientes, luego de un bombardeo en marzo en el mar frente a ese país, dos fallecieron antes de llegar a tierra. Así, la cuenta de los muertos llega 179 hasta el 5 de mayo.  En su respuesta escrita, el Comando Sur de ese país dijo que “cada acción tomada durante la Operación Southern Spear (Lanza del Sur) es deliberada, legal y precisa, dirigida directamente contra los narcoterroristas y sus facilitadores. Tenemos plena confianza en los profesionales de operaciones e inteligencia que informan nuestras misiones”. (Ver toda la respuesta aquí) No obstante, días después del ataque en que murió Pichirilo, en ese mismo octubre, funcionarios del gobierno de Trump reconocieron en reportes a congresistas y sus asistentes que no sabían la identidad ni la historia de las personas que matan, según reveló The Intercept. “Es una tragedia doble no sólo por los asesinatos ilegales, sino que las víctimas son borradas, convertidas en anónimas”, dijo, en entrevista telefónica con el CLIP, John Walsh, de WOLA, una organización de defensa de los derechos humanos en Latinoamérica basada en Washington.  Coincidiendo con Walsh y muchos otros, entre expertos en derechos humanos, congresistas, ex funcionarios del gobierno estadounidense y organizaciones civiles, que han cuestionado la legalidad de matar a estos hombres por la sola sospecha de que podían estar transportando drogas, desde diciembre pasado, una alianza periodística transnacional se dio a la tarea de ponerles nombre a estos muertos, convencidos de que  al conocer sus rostros e historias, emergerá su humanidad.  La alianza, coordinada por el Centro Latinoamericano de Investigación Periodística, CLIP, que reúne a los medios de la región ARI de Venezuela; 360, Casa Macondo y Verdad Abierta de Colombia; Guardian de Trinidad Tobago; y periodistas freelance en República Dominicana, Ecuador, Costa Rica y México con el apoyo técnico y financiero de Airwars, hoy lanza los primeros hallazgos de la investigación Bombardeados, sin derecho a la defensa.  Esta investigación colaborativa ha sido una labor de filigrana, tejiendo hilos sueltos de muchas tragedias. Para ello, hemos visitado caseríos y pueblos costeros en La Guajira y Nariño, en Colombia y en Sucre, Venezuela; entrevistado a familiares, amigos y conocidos de víctimas, autoridades y reporteros locales en cinco países; rastreado y verificado cientos de posteos en redes sociales; identificado decenas de publicaciones de medios reconocidos en múltiples países e idiomas; realizado decenas de peticiones de información a autoridades; contactado fiscalías, hospitales, morgues y embajadas; y hemos verificado registros públicos y judiciales. Con toda esa información, construimos una base de datos que, esperamos, contribuya al elevar la consciencia de que estos hombres eran seres humanos, que merecían haber sido juzgados si eran sospechosos de cometer algún delito.  La mayoría de las fuentes son anónimas porque todo el mundo teme hablar. Algunos familiares de víctimas en Venezuela y en Santa Marta (Colombia), según confirmaron fuentes consultadas a esta alianza,  dicen haber recibido amenazas. Otros no quieren contar nada porque temen represalias de sus gobiernos o, peor, de los señores del narco que mandan en donde viven. Las entidades han resultado herméticas y los funcionarios que responden, sólo lo hacen off the record porque no quieren meter en líos a sus países con Estados Unidos. Sumando las personas que otros medios y organizaciones han conseguido nombrar y las nuevas víctimas mortales identificadas por esta alianza periodística, hemos podido conseguir los nombres y apellidos de 16 de los muertos en estos ataques. De dos más, identificamos su nacionalidad; y de otro, su apodo. De otras dos personas, cuyos restos fueron a dar a la playa al norte colombiano días después de un ataque, tenemos datos de quiénes eran, pero no sabemos con certeza si cayeron en un bombardeo. De otra posible víctima tenemos su nombre completo. Identificamos a tres sobrevivientes heridos. Es buscar agujas en un pajar de 179 ejecutados, desde el 2 de septiembre hasta el 5 de mayo, y seguimos contando… Cada explosión destroza al barco y a sus tripulantes, fuesen traficantes, pasajeros o pescadores, en mil pedazos. Sus identidades volaron al viento sobre océanos inmensos.  Esta colaboración periodística transfronteriza también encontró que la ola destructiva no para ahí. Como lo retratará la reportería en terreno, la Operación Southern Spear ha deshilachado además el tejido de comunidades, de por sí rotas y doblegadas por el crimen organizado y la ausencia de Estado, y ha aterrorizado a pescadores y viajantes, al punto que paró la economía de un pueblo nariñense. También verificamos que en el Caribe colombiano perturbó al menos 18 vuelos comerciales. Más allá, documentamos cómo ha fragmentado la cooperación internacional de combate a las drogas ilegales, porque otras democracias temen estar involucrados en acciones que desconozcan acuerdos internacionales que rigen el mar y el derecho internacional sobre los derechos humanos. Reverbera con la onda explosiva el temor entre funcionarios y fiscalías de revelar detalles de los rescates o sus coordenadas, pues el vecino del Norte puede revirar con nuevos aranceles o ataques personales a los gobernantes. Muchas veces, ni siquiera les responden a quienes están preguntando por sus muertos.  