Trump Says He’s ‘Just Going to Kill People’ Who Are Allegedly Trafficking Drugs Abroad: ‘They’re Going to Be, Like, Dead’

In a shocking statement made on October 23, President Donald Trump claimed that his administration is prepared to take drastic measures against individuals suspected of trafficking drugs into the United States. The President declared, “We’re just going to kill people.” Trump further stated that his administration had approved nine strikes on vessels believed to be involved in drug trafficking, resulting in the deaths of 37 individuals, including a Colombian fisherman whose family asserts had no connections to drug trafficking.

As the deadly strikes on alleged drug traffickers continue in the Caribbean and East Pacific regions, President Trump affirmed his administration’s commitment to combating drug cartels across both land and sea without seeking a formal declaration of war from Congress. He emphasised that the reduction of illegal drug imports by sea to less than 5% of previous levels has prompted a shift towards addressing drug smuggling via land routes. Trump asserted, “The land is going to be next,” hinting at potential actions on land and expressing his belief that Congress would support such efforts.

During his interaction with reporters, Trump indicated that while he might inform Congress about land-based attacks on suspected cartel members, he did not foresee seeking a formal declaration of war from Congress. Justifying the approach, he bluntly stated, “I’m not going to necessarily ask for a declaration of war. I think we’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. Okay? We’re going to kill them, you know, they’re going to be, like, dead.”

The US military’s engagement in nine deadly attacks on boats suspected of drug trafficking has raised legal concerns and sparked debate over the President’s authority to unilaterally authorise such actions. Legal experts have questioned the constitutionality of these attacks, citing the explicit power granted to Congress to declare war under the US Constitution as a crucial check on the President’s authority as Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. The lack of concrete evidence linking those killed in the attacks to drug trafficking has also drawn criticism and cast doubts on the justification for the strikes.

Family members of individuals killed in these operations, such as Colombian fisherman Alejandro Carranza, have protested against the portrayal of their loved ones as drug traffickers. Carranza’s wife denied any involvement in drug trafficking on his part, stating that he was simply fishing when the attack occurred. Colombian President Gustavo Petro echoed these sentiments, asserting Carranza’s innocence and highlighting that his boat was in distress due to an engine failure during the tragic incident.

As questions linger regarding the legality and justification of the lethal strikes authorised by the Trump administration, concerns about the implications of such actions on international relations and human rights persist. Critics argue that the use of deadly force without clear evidence or oversight sets a dangerous precedent and risks undermining diplomatic efforts in combating drug trafficking. With the controversy surrounding these operations escalating, the need for accountability, transparency, and adherence to legal norms in addressing drug-related challenges becomes increasingly paramount.