Venezuelan boats, stopping the illegal drug trade, etc…

byke
Posts
3093
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA, USA
12/7/2025 10:13am
byke wrote:
Definitely for those that had naturalized, or were in the process of naturalizing, but there were a couple/few that were US born. I'd like to see...

Definitely for those that had naturalized, or were in the process of naturalizing, but there were a couple/few that were US born. I'd like to see a test case for them. 

No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….Too much...

No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….

Too much? 🤣

It doesn't get used, but technically....US born proper citizens like you and I can lose our citizenship for treason, to include giving aid to enemies. Though it is treason, I couldn't support a penalty of death for a myriad of moral reasons for what effectively amounts to theft, but losing citizenship seems like it should be on the table for unique circumstances like stealing a billion dollars from taxpayer funds allotted for feeding children and giving it to foreign murderers. 

4
1
BusterScruggs
Posts
208
Joined
12/1/2025
Location
Stephenville, TX, USA
12/7/2025 10:15am
byke wrote:
Definitely for those that had naturalized, or were in the process of naturalizing, but there were a couple/few that were US born. I'd like to see...

Definitely for those that had naturalized, or were in the process of naturalizing, but there were a couple/few that were US born. I'd like to see a test case for them. 

No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….Too much...

No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….

Too much? 🤣

byke wrote:
It doesn't get used, but technically....US born proper citizens like you and I can lose our citizenship for treason, to include giving aid to enemies. Though...

It doesn't get used, but technically....US born proper citizens like you and I can lose our citizenship for treason, to include giving aid to enemies. Though it is treason, I couldn't support a penalty of death for a myriad of moral reasons for what effectively amounts to theft, but losing citizenship seems like it should be on the table for unique circumstances like stealing a billion dollars from taxpayer funds allotted for feeding children and giving it to foreign murderers. 

Basically, if you’ve lost the right to vote and/or own a firearm; you’ve lost your citizenship.

1
1
byke
Posts
3093
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA, USA
12/7/2025 10:21am
No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….Too much...

No Sir, U.S. born is U.S. born. Deportation? Just have some balls and summarily execute them in the Capitol at high Noon and televise it……….

Too much? 🤣

byke wrote:
It doesn't get used, but technically....US born proper citizens like you and I can lose our citizenship for treason, to include giving aid to enemies. Though...

It doesn't get used, but technically....US born proper citizens like you and I can lose our citizenship for treason, to include giving aid to enemies. Though it is treason, I couldn't support a penalty of death for a myriad of moral reasons for what effectively amounts to theft, but losing citizenship seems like it should be on the table for unique circumstances like stealing a billion dollars from taxpayer funds allotted for feeding children and giving it to foreign murderers. 

Basically, if you’ve lost the right to vote and/or own a firearm; you’ve lost your citizenship.

Oh I see...you've got a can of worms in one hand and a can opener in another and you're just tapping them together lol!!

2
1
Kenny Banyan
Posts
4585
Joined
6/2/2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
12/7/2025 10:23am
Looks like the buck stops…. Over there..  Hegseth is an embarrassment to the country. 
IMG 3783 3

Looks like the buck stops…. Over there..  

Hegseth is an embarrassment to the country. 

I disagree , I think he’s a breath of fresh air.

3
9

The Shop

BusterScruggs
Posts
208
Joined
12/1/2025
Location
Stephenville, TX, USA
12/7/2025 10:29am
Looks like the buck stops…. Over there..  Hegseth is an embarrassment to the country. 
IMG 3783 3

Looks like the buck stops…. Over there..  

Hegseth is an embarrassment to the country. 

I disagree , I think he’s a breath of fresh air.

He really is. The Uniform/PFT standards, the restoration of the Combat Arms………

We’re all human. Mostly I’d say I support him 97%.

1
6
Chance1216
Posts
8797
Joined
4/1/2018
Location
Carson, CA, USA
12/7/2025 10:29am
After the creation of the federal reserve act in 1913 and later fortified in 1933 when we went off the gold standard, you no longer have...

After the creation of the federal reserve act in 1913 and later fortified in 1933 when we went off the gold standard, you no longer have the right to the value of your money. The federal reserve is an agency wholly unaccountable to you. They control the money supply, and so they control the value.

The core concept of the modern fiat money system is this- You don't own your money but rather the debt your money represents.

the federal reserve owns almost 25% or 4.6 trillion dollars worth of our 38 trillion dollar debt. The debt you and I are liable for. 

I don't think its too hard to see a conflict of interest. 