Los bombardeados En el mismo bote de ‘Pichirilo’, el jugador de fútbol, viajaban Chad Joseph y Rishi Samaroo, dos trinitenses, cuyas parientes ahora reclaman al gobierno estadounidense por sus ejecuciones extrajudiciales. De Chad y Samaroo se enteró el mundo porque sus familias presentaron una queja legal en enero pasado ante una corte federal de Massachusetts, Estados Unidos, buscando ser indemnizadas por daños y perjuicios por sus muertes.  Según reportó el Trinidad & Tobago Guardian, miembro de esta alianza, en diciembre pasado, en el pueblo donde nació Joseph –quien tenía 26 años al momento del  bombardeo del 14 de octubre – todos lo conocían desde niño como pescador. Se había ido desde su natal Matelot, un pueblo pesquero en la costa trinitense, a vivir a donde una tía en Las Cuevas, una comunidad con lazos de toda la vida con Venezuela.  “Fue la familia de Joseph, al ser una de las primeras en identificarlo entre más de 100 personas que han perdido su vida en los ataques, la que arrojó una luz humana sobre las personas que han muerto como resultado de los ataques de los Estados Unidos en el mar Caribe. Las historias humanas hicieron que congresistas comenzaran a ponerle presión al gobierno de Trump al pedir transparencia sobre estos ataques y al intentar cuestionarlos y detenerlos”, escribió el Trinidad & Tobago Guardian, al cumplirse dos meses de su presunta muerte.  Ese mismo medio entrevistó a Lenore Burnley, madre de Chad, quien dijo que “desde que supo la noticia, su vida se ha caracterizado por la tormenta contradictoria de tener una vaga esperanza y la cruda realidad de la súbita muerte de Joseph, sin que haya un cuerpo para enterrar”.  Y cuando Guardian le preguntó por qué creía que Joseph se había arriesgado a salir, ella respondió: “sé de la ley del mar; la conozco desde que era joven. Si es un barco, o una cosa así, se supone que tienes que detenerlo, ¿ves? La ley no consiste en matar a personas. Donde sea que estés, no debes matar a personas así. Esta es la primera vez en mi vida, y tengo 51 años. Nunca he escuchado de algo así”. Dijo el citado diario local que, según la la pareja de Chad Joseph, él la había llamado para decirle que iba de regreso a casa desde Venezuela.  Sallycar Korasingh, la hermana de Rishi Samaroo, había contado que él era un hombre trabajador que había pagado su deuda con la sociedad y solo intentaba recuperarse y ganarse la vida dignamente en Venezuela criando vacas y cabras para ayudar a mantener a su familia, según informó ACLU en un comunicado . “Si el gobierno de Estados Unidos creía que Rishi había hecho algo malo, debería haberlo arrestado, acusado y detenido, no asesinado. Deben rendir cuentas”, dijo Korasingh. Representan a la madre de Joseph y a la hermana de Samaroo en su caso ante la justicia estadounidense, la Asociación Americana de Derechos Civiles (más conocida como ACLU, por su sigla en inglés) , el Centro para los Derechos Constitucionales y el profesor Jonathan Hafetz, de la Escuela de Derecho Setton Hall.   Los abogados lo presentaron bajo la ley de demandas del almirantazgo, que les permite a personas reclamar compensación por daños a quien haya cometido una muerte por negligencia (wrongful death, en inglés), según el Acta de Muerte en Altamar (DOHSA), reconocida por Estados Unidos. Así mismo, invocaron el viejo Estatuto de Reclamación de Agravios Contra Extranjeros (Alien Torts Statute) que permite a los extranjeros reclamar en Estados Unidos por ejecuciones extrajudiciales, prohibidos en las leyes internacionales de Derechos Humanos.  “Las muertes de Joseph y Samaroo fueron claramente ejecuciones extrajudiciales”, explicó a esta alianza periodística Steven Watt, uno de los abogados de ACLU. No se pueden justificar con argumentos como los esgrimidos por el gobierno Trump, de que estar en guerra contra las drogas les justifica el uso de los ataques violentos, dijo.  Watt dijo además que su equipo legal, en una demanda independiente de ésta, basada en el Acta de Libertad de Información (FOIA por su sigla en inglés), pidió el memorando legal producido por la Oficina de Consejería Legal de del Departamento de Justicia, que expone la racionalidad jurídica oficial de estos ataques, porque el gobierno no la ha hecho público hasta ahora.  Las parientes de los trinitenses aseguran que ninguno de los dos llevaba drogas, que eran ciudadanos corrientes que estaban regresando a sus casas en Las Cuevas, en Trinidad, después de trabajar en Venezuela.   