Coast Guardsmen jump onto moving narco-sub

[TC215]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBq35ilprvg

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/07/11/us-coast-guard-seizes-mass-amount-cocaine-marijuana-submarine/1710904001/

Badass.

[vcdgrips]

Yes indeed!

[blues]

Badass but also pretty damn exposed. That could've gone a couple different ways, none of 'em particularly good.

[HCountyGuy]

Badass but also pretty damn exposed. That could've gone a couple different ways, none of 'em particularly good.

That’s my concern as we start publicizing that we’re finding and boarding these subs. How long til the cartels start sticking a security detail, even one person, in those subs with an automatic weapon trained on the hatch while under way?

[Stephanie B]

What happens when the narcos make those things fully-submersible?

[Lester Polfus]

That’s my concern as we start publicizing that we’re finding and boarding these subs. How long til the cartels start sticking a security detail, even one person, in those subs with an automatic weapon trained on the hatch while under way?

The calculus on that is wrong. Because then the cutter will sink it with a deck gun.

I have some safety concerns with the way that guy handled that, but then again we're only getting a fish eye view of a moment in time.

Our biggest concern when we did EastPac boarding wasn't really a raging gunfight. That was only going to end one way and the dopers knew it. Our concern was they would grab one of us as a hostage and try to bargain for their freedom.

[TC215]

That’s my concern as we start publicizing that we’re finding and boarding these subs. How long til the cartels start sticking a security detail, even one person, in those subs with an automatic weapon trained on the hatch while under way?

Maritime drug interdiction has been a thing for a long time. We don’t have to publicize it— they know when one of their shipments doesn’t arrive.

My bigger concern would be falling in the ocean with all that gear on.

[blues]

Maritime drug interdiction has been a thing for a long time. We don’t have to publicize it— they know when one of their shipments doesn’t arrive.

My bigger concern would be falling in the ocean with all that gear on.

We were following Colombians in the early 90's on their travels (USA / Canada) to buy aircraft and subs to broaden their distribution.
It was a fascinating time to be sure. Fuckers were ingenious with some of the novel approaches they came up with.

[BobM]

My bigger concern would be falling in the ocean with all that gear on.[/QUOTE]

I thought of that too. I assumed there’s some type of flotation device on their gear

[Lester Polfus]

Maritime drug interdiction has been a thing for a long time. We don’t have to publicize it— they know when one of their shipments doesn’t arrive.

My bigger concern would be falling in the ocean with all that gear on.

In 1996, when my body fat percentage was much lower, we found out that certain Coasties in plate carriers would sink, even with a C02 vest deployed. I had a good time sitting on my ass at the bottom of the deep end of a pool trying to get all the straps and such undone, after first letting my buoyancy vest go because it was on over everything else.

They went to a belt mounted, CO2 activated PFD, and a plate carrier that would break away with a cable release. If I remember correctly that carrier was developed after a Marine Raider team went in the water following a helo crash, but my recollection of the details of that are pretty fuzzy.

Despite all that, in 2011 ME3 Shaun Lin died during a hook and climb training exercise in the James River. His death was one of those tragedies that shouldn't have happened, because the breakaway cable on his vest didn't work, and his buoyancy vest was missing both cartridges. I disremember if he was a LEDET or a MSRT guy at the time, but it put a shockwave through the whole Coast Guard tactical community. The CG has its failings, but they are committed to not letting people die in the same stupid way twice. I was long gone when all this happened, but my understanding is water survival with all your gear on is a big deal now.

[mtnbkr]

What happens when the narcos make those things fully-submersible?

Pull a Quint and use more kegs?

Chris

[TC215]

They went to a belt mounted, CO2 activated PFD, and a plate carrier that would break away with a cable release. If I remember correctly that carrier was developed after a Marine Raider team went in the water following a helo crash, but my recollection of the details of that are pretty fuzzy.

Our SWAT vests have the same feature. I have no desire to be the one to test it out in the water.

