- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
So The JAG With Admiral Bradley Said It Was Legal To Kill All Survivors
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:42 pm
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:42 pm
Per NBC News I watched right now...
According to Congressional testimony:
JAG was present at strike and approved the strike and follow up strike, telling Admiral Bradley it was legal.
Hegseth did not order anything.
Tom Cotton says this is over.
Democrats still say it was a war crime and will not stop.
According to Congressional testimony:
JAG was present at strike and approved the strike and follow up strike, telling Admiral Bradley it was legal.
Hegseth did not order anything.
Tom Cotton says this is over.
Democrats still say it was a war crime and will not stop.
17
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:43 pm to LuckyTiger
Dems are going after this hard to hide all the fraud BS going on elsewhere.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:46 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
Democrats
Are looking for their weekly hoax to distract from their immigrants robbing us blind.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:47 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:
So The JAG With Admiral Bradley Said It Was Legal To Kill All Survivors
Geez.... how can some of y'all be so fricking clueless?
THE MISSION GOAL WAS TO DESTROY THE DRUG BOAT. AFTER THE FIRST STRIKE, THE BOAT WASN'T DESTROYED... THEREFORE A SECOND STRIKE WAS NECESSARY. WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE SURVIVORS HAS ZERO IMPACT ON THE MISSION GOAL.
If there happen to be survivors after the first strike, they simply became collateral damage after the second strike. Once the boat was destroyed, only then was mission accomplished.
Survivors had zero impact on this military action.
And what I've described is entirely within the legal military framework.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:52 pm to LuckyTiger
In my opinion this is over.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 5:54 pm to Bama Mountain
quote:
In my opinion this is over.
Oh, thank goodness we got your opinion that is over. Especially after you leftist retards pushed another fake narrative
Posted on 12/4/25 at 6:56 pm to LuckyTiger
It was still an active target environment.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 7:04 pm to LuckyTiger
quote:No. The JAG With Admiral Bradley Said It Was Legal To Kill Survivors Who Had Returned To Enemy Tasks
So The JAG With Admiral Bradley Said It Was Legal To Kill All Survivors
Posted on 12/4/25 at 7:08 pm to Commander Rabb
quote:
It was still an active target environment.
Yes
Why not three times
Posted on 12/4/25 at 7:12 pm to LuckyTiger
As the legal advisor the Supreme Commander, I would say, Sir, as your legal advisor, I advise you to use Bigger Bombs. If you would use a really big bomb, there would be nothing left but atoms, and you can't snort atoms.
So use a bigger motherfricking bomb, Sir.
So use a bigger motherfricking bomb, Sir.
Posted on 12/4/25 at 8:41 pm to LuckyTiger
The mission was to stop the delivery of cocaine.
Two combatants who survived the initial strike who appeared to be communicating with other narcoterrorist and attempting to take actions to continue to deliver drugs or move the drugs were struck a second time to stop the delivery of drugs and destroy the boat used to deliver drugs which was consistent with the original mission.
The act was cleared by military jag lawyers.
This is not an issue.
Two combatants who survived the initial strike who appeared to be communicating with other narcoterrorist and attempting to take actions to continue to deliver drugs or move the drugs were struck a second time to stop the delivery of drugs and destroy the boat used to deliver drugs which was consistent with the original mission.
The act was cleared by military jag lawyers.
This is not an issue.
This post was edited on 12/4/25 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 12/4/25 at 10:04 pm to LuckyTiger
sure has been a short thread
Posted on 12/5/25 at 2:37 am to LuckyTiger
I agree with this.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 4:30 am to LuckyTiger
They are trying to focus on another 80/20 issue that they are on the wrong side of.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 5:48 am to stelly1025
quote:
They are trying to focus on another 80/20 issue that they are on the wrong side of.
Exactly, no one cares. They don’t even care if it was clearly and obviously illegal.Killing some foreign drug traffickers outside the US from a non-threatening country is at the bottom of things people care about.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 6:03 am to RohanGonzales
quote:
sure has been a short thread
In an earlier thread I pondered how long Muh Survivors Clinging To Driftwood would last.
Even shorter than I thought.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 6:07 am to LuckyTiger
When Temu Obama was the first name released on the Epstein drop, they quickly pivoted to wailing about the Ballroom, that was a complete non-starter, so they’ve fallen back to championing for criminals, terrorists, and illegals (sorry for the redundancy).
Posted on 12/5/25 at 6:12 am to LuckyTiger
If this and past incidents with Democrats angry over treatment of illegals and terrorists doesn't convince anyone that the dems care more for the bad guys than they do for American citizens, nothing will.
I hope I live long enough to see the demise of the entire Democrat Party and all of its' evil players.
I hope I live long enough to see the demise of the entire Democrat Party and all of its' evil players.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 6:41 am to LuckyTiger
I really dont care if the survivors were purposely executed. If it deters people from harming Americans, im fine with it
Posted on 12/5/25 at 6:45 am to LuckyTiger
But Matt Taibbi and Bunk said!
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News