Según dijeron fuentes locales a ARI, la coalición periodística de medios venezolanos aliada de esta investigación, un hombre llamado Dushak Milovcic habría viajado en ese mismo barco atacado el 14 de octubre. Un reporte de la AP, informó que Milovcic, de 24 años, “comenzó como vigía para contrabandistas”, había estado en la Academia de la Guardia Nacional de Venezuela y, según dijeron fuentes a la reportera de esa agencia, ahora estaba involucrado con los transportadores de droga.  El del 14 de octubre no fue el único barco del que se sospecha no llevaba drogas ilegales por el alto número de pasajeros que transportaba. Varios medios de prensa y observadores también expresaron su duda frente al primer barco bombardeado el 2 de septiembre de 2025, en el que iban 11 pasajeros. Según algunos entrevistados en terreno, que conocen el movimiento de las lanchas y hablaron con aliados de esta investigación en La Guajira colombiana y en Sucre, es frecuente que las mismas embarcaciones que de ida llevan droga, de vuelta traigan pasajeros. Los “capitanes”, como se les dice a quienes pilotean esos barcos, se apuntan a cualquier trabajo que salga.  Realización: Vera Ferrari “A todos los narcoterroristas que amenazan nuestra patria: si quieren seguir vivos, paren de traficar drogas. Si siguen traficando drogas letales, los vamos a matar”, amenazó  Pete Hegseth, secretario de Guerra de Estados Unidos el 7 de noviembre, al otro día de un golpe mortal a una lancha con tres ocupantes en el Caribe, frente a las costas colombianas.  Por calificativos como estos, cualquiera imagina que acaban de matar a múltiples Pablos Escobares y Chapos Guzmanes.  Los reporteros de esta alianza encontraron una realidad muy distinta.  Restos de dos personas, presumiblemente caídos ese 6 de noviembre, aparecieron en Puerto López, Uribia, en La Guajira colombiana. Distintas fuentes guajiras dijeron que eran dos hombres provenientes de Pedernales, República Dominicana, una provincia fronteriza con Haití, en la región de Enriquillo, con 72% de los hogares en pobreza. Un reportero dominicano le confirmó a esta alianza que desde allí salen decenas de jóvenes a rebuscarse la vida en Colombia o en otros lados, y muchos son enganchados para traer cocaína desde las costas colombianas en el Caribe de vuelta a la isla, en viajes en lancha.  Como nadie venía a reclamar los cadáveres que llegaron a la playa colombiana, porque allí no tenían parientes, la comunidad indígena wayúu que habita en esa región los enterró, según reportó en su momento The New York Times. Un mes después, llegaron los técnicos forenses del Instituto de Medicina Legal colombiano y los exhumaron.  Según verificó el medio colombiano 360-grados.co, aliado de esta colaboración periodística, eso ocurrió entre el 12 y 13 de diciembre y, hasta el cierre de esta edición, permanecen refrigerados en Medicina Legal de Barranquilla. Fuentes de la Fiscalía colombiana indicaron que uno de los cadáveres desenterrados en La Guajira probablemente no provenía de las embarcaciones atacadas, dado su estado de descomposición.  Fuentes locales afirmaron saber que los restos del cuerpo de otro dominicano caído en la embarcación del 6 de noviembre no se encontraron en Colombia. El cuerpo había sido arrastrado más allá de Castilletes, unos 20 kilómetros tierra adentro en territorio venezolano, donde se cree que miembros de la comunidad wayúu lo enterraron. No pudimos confirmar esta versión.  (Ver “Las víctimas del Comando Sur a las que les echaron tierra en La Guajira”).  Esos jóvenes dominicanos no son muy distintos a los de Uribia, en La Guajira colombiana, la región a donde fueron a buscar trabajo. Este último es el municipio más pobre de Colombia: el 92% no tiene educación, ni salud, ni servicios públicos. Por ello es fácil engancharlos para acarrear cocaína y les pagan, según declaró un lanchero con el que habló el medio 360.   “La mayoría de la gente acá no son dueños, la mayoría de los dueños de la mercancía siempre son de afuera, podemos decir hasta internacionalmente: que compran la mercancía acá [en Colombia] y ellos mismos la esperan en su destino“, explicó el lanchero a esta alianza periodística.  Por ese agujero de la esperanza de hacerse una vida mejor han caído decenas de dominicanos y muchos han desaparecido. Ahora la incertidumbre es peor para sus parientes porque no saben si fueron volados por los misiles estadounidenses. Es lo que teme una mujer dominicana, con quien habló esta alianza, pero que prefiere no dar su nombre. Ella no sabe nada de su hermano Francisco –quien hacía diversos oficios en el sector turístico y había aceptado llevar una carga de drogas– desde que la llamó desde una lancha a punto de zarpar rumbo a casa. Fue a mediados de noviembre pasado y estaba usando un teléfono satelital. Fue una charla corta. Él preguntó por sus padres y le anunció su regreso. Nunca volvió.  