[HCM]

That’s my concern as we start publicizing that we’re finding and boarding these subs. How long til the cartels start sticking a security detail, even one person, in those subs with an automatic weapon trained on the hatch while under way?

Not a realistic concern. These subs, and their loads are expendable. A percentage of losses is figured into the price. It’s just like big retail chains telling their people not to get into fights with shop lifters.

I believe Blues was referring to the USCG member falling in the water with negative consequences - drowning, propellers etc.

[HCM]

What happens when the narcos make those things fully-submersible?

Not worth the trouble and expense. The semi submersibles are simpler, cheaper and easier make - they expendable.

Submersibles are also more difficult to operate and the infrastructure needed to fully submerge takes away from the cargo capacity.

Back in the 90s the Colombians tried to buy a surplus Soviet sub via Russian organized crime in Miami. - it never went anywhere.

[Torsius]

In 1996, when my body fat percentage was much lower, we found out that certain Coasties in plate carriers would sink, even with a C02 vest deployed. I had a good time sitting on my ass at the bottom of the deep end of a pool trying to get all the straps and such undone, after first letting my buoyancy vest go because it was on over everything else.

They went to a belt mounted, CO2 activated PFD, and a plate carrier that would break away with a cable release. If I remember correctly that carrier was developed after a Marine Raider team went in the water following a helo crash, but my recollection of the details of that are pretty fuzzy.

Despite all that, in 2011 ME3 Shaun Lin died during a hook and climb training exercise in the James River. His death was one of those tragedies that shouldn't have happened, because the breakaway cable on his vest didn't work, and his buoyancy vest was missing both cartridges. I disremember if he was a LEDET or a MSRT guy at the time, but it put a shockwave through the whole Coast Guard tactical community. The CG has its failings, but they are committed to not letting people die in the same stupid way twice. I was long gone when all this happened, but my understanding is water survival with all your gear on is a big deal now.

My understanding was that he removed the CO2 cartridges to comply with TSA regulations on a flight to the training facility and forgot to replace them. Sobering.

[Lester Polfus]

My understanding was that he removed the CO2 cartridges to comply with TSA regulations on a flight to the training facility and forgot to replace them. Sobering.

I hadn't heard that angle, but it certainly sounds like the sort of thing that could happen. I was long gone by the time this happened, so all my info is second or third hand.

I've known too many people who have died from stuff like that.

[Drang]

My understanding was that he removed the CO2 cartridges to comply with TSA regulations on a flight to the training facility and forgot to replace them. Sobering.

If you check, you'll see that CO2 cartridges are allowed in flotation devices.

EDIT to add: Which does not preclude the possibility that cartridges were removed due to bad info.

[Torsius]

I got my info third hand, but it certainly led to some checks of PFDs in my AO.

[blues]

Not worth the trouble and expense. The semi submersibles are simpler, cheaper and easier make - they expendable.

Submersibles are also more difficult to operate and the infrastructure needed to fully submerge takes away from the cargo capacity.

Back in the 90s the Colombians tried to buy a surplus Soviet sub via Russian organized crime in Miami. - it never went anywhere.

Oh, it was a hoot working some of those cases. And the "stingers" as well. (Red mercury anyone?)

[GardoneVT]

Not a realistic concern. These subs, and their loads are expendable. A percentage of losses is figured into the price. It’s just like big retail chains telling their people not to get into fights with shop lifters.

I believe Blues was referring to the USCG member falling in the water with negative consequences - drowning, propellers etc.

Was gonna say, the street value of the cargo is so high the sub pays for itself after the first voyage. Getting into a gunfight is a bad business decision versus just walking away from the sub (which would be sunk by the cutter anyways). Why risk extra LE heat and attention?

[TGS]

NatGeo documentary on Narco subs:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSSLowRnsl4

[blues]

^^^

Generally speaking, the cartels see the loss of product or equipment as part of the cost of doing business. They are less enthusiastic about losing the people (infrastructure) they have in place to make an operation go smoothly, especially stateside.

That said, what is "generally" true is not always true and many folks that I crossed paths with via arrests, rips, interrogations etc were sent to early graves for any of a number of reasons.

