U.S. Condemns 'Extrajudicial Killing,' Except When It's Called 'Interdiction'
While CBS highlights the U.N.'s objections to U.S. anti-drug operations targeting boats in international waters, the mainstream narrative conveniently overlooks a broader pattern. This isn't the first time the U.S. has engaged in highly questionable operations under the guise of national security, often blurring the lines between law enforcement and military action. The Trump administration's
aggressive policy against supposed Venezuelan drug boats, for instance, echoed past interventions where American jurisdiction expanded remarkably. One might wonder: how many 'drug boats' does it take before the 'war on drugs' becomes a war on sovereignty? The criticism from the U.N. Human Rights Chief isn't just about 'drug boats'; it's about the consistent U.S. practice of projecting its power
unilaterally, often with lethal consequences that bypass due process. From drone strikes across borders to 'interdictions' at sea, the underlying message is clear: U.S. definitions of legal and illegal are the only ones that matter. So, while CBS reports the concerns, they stop short of asking why Washington believes it can declare open season on vessels it deems suspicious, regardless of
international law. It appears 'extrajudicial' is only a problem when it's not American.