Los bombardeos además han llevado a muchas víctimas a no denunciar las desapariciones. ¿La razón? Según el periodista dominicano Manuel González Feliz, es una mezcla de miedo y vergüenza entre los familiares.  Como en Pedernales o en La Guajira colombiana, para muchas comunidades de la costa Pacífica colombiana, el trabajo de transportar cocaína no es una elección criminal, sino una estrategia de supervivencia. El aislamiento de esta región de selvas y manglares que se extiende 1.300 kilómetros de norte a sur del país influye en que sea tan pobre. En Tumaco, el segundo puerto colombiano sobre el Pacífico, de donde salen muchos de los transportadores, un 84% de sus habitantes vive en la pobreza multidimensional. Y los grupos de narcotráfico se aprovechan ofreciendo trabajo en laboratorios, astilleros de embarcaciones y como transportistas. “Es la única fuente de empleo que mueve estas comunidades. Sé que es ilegal, pero es lo que hay”, explica Duván Caicedo, líder comunitario del pequeño poblado de Pital de Costa, situado entre un río y la selva en el Pacífico colombiano. Los 1.200 habitantes del caserío viven sin agua potable y sin puesto de salud, a dos horas en lancha desde Tumaco y desde el hospital más cercano. Un laboratorio de procesamiento de cocaína es la única fuente de trabajo. En Sucre, el estado de Venezuela donde queda Güiria, el 90 % de la gente no tiene segura su alimentación.  Según reporteó ARI, casi nadie se dedica exclusivamente a hacer viajes que lleven cocaína. Esas lanchas mueven la vida cotidiana de la gente en esa costa: traen y llevan comida, pescado, medicinas. En ellas viajan trabajadores de Venezuela a Trinidad y de regreso, o pescadores que salen a traer la pesca del día, migrantes que huyen del autoritarismo y también traficantes. (Ver historia Todas las”vueltas” en Güiria). Cuando cargan drogas, generalmente van dos o máximo tres personas, un conductor y dos ayudantes. Esta investigación revela que las víctimas de los bombardeos estadounidenses provenientes de Güiria se dedicaban a la pesca, a conducir mototaxi, a manejar bus, y  algunos de ellos se habían arriesgado a hacer un viaje con cocaína porque no podían sostener a sus familias. Así, Juan Carlos Fuentes, 43 años, chofer de “toda la vida”, y Luis Ramón Amundaraín, pescador y mototaxista, 36 años, estaban en Trinidad y Tobago desde el 28 de septiembre de 2025. Juan Carlos, dice su esposa, estaba desesperado por falta de dinero. Se le dañó un bus Yutong del que vivía y no lo pudo reparar.  Él la llamó desde Trinidad la víspera del bombardeo del 3 de octubre en que presumiblemente cayó y le dijo que estaba por salir; que no llevaba droga.  Ramón, dice su compañera, “se fue para buscar más ingresos” porque la ganancia de la pesca y los traslados en moto habían dejado de ser suficientes para su familia de siete. Ella contó a los reporteros de ARI que su esposo se dedicaba a la pesca. “Dicen que él es un narcoterrorista”, dijo, pero asegura que si lo fuera tendrían bienes, y ni siquiera tienen casa propia. Su familia cree que él murió con Juan Carlos el 3 de octubre.   Tiene sentido lo que dicen las mujeres, porque sus maridos venían de Trinidad y Tobago hacia Venezuela y las drogas fluyen en sentido contrario. Otro más, Eduard Hidalgo, de 46 años, había sido ducho pescador y se había ido a finales de 2024 a Estados Unidos. Lo deportaron un año después. Sostiene una amiga que si bien había transportado diversas mercancías para los jefes criminales de la zona, no quería hacer más viajes, “pero lo obligaron”.  Ella cree que cayó en el bombardeo de una lancha el 23 de febrero pasado.  (Ver historia “Los explotaron los gringos”: Cómo tres venezolanos terminaron en las lanchas atacadas por Estados Unidos) Miedo y hambre No sólo las familias de los muertos hoy los lloran.  La ondas expansivas también impactan a las comunidades. Por ejemplo, durante algunos días, pescadores de la zona rural de Buenaventura, el principal puerto colombiano sobre el Pacífico, suspendieron sus faenas por el temor de no regresar a sus hogares, aunque luego las retomaron paulatinamente.  El municipio de Olaya Herrera, en Nariño, salió más afectado. Una persona que trabaja en el sector humanitario de la región y pidió anonimato, le dijo a esta alianza que allí muchos viven del dinero que recogen los transportistas al completar un viaje. “Cuando regresan, entra plata a la comunidad, el comercio se mueve y todos se benefician”, dijo. Con el miedo a hacer viajes transportando drogas no volvió a ingresar dinero a las familias.  “Estamos viviendo una situación muy pesada”, dice el párroco Luis Carrillo. “Se empezó a sentir desde noviembre, pero se volvió crítica en febrero”. En coordinación con la Alcaldía, el sacerdote solicitó ayuda al Banco de Alimentos en Bogotá y en marzo llegaron en barco desde Buenaventura 700 canastas con alimentos que se repartieron en la cabecera municipal de Bocas de Satinga y la zona rural. “Obviamente eso no mitiga ni el uno por ciento de las necesidades”, dice el párroco. ¿Quién investiga? Las autoridades de ningún país, desde Estados Unidos hasta Colombia o México, revelan cuánta droga se hundió, ni cuantos de los caídos en bombardeos la transportaban, ni sus nombres. Ni siquiera han informado cómo recogieron la información de inteligencia que los llevó a señalar a esas víctimas como objetivo militar.   