On a slightly different note, over two-thirds of our debt is held by private entities. And anyone who's familiar with how debt works, understands the debtor is beholden (legally bound) to the creditor. Our government is compromised my friend. It doesn't work for you and I. It works those it owes money to, and it pays those we owe money to with our money and our labor. And the value of our money and our labor is controlled by an entity not beholden to our needs. We are debt slaves bound to a debt that an illegitimate authority has placed on us. The only right you have is the right to pay your taxes or die.

Your illusions of freedom are just that: illusions. It only looks like freedom because people like @Titan1 compare the freedom we have to places which have less or none at all. You/we are not free, we are simply afforded a larger illusion of it. We are simply afforded the comfort, based solely on exploitation and theft, to be more delusional than others. This is the "comfort" material wealth supplies, but it comes at the cost of spiritual health which manifests as either mental or physical dis-ease. All you need do is take a trip to Walmart or a drive down skid row to see this reality. It comes at such a cost because the materialistic world is only a tiny fraction of a sliver of the metaphysical whole. And so this delusional belief in this freedom or rights some claim to posses is actually the root cause of sickness and dis-ease because it runs contrary to the reality your subconscious is all to aware of. Hence my point in calling disease dis-ease. Because it is this un-easiness which causes our sickness.

 We live undisputedly in an ecological world and it's time for us to man up and take some responsibility for ourselves. But sure, go on and whistle yourself into oblivion. They say ignorance is bliss, so enjoy it while it lasts.

 

"There's two kinds of men in this world. There are those among us who desire to be an active participant in their own lives, and those among us contented to be only passive observers. Only one of these men has guts"

-Ulysses S. Grant

LoudLove wrote:
Can you imagine getting cornered by this dude at a party?  I’d fake food poisoning and make a break for the exit!Are each of us not...

Can you imagine getting cornered by this dude at a party?  I’d fake food poisoning and make a break for the exit!

Are each of us not active participants AND passive observers?  No man can survive without active participation, and no man controls 100% of his destiny. However, most of us agree beating your head against a brick wall isn’t the most efficient way of moving forward. 

lol. It was one hell of a statement though. Even @TXDirt i think would be impressed with the articulation 😂.. I’m going to save that one...

lol. It was one hell of a statement though. Even @TXDirt i think would be impressed with the articulation 😂.. I’m going to save that one for my soon to be released manifesto. 

Either way you’re deflecting only because you can’t dispute. At least in reference to my first few sentences about the federal reserve and how you don’t have a right to the value of your money. Everything else I’ll admit is somewhat subjective. 

Now, read it out loud in the voice of the Clear Eyes guy. 😂

2
1
BusterScruggs
Posts
208
Joined
12/1/2025
Location
Stephenville, TX, USA
12/7/2025 10:50am

I’ve already agreed, the other guy doing it, just as wrong. I’m not looking at with any partisan blinders. I saw it and immediately thought to myself, “Holy fuck, that was wrong”. 

I can still do that. No matter whose side I’m on politically. 

You’re talking from a cop/guard perspective on escalation of use of force. You’ve got a guy resisting but then surrenders. Instead of taking him in to custody, you decide to Molly Whop him to prove a point. What’s going to happen to you. Especially when the video is released. 

Two things I know anymore, leave your cell phone at home and you can expect to be under video surveillance. 

1
SEEMEFIRST
Posts
14008
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX, USA
12/7/2025 12:36pm

It looks like it's about a 50 hour trip to Florida from Venezuela. That's a long round trip.

I guess they could carry enough fuel and water to do that, but it would be a helluva trip.

I wonder if they're actually trying to go to the U.S., or headed to a waiting ship.

Now I'm not losing a bunch of sleep over the sinking of these things, but if I was in charge, I'd track a couple of them to see what the actual plan is. Maybe they have, who knows?

1
flow
Posts
196
Joined
7/27/2022
Location
Ontario, OR, USA
12/7/2025 12:40pm
ToolMaker wrote:

"Of the united states" brother!

matt.3150 wrote:

Yes of the United States, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights does not say anything about citizens is says people. 

Hmmm…….nice try to play semantics. Who do you think those people mentioned as, “We the people of the United States” would be. Foreign nationals? Those people would...

Hmmm…….nice try to play semantics. Who do you think those people mentioned as, “We the people of the United States” would be. Foreign nationals? 

Those people would be Citizens.

You know what else is never mentioned? Democracy. Because the United States is not one. 

"We the People of the United States" is a statement of authority and authorship, that the legitimacy of the document comes from the people themselves (rather than, say, a Monarch). It's not a designation on who gets protected by it. Popular sovereignty/consent of the governed. The preamble is about why they're writing the Constitution/Bill of Rights and by who's authority

Thhe Constitution absolutely has the word "citizen" in it. 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments plus obvious references in articles I thru IV (pertaining to stuff like running for office). 

