A recently resurfaced video of Joe Biden from 1989 has sparked intense discussions about current U.S. military actions against drug trafficking in the Caribbean. The video shows Biden, then a Senator, advocating for aggressive military action against drug lords. “Let’s go after the drug lords where they live with an international strike force. No safe haven for narco-terrorists,” he asserted. This statement has ignited a debate, as Democrats criticize present-day military strikes on suspected traffickers at sea, while Republicans and the Trump administration defend them as legitimate anti-narcotics operations.
Since September 2023, U.S. military forces have conducted at least 22 targeted strikes on vessels believed to be carrying illegal drugs from Venezuelan waters. Reports confirm that these operations have killed at least 86 individuals suspected of being linked to drug cartels. The Trump administration portrays these actions as part of a broader strategy to combat cartels, framing them as terrorist organizations responsible for the flood of fentanyl and other opioids entering the United States.
A particularly controversial strike on September 2 involved a Venezuelan drug boat. Reports indicate the vessel was first disabled by a strike, but a follow-up attack led to the deaths of survivors who were incapacitated in the water. This incident prompted calls for an investigation, especially from Democrats who assert that the second strike could constitute a war crime.
Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) has voiced strong concerns, stating, “If the reports are true, Pete Hegseth likely committed a war crime when he gave an illegal order that led to the killing of incapacitated survivors.” Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) painted a grim picture, noting, “You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel, who were killed by the United States.” Former Navy pilot Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) added, “Going after survivors in the water, that is clearly not lawful.”
Republicans have countered, linking the urgency of the situation to the ongoing opioid crisis. Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), who reviewed footage of the incident, argued that the targets were not surrendering individuals but active combatants attempting to continue smuggling operations. He stated, “I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs bound for the United States, back over so they could stay in the fight.”
The tension deepens as Biden’s historic endorsement of military action against drug traffickers is recalled. In 1989, during a discussion on President George H.W. Bush’s declaration of a national emergency regarding drug crime, Biden declared that America was “under attack” by a well-funded enemy. Although today’s President Biden has not publicly commented on his earlier remarks amid the current military actions, critics are quick to call out what they see as hypocrisy in the party’s stance.
A viral tweet highlights this hypocrisy: “WOW! Democrats have NO response to this. JOE BIDEN, 1989: ‘Let’s go after the drug lords where they LIVE! With an international strike force. NO safe haven for narco-terrorists.’ But Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth are ‘war criminals?’ Unreal.” This sums up the frustration felt among some who see a disconnect between past declarations and present criticisms.
The operations target drug routes largely controlled by a regime in Venezuela that U.S. intelligence claims is complicit in the drug trade. By classifying cartels as terrorist entities and framing military engagements as lawful combat, the Trump administration argues it is acting within both legal and moral frameworks. President Trump affirmed this stance in a statement, emphasizing the gravity of the situation: “Every boat kills 25,000.” He reiterated this commitment in his November 2024 re-election announcement, pledging to wage war on cartels.
Statistics underscore the urgency of the crisis. Between 1999 and 2023, over 806,000 Americans succumbed to opioid overdoses. Despite a slight dip in deaths in 2023, drug-related fatalities continue to plague the nation, driven primarily by fentanyl produced in clandestine labs and trafficked through international channels.
Anna Kelly, a spokesperson for the White House, dismissed the Democratic claims as disconnected from reality: “‘Innocent fisherman’ is the new ‘Maryland man’ hoax. President Trump is using every element of American power to take on the cartels and stop deadly drugs from flooding into our country.”
This debate reveals a deep partisan divide regarding how to confront America’s drug crisis. While Democrats emphasize adherence to international law, Republicans argue national survival takes precedence over diplomatic concerns. They highlight shifting standards: although Democrats now condemn military tactics used against drug traffickers, they previously accepted similar actions during the Obama administration’s drone strike campaigns.
As political tensions rise, significant questions linger. Should drug cartels be treated as enemies warranting military engagement, or as criminal organizations best addressed through law enforcement? The Biden administration has yet to clarify its position, while the Trump campaign indicates a path of escalation.
The numbers are stark: if current trends persist, drug-related deaths could reach 200,000 annually. Advocates for military engagement argue that intercepting even a fraction of drug shipments can save countless lives. The legality of the September 2 strike hinges on interpretations of intent and the role of individuals in the water. While no formal report has been released, the intensity of partisan voices suggests a growing urgency to address the implications of these military strategies.
In 1989, Biden declared that there should be “no safe haven for narco-terrorists.” Today, that call resonates with a new intensity as the country grapples with the line between defending national interests and potential overreach. The future of America’s approach to drug trafficking and military engagement hangs in the balance.
"*" indicates required fields