Esta alianza periodística envió un cuestionario con estas y otras preguntas al Comando Sur de los Estados Unidos. Este respondió que “por razones de seguridad operativa y protección de las fuerzas, no discutimos inteligencia ni detalles sobre nuestros procesos y planificación operativos”. También dijo su vocero que “no se puede ignorar la amenaza que los narcoterroristas y los cárteles representan para la vida humana. Han intensificado su violencia hasta niveles sin precedentes, yendo más allá de la mera conducta criminal al cometer actos de terror indescriptibles. No son solo sus rivales criminales quienes están en su mira; están librando una guerra contra ciudadanos respetuosos de la ley, comunidades enteras e instituciones gubernamentales, llevando a cabo actos atroces para imponer su voluntad y satisfacer su insaciable ansia de ingresos ilícitos”. Fuentes de la embajada de República Dominicana en Colombia confirmaron a este equipo periodístico que la única información recibida sobre la posible muerte de dos de sus connacionales proviene de una alocución del presidente colombiano Gustavo Petro; sin embargo, no se han iniciado gestiones oficiales para su identificación. Calificaron el asunto como “políticamente sensible”. En Ecuador, el Servicio de Guardacostas de la Armada no ha revelado ningún detalle sobre las operaciones de rescate de posibles sobrevivientes que —según dijo EE. UU— inició tras un bombardeo en el Pacífico el 9 de febrero de 2026, según confirmó un reportero que apoya esta investigación en ese país. En el Pacífico costarricense, las autoridades rescataron dos muertos y un sobreviviente. Los dos fallecidos eran ecuatorianos. Reporteros de esta alianza pudieron confirmar con fuentes de seguridad en Ecuador que uno de ellos, Pedro Ramón Holguín Holguín, tenía un negocio minorista de venta de pescado en Manta, una ciudad costera que es hoy centro de la actividad narcotraficante en el país.  Lograron establecer, además, que la embajada de Ecuador en Costa Rica ayudó con la identificación de los restos, pero sus cuerpos, a la fecha, siguen en una morgue en San José, la capital costarricense.  Casa Macondo, un aliado de esta investigación en Colombia, envió peticiones de información a diversas autoridades. La DIMAR, la autoridad marítima colombiana, aseguró que nadie le reportó que hubo bombardeos en sus aguas territoriales. La Cancillería convocó en noviembre pasado a  una reunión con el Ministerio de Defensa, la Armada y la Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia. El resultado fue que todas las entidades dijeron no tener información oficial más allá de los medios de comunicación. La conclusión escrita, firmada por el Director de Soberanía Territorial Javier Pava Sánchez, fue que “nuestra soberanía no ha sido vulnerada”. Trece días después de esa reunión, el embajador colombiano ante la OEA intervino en el Consejo Permanente para denunciar esos mismos ataques como violaciones al derecho internacional. El 23 de diciembre, Colombia repitió la denuncia en una reunión de emergencia del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU.  El mismo presidente de Colombia, Gustavo Petro, dijo públicamente que había visitado la casa de un pescador bombardeado el 15 de septiembre, Alejandro Andrés Carranza, en Santa Marta, y había visto que vivía en la pobreza. Denunció estos ataques como ejecuciones extrajudiciales. Además, facilitó una reunión de un abogado estadounidense con los familiares de Carranza para que estos consideraran demandar por daños sufridos, según contó el abogado en cuestión, Daniel Kovalik, a reporteros de esta alianza. Finalmente, Kovalik presentó una denuncia ante la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos de la OEA, argumentando que la de Carranza fue una ejecución extrajudicial y que por ello Estados Unidos violó la Declaración Americana de los Derechos y Deberes del Hombre.  Los ataques verbales entre los presidentes Trump y Petro, que venían escalando de tiempo atrás, se tornaron álgidos luego de esta declaraciones.  Finalmente, el presidente Petro se reunió con Trump en la Casa Blanca, y las denuncias se acallaron. Fuentes de Cancillería colombiana ahora aseguran que el tema es tan sensible que no lo mencionan, ni dan información al respecto.  