It'd be nice if we'd had a clarifying article that defined citizen vs person/people but instead we have to rely on ~200 years of Supreme Court precedent to get answers on all of this. 

It's funny, I was pressured into AP US History because a family friend taught it. I remember her covering these things during some Constitutional Law stuff and thinking, "when the fuck am I ever going to use this". The answer is "arguing with people on a motocross forum in the year 2025". Time well spent lol. 

12
SEEMEFIRST
Posts
14008
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX, USA
12/7/2025 12:55pm
matt.3150 wrote:

Yes of the United States, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights does not say anything about citizens is says people. 

Hmmm…….nice try to play semantics. Who do you think those people mentioned as, “We the people of the United States” would be. Foreign nationals? Those people would...

Hmmm…….nice try to play semantics. Who do you think those people mentioned as, “We the people of the United States” would be. Foreign nationals? 

Those people would be Citizens.

You know what else is never mentioned? Democracy. Because the United States is not one. 

flow wrote:
"We the People of the United States" is a statement of authority and authorship, that the legitimacy of the document comes from the people themselves (rather...

"We the People of the United States" is a statement of authority and authorship, that the legitimacy of the document comes from the people themselves (rather than, say, a Monarch). It's not a designation on who gets protected by it. Popular sovereignty/consent of the governed. The preamble is about why they're writing the Constitution/Bill of Rights and by who's authority

Thhe Constitution absolutely has the word "citizen" in it. 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments plus obvious references in articles I thru IV (pertaining to stuff like running for office). 

It'd be nice if we'd had a clarifying article that defined citizen vs person/people but instead we have to rely on ~200 years of Supreme Court precedent to get answers on all of this. 

It's funny, I was pressured into AP US History because a family friend taught it. I remember her covering these things during some Constitutional Law stuff and thinking, "when the fuck am I ever going to use this". The answer is "arguing with people on a motocross forum in the year 2025". Time well spent lol. 

Hahahaha!

1
APLMAN99
Posts
12701
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
12/7/2025 2:06pm
ToolMaker wrote:

Nope, citizens have different rights. Need proof? I as a citizen cannot be deported. Case closed.

You're welcome

APLMAN99 wrote:
What you are describing is privileges, which are granted by government. Rights are inalienable, and apply to all human beings. The fact that they are constantly...

What you are describing is privileges, which are granted by government. Rights are inalienable, and apply to all human beings. The fact that they are constantly infringed upon doesn’t negate their existence, nor does selective infringements based upon citizenship or immigration status. It just displays the fact that some people have their rights infringed upon a little bit less and/or they effectively mistake a granted government privilege as a ‘right’ because they’ve been told that lie since birth…….

TeamGreen wrote:
Sir,That is both eloquent and elegant.I don’t necessarily agree with all of it when it comes to the rights of a U.S. citizen versus the rights...

Sir,

That is both eloquent and elegant.

I don’t necessarily agree with all of it when it comes to the rights of a U.S. citizen versus the rights of anyone that simply happens to find their way inside our borders…legally or illegally.

But, again, that is a well stated position on the matter.

👍🏼

I wouldn’t call it either eloquent or elegant. There are many easily accessible explanations of those points that are far clearer and more definitive than I could ever come up with. But I do hope that it’s a mostly understandable, simple explanation of the logic behind the differences between rights and privileges. It certainly isn’t all inclusive of the reasoning, but it’s a basic framework. 

1
Piston Slap
Posts
1988
Joined
7/2/2013
Location
Stillwater, OK, USA
12/7/2025 2:47pm
LoudLove wrote:

Ummm…who wants to tell Buster?

Let it roll...😜

12/7/2025 2:53pm
ToolMaker wrote:

Nope, citizens have different rights. Need proof? I as a citizen cannot be deported. Case closed.

You're welcome

plowboy wrote:

You aren't SUPPOSED to be deported...they CAN do anything they want.  There's the rub.  Our laws apply to everyone or they don't apply at all.

ToolMaker wrote:

Pulling things out of the air on that one

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

1
1
12/7/2025 3:06pm
plowboy wrote:

You aren't SUPPOSED to be deported...they CAN do anything they want.  There's the rub.  Our laws apply to everyone or they don't apply at all.

ToolMaker wrote:

Pulling things out of the air on that one

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

ToolMaker, citizen, not deported.

1
5
LoudLove
Posts
2938
Joined
7/16/2010
Location
USA
12/7/2025 3:08pm
plowboy wrote:

You aren't SUPPOSED to be deported...they CAN do anything they want.  There's the rub.  Our laws apply to everyone or they don't apply at all.