[SeriousStudent]

.....

They went to a belt mounted, CO2 activated PFD, and a plate carrier that would break away with a cable release. If I remember correctly that carrier was developed after a Marine Raider team went in the water following a helo crash, but my recollection of the details of that are pretty fuzzy.

.......

Yes, we lost some Recon bubba's who could not get out of their gear. Eagle developed the maritime CIRAS as a result. :(

[TGS]

Yes, we lost some Recon bubba's who could not get out of their gear. Eagle developed the maritime CIRAS as a result. :(


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTj-Gab3JIw

Rough day for that unit.

[txdpd]

My bigger concern would be falling in the ocean with all that gear on.

I thought of that too. I assumed there’s some type of flotation device on their gear[/QUOTE]

Just falling into the ocean is one thing. Falling and getting entangled on the vessel and keel hauled, those are rough enough seas that he could get crushed to death by the hull pitching up and down.

[Gray01]

the cutter will sink it with a deck gun.



Why is that not the first tactic that is used? It seems that the consensus is that the business owners see them as a write-off. If/since that is the case, why not smoke em if you got em?

[mtnbkr]

Why is that not the first tactic that is used? It seems that the consensus is that the business owners see them as a write-off. If/since that is the case, why not smoke em if you got em?

Intel.

Chris

[blues]

Why is that not the first tactic that is used? It seems that the consensus is that the business owners see them as a write-off. If/since that is the case, why not smoke em if you got em?

It's an LE operation, not a military op. Certainly you know that the rules of engagement and the continuum of force applied are different in each instance.

If your remark is simply rhetorical or intended as sarcasm, you should make it plainer. Some of your comments, despite your intended erudition, leave one wondering.

[Wake27]

It's an LE operation, not a military op. Certainly you know that the rules of engagement and the continuum of force applied are different in each instance.

If your remark is simply rhetorical or intended as sarcasm, you should make it plainer. Some of your comments, despite your intended erudition, leave one wondering.

Should it be though? Was the “war” on drugs ever brought to a close? I know I got some people fired up in the past for a similar topic, but this one seems to have even more credibility for at least a discussion. These are [presumably] foreign nationals and I assume the USCG had decent reason to believe they were smuggling illegal substances into the country. I’m curious what their ROE/EOF is and if they’re able to use some type of less than lethal/signaling method to remove any doubt that they’re attempting to stop the sub. If compliance isn’t immediate, would it be so bad if lethal force was authorized? What’s the alternative? What’s honestly going to happen to the guys in the sub?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wake27]

Intel.

Chris

I don’t know, I’ve seen some of the stuff cartels do and it would make me extremely surprised if any of these guys rolled over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blues]

Should it be though? Was the “war” on drugs ever brought to a close?

I will speak from my many years of experience as a participant in the war on drugs both domestically and internationally. The "war" is just a term in this regard, it does not follow the ROE of a military op.

Even when I flew on U.S. Customs Black Hawks over international waters accompanied by Bahamian authorities so that we could interdict in the U.S., Bahamas or int'l waters, weapons were not loosed unless engaged. Now, the Bahamians had a little more leeway in the aggression they might use on a Bahamian on their native soil, but it was not carte blanche.

We did not shoot down aircraft suspected or known to be carrying a load of narcotics into the U.S. from abroad. We did not blow ships out of the water. There were times that vessels, (fast boats and such), were incapacitated by firing at the engines and rendering them incapable of escape or ramming our vessels.

In this particular capacity the USCG is operating a police action as opposed to a military op. As in such ops, if there is peril to life and limb then the appropriate force can be brought to bear. If there were reason to believe that the vessel presented a grave danger to the U.S. (such as it contained military grade weapons and arms) then the matter could cross from a police action to a military one as the USCG has authority in both arenas.

[blues]

I don’t know, I’ve seen some of the stuff cartels do and it would make me extremely surprised if any of these guys rolled over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've interrogated tons of these guys. Plenty of them roll over and bigger national and international cases are built upon such foundations.