Uno de los pedidos de información de Casa Macondo sí fructificó y reveló un efecto de estos bombardeos que había pasado desapercibido: que coincidiendo con los ataques desde el cielo a los botes bajo sospecha, subió el número de disrupciones a  vuelos comerciales en Colombia en 2025. Con información de la Aerocivil (la autoridad colombiana de aviación civil), Casa Macondo estableció que entre enero y julio de 2025 se habían reportado mensualmente entre cuatro y cinco incidentes involucrando a los GPS de los aviones comerciales, un nivel dentro de los rangos esperados para cualquier espacio aéreo. Pero desde agosto, coincidiendo con la víspera del inicio de la campaña de bombardeos, los reportes se multiplicaron por cinco. En el año contabilizó un total de 251 reportes de fallas de GPS y las clasificó como ajenas a sus sistemas. Cerró el expediente sin investigar qué las causaba.  Aerocivil informó que durante 18 vuelos comerciales que volaban en el Caribe norte, los pilotos dieron cuenta de fallas en los GPS de los aviones, al cruzar AMBAS –como se le llama a una coordenada de navegación aérea sobre el mar Caribe, al norte de Colombia, donde convergen las rutas que conectan Bogotá y Medellín con Miami, Nueva York, Santo Domingo y Curazao. La señal permanecía perdida entre ocho minutos y una hora —mientras los aviones cruzaban a alturas de entre 30.000 y 40.000 pies, es decir, entre nueve y doce kilómetros de altura—, y se recuperaba al salir del espacio aéreo colombiano. El GPS siempre se apagó en el mismo lugar. Siempre se volvió a encender cuando el avión se alejó. En uno de los casos reportados por Aerocivil,  a un piloto le fallaron los GPS y luego por otra falla, el transponder —el dispositivo que le dice al radar en tierra dónde está el avión— dejó de transmitir y en la cabina, se encendieron las alarmas del sistema antichoque, como si el suelo estuviera cerca, cuando en realidad iba a miles de pies de altura.  El piloto de la aeronave, que habló con esta alianza periodística pidiendo reserva del nombre, aseguró que se asustó porque nunca le había pasado, pero que los aviones tienen al menos tres sistemas redundantes de navegación, y siempre hay alternativa cuando uno se apaga. “No hubo peligro para los pasajeros”, dijo.  Al suministrar estos registros, la autoridad aérea reconoció que estos episodios constituyen una “afectación a la navegación aérea civil” y los clasificó oficialmente bajo su protocolo de “identificación de peligros” para la seguridad del espacio aéreo. (Ver Historia Aviones comerciales volaron con interferencias coincidentes con los bombardeos de EE.UU a las lanchas) Ataques que socavan la lucha contra el narco Los golpes de misil pueden ser más espectaculares y violentos que la silenciosa interceptación e incautación regular que el presidente Trump venía denigrando como inútil, pero no por ello, más eficaz. Así, mientras Trump celebraba su primer bombazo del 2 de septiembre a la lancha con 11 tripulantes, como un ataque contra terroristas del Tren de Aragua “identificados con certeza” y aseguraba que llevaba “cantidades masivas de drogas”, el vicepresidente aseguró que era el mejor uso y más elevado uso de sus fuerza armadas. El secretario de Estado Marco Rubio, haciendo eco de esta declaraciones el día siguiente, aseguró que interceptar a las lanchas que llevan drogas no había funcionado. “En lugar de interceptarlas, las volamos, siguiendo la orden del Presidente. Y va a pasar de nuevo”, dijo.   Lo que no contaron los dirigentes del gobierno estadounidense es que ese mismo 2 de septiembre ocurrió la Operación Zeus, que sin embargo, no lanzó rayos desde el cielo, como la del bombazo a los 11 tripulantes. En esta Operación Zeus, la Fuerza Aeroespacial Colombiana había detectado una embarcación sospechosa en las mismas aguas del Caribe, y compartió las coordenadas con la Fuerza Aérea dominicana.  Esta última, con la coordinación de la  Fuerza de Tarea Conjunta Interinstitucional del Sur de Estados Unidos (JIATF-S por su sigla en inglés), en la Base Naval Aérea de Key West en Florida, envió a unidades de su armada a interceptarla. Abordaron la embarcación, apresaron a sus dos tripulantes e incautaron 448 kilos de cocaína, entregaron evidencia a un proceso penal y no hubo un solo muerto.  No fue la única. Una investigación del CLIP siguió las interdicciones regulares de lucha antinarcóticos en el Caribe y en el Pacífico que realizaron entidades estadounidenses en cooperación con países europeos y latinoamericanos, entre septiembre de 2025 y febrero de 2026, basándose en informaciones de las fuerzas del orden y de prensa en varios idiomas y países, y consultó con los registros públicos disponibles en la API v3 de Global Fishing Watch y Vesseltracker. Encontró que gracias a esta cooperación internacional, pudieron decomisar, sin disparar un solo tiro mortal, al menos 140 toneladas de cocaína y detener a 160 tripulantes que luego fueron entregados a la justicia. Este rastreo estableció que, coincidiendo con la operación de bombardeos a lanchas, el remolcador Little Girls con bandera de Tasmania, el pesquero griego Ourania A y, el viejo buque de propiedad turca United S, pasaron por el Atlántico cargados de drogas. Ninguno fue volado con misiles. Esperaron a que llegaran a un lugar seguro para inmovilizarlos, incautar la droga que llevaban y detener a sus tripulantes. Es más, la operación contra el Ourania A llevó al arresto de un conocido narco griego.  