ToolMaker wrote:

Pulling things out of the air on that one

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

Deported to…where?  We can’t force a nation to take a US citizen. And vice versa. Am I missing something?

1
12/7/2025 3:08pm
ToolMaker wrote:

Pulling things out of the air on that one

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

ToolMaker wrote:

ToolMaker, citizen, not deported.

Yet...

1
12/7/2025 3:10pm
ToolMaker wrote:

Pulling things out of the air on that one

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

LoudLove wrote:

Deported to…where?  We can’t force a nation to take a US citizen. And vice versa. Am I missing something?

TeamGreen
Posts
37286
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
12/7/2025 3:37pm
I’ll tell you exactly the point I’m trying to make. I’ll spell it out for you real slow. It’s quite evident that you’ve picked a partisan...

I’ll tell you exactly the point I’m trying to make. I’ll spell it out for you real slow. It’s quite evident that you’ve picked a partisan side, that your defense for this being wrong, is that the other guy did it also. 

If you’ll read what I wrote, have written on the subject; I’m fine with the drug boat interdiction. My problem is the second strike. You want to destroy the cargo? Get the survivors out of the water, then “BOOM”. 

Shield whomever, IDGAF. Just take that highly repugnant action off the table. I’ll settle for a 24hr “Safety Stand-down”! 🤣

 

Thank you for spelling it out 🙄Now let’s look at reality:You could apply the exact same logic to Somali pirate boats: ‘They’re just poor fishermen who...

Thank you for spelling it out 🙄

Now let’s look at reality:

You could apply the exact same logic to Somali pirate boats: ‘They’re just poor fishermen who might be innocent—should we really be shooting at them from helicopters without warning?’

You could extend it even further to drone strikes on suspected terrorists: ‘What if they’re not actually terrorists? Shouldn’t we have to capture and interrogate them first instead of just killing them from the air?’

Once you start down that road, you quickly end up arguing that we should be trying to arrest and interrogate every potential threat—pirates in speedboats, terrorists in pickup trucks, even hostile fighters in wartime—before using any lethal force.

ROE - Rules of Engagement Go do some reading and get back to me. Let me get this straight. Your only defense to illegal conduct is to attempt...

ROE - Rules of Engagement 

Go do some reading and get back to me. 

Let me get this straight. Your only defense to illegal conduct is to attempt to defend it by pointing out potentially other illegal conduct? That’s the stand you’re taking, correct? 

Since we are delving in to reality, please enthrall me with your list of military/combat service? I know, I know, you almost joined up. 

Your 1st line is what’s “Lost in Translation”. 

I’m watching all sorts of talking-heads attempting to plug in all sorts of ROE considerations & conventions that don’t apply.

That’s why this is getting pretty interesting, to me. Once a group is designated a Terrorist Threat…?

The gloves come off. 

1
BusterScruggs
Posts
208
Joined
12/1/2025
Location
Stephenville, TX, USA
12/7/2025 3:49pm
Thank you for spelling it out 🙄Now let’s look at reality:You could apply the exact same logic to Somali pirate boats: ‘They’re just poor fishermen who...

Thank you for spelling it out 🙄

Now let’s look at reality:

You could apply the exact same logic to Somali pirate boats: ‘They’re just poor fishermen who might be innocent—should we really be shooting at them from helicopters without warning?’

You could extend it even further to drone strikes on suspected terrorists: ‘What if they’re not actually terrorists? Shouldn’t we have to capture and interrogate them first instead of just killing them from the air?’

Once you start down that road, you quickly end up arguing that we should be trying to arrest and interrogate every potential threat—pirates in speedboats, terrorists in pickup trucks, even hostile fighters in wartime—before using any lethal force.

ROE - Rules of Engagement Go do some reading and get back to me. Let me get this straight. Your only defense to illegal conduct is to attempt...

ROE - Rules of Engagement 

Go do some reading and get back to me. 

Let me get this straight. Your only defense to illegal conduct is to attempt to defend it by pointing out potentially other illegal conduct? That’s the stand you’re taking, correct? 

Since we are delving in to reality, please enthrall me with your list of military/combat service? I know, I know, you almost joined up. 

TeamGreen wrote:
Your 1st line is what’s “Lost in Translation”. I’m watching all sorts of talking-heads attempting to plug in all sorts of ROE considerations & conventions that don’t...

Your 1st line is what’s “Lost in Translation”. 

I’m watching all sorts of talking-heads attempting to plug in all sorts of ROE considerations & conventions that don’t apply.

