Imagine If a Foreign Military Did This Off the Coast of Florida
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit michaelfanone.substack.com [https://michaelfanone.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_7]
Imagine, for a second, that a foreign military blew up a small boat off the coast of Florida and killed three Americans. They never told anyone who the dead were. They never produced any evidence the boat had been doing anything wrong. They posted a 19-second video of the explosion to social media and walked off.
We’d be at war. There would be hearings. There would be funerals on the front page of every newspaper in the country.
The United States military has done exactly that, 58 times, since September [https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/27/us/politics/two-survivors-boat-strike.html]. The death toll is 194 people. And almost no one is talking about it.
The most recent strike happened this week in the eastern Pacific. One person killed. Two survivors left floating in open water. The Mexican Navy was asked to go find them. We don’t know their names. We don’t know if they’re alive. What we know is that the U.S. military put them there, on the order of a four-star Marine general, based on intelligence the administration refuses to show anyone, against a target the administration won’t even identify.
The Pentagon posted the video [https://x.com/southcom/status/2059440695488790898] like a highlight reel. A boat moving across open water, an explosion, a column of fire on the surface. No context, no names, no charges, no court. The press release throws around the phrase “designated terrorist organization” the way a magician throws around the word abracadabra. Say it, and the rules disappear.
I want to be specific about something. In 56 of these 58 strikes, there were no survivors. The Pentagon’s term for what happens to the people who jump off the boats before the missile hits is “lost at sea.” Read that as drowned. Or read it the way I read it, which is that we should be asking a lot harder questions about what happens out there when the cameras are off.
Because we already know what happened on the very first strike, back on September 2nd of last year. The military hit a boat. People survived the initial blast. They were clinging to wreckage in the water. And the U.S. military sent a second strike in to finish them off [https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/04/us/politics/trump-boat-attacks-killings.html]. CNN reported it. The Pentagon’s never denied it. That is, by definition, a war crime. And it’s what makes anyone who survives one of these strikes so vulnerable in the hours that follow.
The four-star who ordered this latest strike is General Francis Donovan, the Marine running Southern Command. Donovan says the Coast Guard has been notified to conduct Search and Rescue. The Mexican Navy is actually doing the searching. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about whether the institution that destroyed the boat is the institution you want trusted with saving the people who lived through it.
Go back to the thought experiment I opened with. A foreign military doing this off the coast of Florida. Ask yourself why your gut reaction was so different from the way you probably felt when I told you it was the U.S. doing it in the Pacific. That difference is the entire reason the administration has gotten away with this 58 times.
The public justification for blowing up these boats is fentanyl. Stopping the drugs that are killing Americans. That’s what the President says, what Pete Hegseth says, and what JD Vance said when he called this “the highest and best use of our military.”
Here’s what the President’s own Drug Enforcement Administration says, in writing, in its 2025 National Drug Threat Assessment [https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/DEA_GOV_DIR-008-20%20Fentanyl%20Flow%20in%20the%20United%20States_0.pdf]: fentanyl is manufactured in Mexico, moved into the United States overland, through legal ports of entry, hidden in passenger vehicles, driven by American citizens. In fiscal year 2023, 86 percent [https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/fentanyl-smuggling/] of the people sentenced in federal court for trafficking fentanyl were U.S. citizens, moving the drug across legal border crossings in cars and trucks. The Venezuelan boat is a fiction.
Now look at a map. These Pacific strikes are happening roughly 2,600 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border. The Caribbean strikes off Venezuela are thousands of miles from where fentanyl is actually produced and trafficked. The Coast Guard’s own interdiction reports from those waters don’t show fentanyl. They show cocaine, marijuana, occasionally heroin. The geography doesn’t work, the drug doesn’t match the route, and the story falls apart the second you look at a map.