Las operaciones antinarcóticos regulares y los ataques letales se ejecutaron en las mismas aguas, en las mismas semanas, con coordinación de inteligencia que en varios casos pasaba por los mismos nodos institucionales: el MAOC-N de Lisboa, la Fuerza de Tarea Conjunta Interagencial Sur (JITF-S) de Key West y la DEA. (Ver historia Para los grandes cargamentos, justicia; para los pequeños, bombas). ¿Quién toma las decisiones? ¿Quién ordenó a cuál embarcación volar y a cuál dejar pasar para luego detenerlo civilizadamente? Eso le preguntamos al Comando Sur.  No respondió la pregunta, sino que envió el siguiente comentario: “La Operación Southern Spear se lleva a cabo bajo las órdenes de nuestro Comandante en Jefe para defender el territorio nacional de los Estados Unidos, proteger a los socios regionales y mantener la ley y el orden, impidiendo que los narcoterroristas, los cárteles y su red de cómplices se afiancen en el Hemisferio Occidental mediante una presencia abrumadora. El objetivo de la operación es detectar, desarticular y desmantelar las redes de los cárteles y otras organizaciones transnacionales que el presidente de los Estados Unidos, mediante una orden ejecutiva, ha designado como organizaciones terroristas”. Expertos jurídicos ya han planteado sus inquietudes sobre el significado del término “narco-terrorista”, pero Brian Finucane, asesor principal del Programa de Estados Unidos del International Crisis Group y exabogado de la Oficina del Asesor Jurídico del Departamento de Estado de EE. UU., declaró a esta alianza que los comentarios del ejército estadounidense en respuesta a este reportaje llevan esas inquietudes un paso más allá. “El derecho de la guerra permite la violencia que de otro modo estaría prohibida, pero solo durante un conflicto armado genuino —un umbral que la administración Trump no ha logrado alcanzar, ya que ni siquiera ha identificado contra quién se supone que Estados Unidos está luchando”, dijo. “Más allá de ese problema fundamental, la sugerencia de la administración de que los ‘facilitadores’, vagamente definidos, pueden ser blanco de ataques, suscita aún más inquietudes de que esté violando las reglas de su propio paradigma legal falso”. Mientras la cooperación internacional para la lucha anti-narcóticos se desarrollaba con normalidad y sin dejar muertos en estos seis meses de septiembre a febrero, los múltiples ataques que realizó el gobierno estadounidense dejaron 140 muertos, sin una cantidad de cocaína públicamente incautada y pulverizando las pruebas judiciales que podrían llevar a encontrar a los grandes narcos dueños de las rutas.  De hecho, la Fiscalía de Colombia solo abrió una indagación preliminar en contra del sobreviviente Jonathan Obando Pérez,  según El País América, “pero no prevé convertirla en una investigación formal, pues no tiene elementos para señalar que Obando Pérez haya cometido algún delito en Colombia”. Por eso luego de salir del hospital, quedó en libertad. Una fuente citada por AP de la Fiscalía ecuatoriana también aseguró que “no encontró pruebas suficientes para emprender acciones legales” en contra de Andrés Fernando Tufiño, sobreviviente de un ataque en el Caribe el 16 de octubre.  Por las posibles violaciones a los derechos humanos y al derecho del mar, las autoridades de Reino Unido y Canadá dijeron que no compartirían inteligencia con sus pares de Estados Unidos, según reportó Time. Las fuentes británicas le dijeron en noviembre pasado a esas revista que “los oficiales británicos creen que los golpes militares de Estados Unidos que han matado 76 personas violan la ley internacional” y por ello, suspendieron la cooperación para este tipo de ataques desde octubre. Y fuentes canadienses dijeron que su gobierno “no quiere que su inteligencia ayude a localizar como objetivos a barcos para dar golpes mortales”.  En enero pasado, el ministro de Defensa holandés dijo en Aruba que continuarán las labores de interdicción en la aguas territoriales de su país pero no usarán su barco-estación naval para operaciones relacionadas con la operación Southern Spear (la de los bombardeos) de los Estados Unidos.  “Ningún país europeo, incluida Francia, enviará inteligencia operacional a los americanos en la situación actual si esta se puede usar como base para un ataque militar a un barco”, dijo Dimitro Zoulas, jefe del servicio antidrogas de la policía francesa a Radio Caraibes (RCI). Y Euractiv confirmó con una fuente francesa de seguridad que “es 100 por ciento claro que los europeos no les están dando ninguna inteligencia a Estados Unidos que puede llevar a un golpe (contra los barcos)”.  