Now, if you want to ask what good it does or has done, that's a different matter entirely. I can tell you that I've arrested hundreds, seized millions of dollars and thousands of kilos...but it's still like shoveling an incoming tide.

[mtnbkr]

I don’t know, I’ve seen some of the stuff cartels do and it would make me extremely surprised if any of these guys rolled over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would there not be materials in the boat that could further investigations? Could the drugs themselves not indicate source via chemical analysis?

I have no experience in this arena, but it seems to me there would be something of value from an investigative perspective.

Chris

[Wake27]

I will speak from my many years of experience as a participant in the war on drugs both domestically and internationally. The "war" is just a term in this regard, it does not follow the ROE of a military op.

Even when I flew on U.S. Customs Black Hawks over international waters accompanied by Bahamian authorities so that we could interdict in the U.S., Bahamas or int'l waters, weapons were not loosed unless engaged. Now, the Bahamians had a little more leeway in the aggression they might use on a Bahamian on their native soil, but it was not carte blanche.

We did not shoot down aircraft suspected or known to be carrying a load of narcotics into the U.S. from abroad. We did not blow ships out of the water. There were times that vessels, (fast boats and such), were incapacitated by firing at the engines and rendering them incapable of escape or ramming our vessels.

In this particular capacity the USCG is operating a police action as opposed to a military op. As in such ops, if there is peril to life and limb then the appropriate force can be brought to bear. If there were reason to believe that the vessel presented a grave danger to the U.S. (such as it contained military grade weapons and arms) then the matter could cross from a police action to a military one as the USCG has authority in both arenas.

Understood on the war being nothing more than a political term, but it still gets at my point as to whether it should be. I'm not just advocating that we start mowing down anyone other than Americans, but what is really the difference between them bringing in a shit ton of cocaine vs smuggling weapons? Sure, people ultimately choose to use drugs and sometimes that results in an OD whereas they typically don't choose to get shot or blown up from cartels or terrorists. But are there differences aside from that? Again, it seems to me that these are foreigners that are violating US national sovereignty AND smuggling in products that will not only harm Americans, but will also fund some of the worst organizations currently in existence. Would it be so bad to loosen the restrictions of what constitutes an LE vs MIL operation and therefore, engagement criteria? I don't know because I have no personal experience in any of these things, so these are all legitimate questions.


I've interrogated tons of these guys. Plenty of them roll over and bigger national and international cases are built upon such foundations.

Now, if you want to ask what good it does or has done, that's a different matter entirely. I can tell you that I've seized millions of dollars and thousands of kilos...but it's still like shoveling an incoming tide.

Interesting, I wouldn't have guessed. What happens to them though, whether they talk or not? Do we deport them or imprison them? How much does that cost? If they talked, how does that change the consequences and the cost that is incurred with those? What is really making sure that these same guys don't do this shit again in a few months, and take some lessons learned back to the organization so that they're more effective? One step further - what is making sure that the consequences are severe enough that there is some type of deterrent against others attempting the same?

[blues]

Interesting, I wouldn't have guessed. What happens to them though, whether they talk or not? Do we deport them or imprison them? How much does that cost? If they talked, to how does that change the consequences and the cost that is incurred with those? What is really making sure that these same guys don't do this shit again in a few months, and take some lessons learned back to the organization so that they're more effective? One step further - what is making sure that the consequences are severe enough that there is some type of deterrent against others attempting the same?

I'm not going to get into how the effort "should" be waged because not only am I retired from the work, but even when I wasn't nobody in D.C. asked for my opinion. You had your mission and you did your best to make the best cases you could within the parameters the law allowed. At least that's how my agency operated, including my years in task forces with other federal, state and local agencies.

As to the questions in your quote above...everyone that I arrested during the course of an investigation was put through the legal system. Most received lengthy sentences of several years to several decades. The only folks turned over to Border Patrol were folks who were already wanted within their system at the time, or those we had no reason to put through the criminal justice system.

