admin
Americans watching the frenzy over the Pentagon’s maritime counter-narcotics campaign have seen a steady drumbeat from the mainstream media desperate to gin up scandal. Conservative voices and former military leaders on platforms like Newsmax have rightly pushed back, warning that accusing our uniformed men and women of a deliberate coverup before facts are verified is dangerous and demoralizing. Too many on the left are treating national security as a partisan blood sport instead of letting the inspectors and uniformed chain of command do their jobs.
Since September the United States has carried out dozens of lethal strikes on vessels the administration says were carrying narcotics or operated by designated narco-terrorist groups, and the campaign continues as the Pentagon conducts its after-action reviews. The recent strike in the eastern Pacific was another example of the effort to choke off the flows of deadly drugs into American neighborhoods. Those operations are not whimsical attacks; they are the outcome of an aggressive policy aimed at protecting American lives and communities.
That said, irresponsible reporting from outlets like the Washington Post has inflamed accusations—claiming, among other things, that a second strike targeted survivors—without giving proper context or waiting for the Pentagon’s investigation to run its course. The Post’s reporting has been seized upon by political opportunists who reflexively weaponize tragedies against the administration and the military, demanding headlines instead of facts. Conservatives should oppose lawless orders, but we should also oppose the reflex to convict on innuendo.
Legal scholars and independent experts have understandably raised questions about the rules of engagement and the moral lines involved in follow-up strikes, and those concerns deserve measured attention rather than sensationalism. If any operation crossed a lawful line, every American should want a full, transparent accountability process that protects due process and the reputations of service members. The right approach is sober oversight—not theatrical calls for prosecutions from people who weaponize justice for partisan gain.
The Pentagon and U.S. Southern Command have publicly stated these strikes were carried out against vessels identified by intelligence as operating on known narcotrafficking routes, and senior officials say the operations were legally reviewed. While the left screams and searches for villains, the reality is that the chain of command has procedures, legal advisors, and military professionals who do not take the decision to use lethal force lightly. Americans must trust that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are acting under the oversight of lawful civilian leadership and military legal counsel.
It’s shameful to watch Democrats and the legacy media try to turn a campaign against the cartels into yet another hit job on patriotic Americans who answer the call to defend the homeland. Instead of reflexive denunciations, Congress ought to conduct thoughtful, bipartisan oversight that strengthens legal standards and ensures transparency while not undermining the morale of forces fighting a real threat. The men and women on the front lines deserve our support as they strike at the cartels that have terrorized American communities for decades.
We can demand accountability without tearing apart our national defense every time an operation goes wrong or a question arises. Real patriots stand with our troops and demand a fair, methodical examination by the inspector general and by Congress—one that preserves the rule of law, protects whistleblowers, and stops the media circus from endangering national security. If Washington wants to stop the flow of poison into our towns, it must back bold action, insist on due process, and stop using the military as a political punching bag.