And here’s the kicker. If this campaign were actually about reducing the flow of drugs, you’d expect to see results. Customs and Border Protection just reported that fentanyl seizures on land are down 45 percent compared to last year, and seizures over air and sea are down 49 percent. Either drugs are getting through at a higher rate than ever, or there were never as many drugs on these boats as the administration claimed. Either way, the policy has failed on its own stated terms. The response from the administration is to keep blowing up boats.
So if this isn’t about drugs, what is it about?
Look at the scale of the deployment. Roughly 15,000 troops in the region. A carrier strike group. Military aircraft. That isn’t a counter-narcotics posture. The DEA does counter-narcotics with badges and warrants and informants. You don’t need a carrier to interdict a fishing boat. You need a carrier when you’re preparing for something else.
This is about precedent. It’s about establishing that the President of the United States, on his own personal authority, with no vote from Congress and no review from any court, can order the military to kill specific people in international waters based on intelligence he refuses to show anyone. That is a power no president has ever claimed before in this way, against this kind of target. And once a president has it, every president after him has it too.
This isn’t a partisan analysis. Senator Rand Paul [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/drug-boat-strikes-spark-debate-over-legal-justification/], Republican of Kentucky and chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, calls these strikes extrajudicial killings. Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, calls them illegal. The Senate held a war powers vote last fall to try to stop them. It failed [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-war-powers-trump-venezuela-boat-strikes/]. Most Republicans voted against it. A handful crossed over. The administration kept going.
Human Rights Watch [https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/12/16/us-military-boat-strikes-constitute-extrajudicial-killings] calls them extrajudicial killings under international human rights law. Dozens of former U.S. government attorneys [https://www.justsecurity.org/120753/collection-u-s-lethal-strikes-on-suspected-drug-traffickers/], the people who spent their careers writing the legal opinions that authorized counterterrorism strikes under Bush, Obama, and the first Trump administration, have publicly said these strikes have no legal foundation. The consensus is overwhelming. It cuts across the entire political and legal establishment of this country.
And it hasn’t mattered.
The reason it hasn’t mattered is that the dead don’t look like us, don’t speak our language, and don’t have names in our newspapers. The first strike was front-page news. The fifteenth was buried inside the paper. The thirtieth was a paragraph on a wire service. The 58th cracked the news cycle only because someone was still alive to be found. That isn’t journalism failing. That is the strategy working.
In my twenty years as a law enforcement official, I locked up people I was certain in my bones were guilty and watched some of them walk free because a judge ruled a search was bad or a warrant was thin. It was infuriating. It was also the system working exactly the way it’s supposed to work. The alternative, the thing on the other side of due process, is what we are watching the U.S. government do in the Pacific Ocean right now. It is the government deciding that some lives aren’t worth the inconvenience of evidence.
And the thing nobody in Washington wants to say out loud is that powers like this never stay where you put them. They start with people far away who don’t look like us and don’t speak our language and whose names we’ll never know. They end somewhere else. They always do.
One last thing. The Pentagon explained the three-week pause before this latest strike by saying they’d been delayed by “bad weather.” Sit with that phrase for a minute. Bad weather. As if killing strangers in international waters is a recreational activity that the rain interferes with. As if the only thing standing between the U.S. military and another funeral in another country is the forecast.
We don’t know the names of the people we killed. We don’t know the names of the people who survived. We don’t know what they were carrying, because the administration won’t tell us, and we have no reason to take their word for it after 57 previous strikes where they also wouldn’t tell us.
What we know is this. If three Americans had died this week off the coast of Florida the way three strangers died this week off the coast of Mexico, the country would have stopped what it was doing. Instead, the boats keep getting hit, the bodies keep going into the water, and the only thing slowing the next strike down is the forecast.
Keep counting. It’s the only thing the people running this operation can’t survive.
🟧 Paid subscribers get 15% off your next merch order🟧 Founding Members get 20% off for life
You’ll get the link in your welcome email.
GET DISCOUNTS BELOW! ENJOY!
Comentarios
0Sé la primera persona en comentar
¡Regístrate ahora y únete a la comunidad de The Michael Fanone Show!