That’s why this is getting pretty interesting, to me. Once a group is designated a Terrorist Threat…?

The gloves come off. 

Honestly, if they wanted to “Take the Gloves Off”, they shouldn’t be videoing the shit and releasing it to the public. There are probably several Information Officers getting their ass chewed as we type. 

Tell that to Eddie Gallagher. 




 

TeamGreen
Posts
37286
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
12/7/2025 4:08pm

Au contraire!

Film it. Show it. Stop it.

All the while, the continuous Monday-morning quarterbacking is par for the course, too.

3
3
BossWool2800
Posts
829
Joined
10/25/2025
Location
Jackson, TX, USA
12/7/2025 4:28pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2025 4:46pm

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

These were mistakes and were years ago.

1
BossWool2800
Posts
829
Joined
10/25/2025
Location
Jackson, TX, USA
12/7/2025 4:29pm

US citizens cannot be deported

2
12/7/2025 4:39pm

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

These were mistakes and were years ago.

They were all adults when they were deported.

1
12/7/2025 4:40pm

US citizens cannot be deported

Some US citizens have been deported, I think you mean US citizens should not be deported.

2
1
LoudLove
Posts
2938
Joined
7/16/2010
Location
USA
12/7/2025 4:46pm

US citizens cannot be deported

Some US citizens have been deported, I think you mean US citizens should not be deported.

Looks like they were unlawfully deported. Each sued and won suits challenging their deportation. 

2
1
12/7/2025 5:21pm

Lorenzo Palma, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Robles, Esteban Tiznado and Mark Lyttle, were all US citizens who were deported.

ToolMaker wrote:

ToolMaker, citizen, not deported.

Yet...

Oh my, almost 350 million people here and you have 5 examples. Hold the press folks, we have breaking news. Seriously, it's just not possible to have 100% accuracy. In Ausland, folks are required to register if they have guns. Do you believe there's 100% compliance?

2
10
BossWool2800
Posts
829
Joined
10/25/2025
Location
Jackson, TX, USA
12/7/2025 5:55pm
ToolMaker wrote:
Oh my, almost 350 million people here and you have 5 examples. Hold the press folks, we have breaking news. Seriously, it's just not possible to...

Oh my, almost 350 million people here and you have 5 examples. Hold the press folks, we have breaking news. Seriously, it's just not possible to have 100% accuracy. In Ausland, folks are required to register if they have guns. Do you believe there's 100% compliance?

He’s a troll.

1
6
LoudLove
Posts
2938
Joined
7/16/2010
Location
USA
12/7/2025 6:14pm
TeamGreen wrote:

Au contraire!

Film it. Show it. Stop it.

All the while, the continuous Monday-morning quarterbacking is par for the course, too.

Why hasn’t that strategy worked at the border?  Begging the larger question, if the Venezuelan traffickers are terrorists, what about the traffickers we catch inside US borders?  Should we not use lethal force on them as well?  If yes, then why aren’t we?  (The answer is obvious, but bears asking anyway.)

2
12/7/2025 10:23pm
ToolMaker wrote:

ToolMaker, citizen, not deported.

Yet...

ToolMaker wrote:
Oh my, almost 350 million people here and you have 5 examples. Hold the press folks, we have breaking news. Seriously, it's just not possible to...

Oh my, almost 350 million people here and you have 5 examples. Hold the press folks, we have breaking news. Seriously, it's just not possible to have 100% accuracy. In Ausland, folks are required to register if they have guns. Do you believe there's 100% compliance?

Would you be happy if you were one of the examples?

There is never 100% compliance with any law.

3
12/8/2025 7:24am
TeamGreen wrote:

Au contraire!

Film it. Show it. Stop it.

All the while, the continuous Monday-morning quarterbacking is par for the course, too.

LoudLove wrote:
Why hasn’t that strategy worked at the border?  Begging the larger question, if the Venezuelan traffickers are terrorists, what about the traffickers we catch inside US...

Why hasn’t that strategy worked at the border?  Begging the larger question, if the Venezuelan traffickers are terrorists, what about the traffickers we catch inside US borders?  Should we not use lethal force on them as well?  If yes, then why aren’t we?  (The answer is obvious, but bears asking anyway.)

"if the Venezuelan traffickers are terrorists, what about the traffickers we catch inside US borders?  Should we not use lethal force on them as well?"

If required, yes. Not "yes we should NOT" but "yes we should". Because you question can cause confusion.

Have you seen the photos of dead people hanging from bridges with no heads? Maybe that was done by innocent fishermen also? These people need extreme measures to have any effect.

4
1

Post a reply to: Venezuelan boats, stopping the illegal drug trade, etc…

The Latest