El gobierno de Colombia había anunciado algo similar, pero un alto funcionario diplomático que habló con CLIP y pidió no revelar su nombre por la sensibilidad del tema, dijo que hoy éste sigue compartiendo normalmente su inteligencia con su par de Estados Unidos, pero no precisó para cuáles operaciones.   A estas críticas, en la respuesta enviada a esta alianza periodística, el Comando Sur respondió: “las fuerzas estadounidenses operan bajo reglas de combate que son consistentes con el derecho marítimo internacional contra actividades que representan una amenaza directa para la seguridad de EE. UU. y la vida de los ciudadanos estadounidenses. Como organización militar a la que se le ha confiado la defensa de nuestra patria, estamos plenamente comprometidos con misiones que apoyan directamente la salud y la seguridad del pueblo estadounidense”. En abril pasado, una coalición de 125 organizaciones civiles de todo el mundo (incluida Airwars, que apoyó con información experta a esta alianza periodística, Human Rights Watch y Amnistía Internacional, entre otras), hizo una petición pública urgente para que los países “inmediatamente dejen o se abstengan de apoyar las ejecuciones extrajudiciales de Estados Unidos en el mar Caribe y el océano Pacífico”. “Debemos recordar que todos estos individuos tienen nombres, familias y vidas que nunca serán iguales”, dijo Jamil Dakwar, director del Programa de Derechos Humanos de ACLU en una audiencia ante la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos de la OEA (CIDH), el pasado 13 de abril.  Esa organización, además de representar a las dos víctimas trinitenses ante una corte federal estadounidense, pidió a la CIDH declarar que los golpes de misil a las embarcaciones violan el derecho internacional y propuso la creación de un grupo especial que investigue las implicaciones que estos han tenido en el hemisferio.  ¿Por qué lo hacen, entonces? Es difícil entender por qué el gobierno Trump se empeña en continuar los bombardeos, a pesar de que no frenan el flujo de drogas.  Incluso, el almirante Nathan Moore, comandante del Guardacostas de Área Atlántica de Estados Unidos, defensor de usar todos los métodos, incluidos los bombardeos, reconoció que no han visto ninguna diferencia notable en el flujo de cocaína. Moore dijo,  después de 21 bombardeos en noviembre de 2025, que no han cambiado ni las rutas de los traficantes, ni el ritmo, ni la pureza de la droga.   Es probable que hayan conseguido que los traficantes dejen de usar algunas rutas, sobre todo aquellas por donde se mueven las lanchas go-fast –de acuerdo con un análisis de InSight Crime, un medio especializado en el crimen organizado—pero la operación no “evitó que los traficantes movieran la cocaína por otros medios”, como apelar más a la ruta por la Amazonía.  Tampoco es difícil para los grandes narcos reemplazar a los muertos por otros hombres empujados a sus redes por la desesperación, la pobreza y el desempleo, pues éstos abundan en las costas latinoamericanas. Atacar al eslabón más débil del multimillonario negocio del narcotráfico no es nuevo. Lo vienen haciendo nuestros países sin resolver el problema desde hace más de 50 años. Esta nueva estrategia de explotar lanchas y matar sospechosos desconocidos lleva esta política al extremo. Los misiles han causado un tremendo dolor y hunden en peores carencias a familias y pueblos pobres que no se pueden defender del majestuoso poder militar estadounidense, ni de su omnipresente retórica.  Además, como se contó aquí, aliena la cooperación internacional y deja más solitario a Estados Unidos frente al crimen.  ¿Por qué entonces persistir en un camino tan riesgoso y estéril por más de ocho meses? “En el gobierno Trump creen en el espectáculo de fuerza por razones que tienen muy poco que ver con interdicción efectiva”, dice Walsh de WOLA. “Quieren impresionar a los ciudadanos, haciéndoles creer que ellos sí que le están poniendo fin al problema terrible del narcotráfico, lo que otros gobiernos no lograron. La profunda crueldad y despreocupación con que ordenan estos asesinatos sistemáticos e intencionales les permite proyectar la naturaleza amenazante de ‘narcoterroristas’ sin nombre. De esta manera asombran a muchos estadounidenses, mientras anestesian la noción de que los funcionarios de Estados Unidos responsables de estos asesinatos deben rendir cuentas ”. La figura del presidente Trump y sus más altos funcionarios de Guerra y Estado, acompañando sus bombardeos con videos explosivos y  triunfales comentarios en redes sociales, orquestan un espectáculo de poder desproporcionado frente a hombres humildes, en su mayoría pobres, y en todo caso, sólo sospechosos de estar transportando drogas.  Como dijo una venezolana esposa de un hombre caído en un bombardeo, “Donald Trump no se puso a pensar; está matando a un padre de familia y no sabe por qué este hombre se montó en ese bote”. ¿Tienes más información sobre esta historia? Escríbenos a investigaciones@elclip.org