On September 2, 2025, Trump ordered an unauthorized military strike on a small vessel in international waters off the coast of Venezuela. The boat was allegedly carrying narcotics for the Tren de Aragua gang, a criminal organization with roots in Venezuela’s prison system. The strike killed 11 people instantly, and the footage was posted by Trump on Truth Social, accompanied by the warning: “BEWARE”.
But beneath the dramatic visuals and the tough-on-crime rhetoric lies a ominous truth: this was an extrajudicial killing, carried out without evidence, oversight, or due process.
No Evidence, No Transparency
Trump has provided no verifiable intelligence to support his claim that the boat was operated by Tren de Aragua or that it was carrying drugs. U.S. officials have refused to disclose how they identified the individuals aboard or what surveillance confirmed their alleged criminal ties. The gang, while notorious for violence and extortion, is not widely known for transnational drug trafficking, raising further doubts about the justification for lethal force.
Even the designation of Tren de Aragua as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” was made unilaterally by Trump, without congressional debate or international consensus. Legal scholars warn that such designations, when used to justify military action, bypass the checks that prevent abuse of executive war powers.
No Judge, No Jury, No Due Process
This strike was not authorized by Congress. It was not reviewed by a court. It did not follow the procedures required under the War Powers Resolution or international law. The individuals aboard were not charged, tried, or convicted. They were executed by a missile, based solely on Trump’s word. Legal experts have compared the strike to the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Iraq War, moments when thin or manipulated intelligence was used to justify deadly force.
A Credibility Problem
According to multiple reports, a naval taskforce consisting of seven warships, including Aegis-class destroyers like the USS Gravely and USS Jason Dunham, as well as three amphibious assault ships carrying over 4,000 Marines, were deployed to the area days before the strike on the boat. A nuclear-powered submarine was also positioned in the region, and long-range aircraft like the P-8 Poseidon were actively surveilling the area.
The administration claimed the strike targeted a drug boat linked to Tren de Aragua, but no evidence has been released to support that claim. No cargo was recovered. No identities confirmed.
So, when you deploy a full naval task force and a nuclear submarine days before a strike, it doesn’t look like a spontaneous law enforcement action. It looks like a premeditated military operation. And when Trump posts footage online with the caption “BEWARE,” it leads to a number of questions.
- Was the strike truly about narcotics? Or was it a geopolitical message to Venezuela?
- Why was there no congressional authorization or judicial oversight?
- What intelligence, if any, justified the use of lethal force?
The credibility gap is glaring. And the constitutional implications, executive war powers exercised without evidence, oversight, or accountability, are profound.