🔴 Website 👉 https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram 👉 https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
According to the U.S. Department of State, the Trump administration says recent military strikes against suspected narco‑terrorist vessels in the Caribbean and off the Pacific coasts of Latin America are lawful under Article 51 of the UN Charter — a self‑defense justification that the administration says allows it to defend the homeland from organized criminal threats.
The U.S. Department of Defense reported that at least 19 strikes have been carried out against suspected drug vessels, resulting in at least 76 deaths — a scale of lethal force Washington says is needed to choke transnational drug flows bound for American streets.
That hardline posture drew an unusually muted European reaction — and a public rebuke from U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a G‑7 meeting. The Straits Times reported Rubio blasting Europe’s posture and noting that Washington will not cede judgment on its national security choices: “I don’t think that the European Union gets to determine what international law is. They certainly don’t get to determine how the United States defends its national security.”
“The United States is under attack from organized, criminal narco-terrorists in our hemisphere – and the president is responding in the DEFENSE of our country.”
“So I would say that the United States and this president has made very clear his job is to protect the United States from threats against the United States…and THAT is what he’s doing in this operation.”
WATCH Rubio’s takedown below:
Rubio pushed back on rumors that intelligence cooperation with Britain had been suspended over the strikes, calling those claims “false,” The Straits Times noted — and he framed the campaign as an immediate defense of the homeland. Newsmax reported Rubio saying: “The United States is under attack from organized criminal narco-terrorists in our hemisphere, and the president is responding in defense of our country.”
European officials pushed back on legal grounds. Reuters reported EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas saying, “Such strikes could be only justified as self-defence or by a UN Security Council resolution,” while the G‑7 foreign ministers’ statement reaffirmed a commitment to securing maritime routes against drug trafficking without explicitly endorsing the U.S. use of lethal force, the Council of the European Union documented.
International human‑rights bodies issued sharp legal warnings. A group of independent UN experts stated, “Even if such allegations were substantiated, the use of lethal force in international waters without proper legal basis violates the international law of the sea and amounts to extrajudicial executions.” That accusation raises the prospect of reputational and legal battles for Washington.
Not every European voice was equivocal: French Foreign Minister Jean‑Noel Barrot criticized the strikes as “violating international law,” The Straits Times reported, citing concerns about impacts on French overseas territories in the region. But other capitals stopped short of formal condemnation, calling instead for restraint and adherence to legal norms.
Back home, conservative institutions lined up behind the administration. The DEA issued support, arguing the strikes will help disrupt drug flows into the United States and reduce street‑level availability and violence. Fox News reported GOP leaders broadly backing the operation as necessary for national security and regional stability — and conservative grassroots groups are already urging Congress to boost border and anti‑narcotics funding, Breitbart documented.
But the move carries risk. Analysts warn of potential cartel retaliation and diplomatic fallout that could affect intelligence sharing and trade, Politico Europe reported, and legal experts expect possible challenges at international tribunals even as Washington insists its actions are lawful under self‑defense, Lawfare analyzed.
The Biden administration’s successor — the State Department — says more evidence is coming fast. Per the U.S. Department of State, officials expect to release additional intelligence and documentation justifying the strikes within the next 24–48 hours — a move Republicans say will vindicate the president and critics say will be scrutinized by courts and allies alike.
Unanswered questions remain: what specific intelligence guided each target selection, how sustained the naval campaign will be, and whether the strikes will permanently blunt cartel operations or provoke a violent backlash — issues experts warned about in background reporting, the Council on Foreign Relations noted. For conservatives who see the strikes as a decisive defense of the homeland, the next 48 hours — and the State Department’s promised evidence — will be decisive.
Want to act? Heritage Action urged patriots to contact lawmakers to support stronger anti‑narcotics policy and border security funding — the grassroots push that conservatives say will shore up the administration’s hardline approach.
What do you think? Let us know in the comments below!
Love this article? Share it with your fellow patriots and subscribe to our newsletter for more hard-hitting conservative news the mainstream media won’t show you.
Steeve Strange is the CEO and Editor-in-Chief of The Scoop. A passionate defender of conservative values and constitutional freedoms, he founded The Scoop to deliver truthful, America First journalism. Contact: [email protected]