Some become government informants and help us with complex international investigations. Others do their time and upon completion are deported. Some flee, if they make bond, and end up returning to their country where they continue their criminal activity or meet an untimely end. Occasionally we would run into someone known to us from prior investigations. But that wasn't the norm.

Nobody that got put through the legal system, (federally), during my years, got a slap on the wrist. I never presented a case that didn't end in a conviction.

What difference has it made? That's a legitimate question for which I have different answers on different days.

[Wake27]

I'm not going to get into how the effort "should" be waged because not only am I retired from the work, but even when I wasn't nobody in D.C. asked for my opinion. You had your mission and you did your best to make the best cases you could within the parameters the law allowed. At least that's how my agency operated, including my years in task forces with other federal, state and local agencies.

As to the questions in your quote above...everyone that I arrested during the course of an investigation was put through the legal system. Most received lengthy sentences of several years to several decades. The only folks turned over to Border Patrol were folks who were already wanted within their system at the time, or those we had no reason to put through the criminal justice system.

Some become government informants and help us with complex international investigations. Others do their time and upon completion are deported. Some flee, if they make bond, and end up returning to their country where they continue their criminal activity or meet an untimely end. Occasionally we would run into someone known to us from prior investigations. But that wasn't the norm.

Nobody that got put through the legal system, (federally), during my years, got a slap on the wrist. I never presented a case that didn't end in a conviction.

What difference has it made? That's a legitimate question for which I have different answers on different days.

Thanks for your input. If I’m reading it right, you’re saying best case (as far as “justice” is concerned), is those guys get locked up in the federal system for many years and then deported once time has been served. Apparently that costs us at least $36k a year, per inmate, plus whatever it costs to actually deport them. Obviously this is far more than just a numbers thing, but numbers alone, that seems like a decent amount of money that is completely wasted. Also, depending on their quality of life working for whatever cartel, I wonder how our federal prisons compare? Maybe it’s not that bad to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gray01]

It's an LE operation, not a military op. Certainly you know that the rules of engagement and the continuum of force applied are different in each instance.

If your remark is simply rhetorical or intended as sarcasm, you should make it plainer. Some of your comments, despite your intended erudition, leave one wondering.

Not sarcasm; maybe cynicism, and also an aside. I know that these operations are prosecuted as LE, and hence any cynicism, since the same tactics for decades have accomplished nothing but more of the same. I know that the men (LE personnel) perform honorably and energetically; nonetheless people have spent entire careers, some duplicated by sons, and accomplishing the same ends. And yes, I understand that the U.S. (at whatever level, either societal or political) lacks the will to prosecute this as a military operation with the intent of destruction (not arrest and confiscation) of the involved people and/or state(s).

The secondary thought (the "aside") was the physical bravery of those in the video, and the absurdity of continuing to put men in physical jeopardy by using such tactics.

And you made me smile with the "intended erudition" comment. I simply write in the same fashion that I speak; those who know me best would simply call me boring, not erudite.

[HCM]

I've interrogated tons of these guys. Plenty of them roll over and bigger national and international cases are built upon such foundations.

Now, if you want to ask what good it does or has done, that's a different matter entirely. I can tell you that I've arrested hundreds, seized millions of dollars and thousands of kilos...but it's still like shoveling an incoming tide.

Time, is a flat circle.


https://youtu.be/LSXKyHM133c

[Drang]

I've had some involvement on the periphery of military support to the war on drugs, and even when door kickers are involved (i.e., Rangers, Long Range Surveillance units) they are doing patrolling and surveillance, but they are only armed in extreme circumstances, where it is judged to be necessary for self-defense. (One operation involved national forest and BLM lands in Oregon, some vacationing congress critter ran across -- but did not trip -- booby traps around acres of marijuana. I Corps supplied aviation and intel assets in support. Later we were supporting JTF 6 with surveillance elsewhere.)

Granted these were domestic operations, posse comitatus and all that.

I suppose it's possible that the navy could be given orders to sink on sight on the high seas, if the CINC got froggy enough and wanted to declare that narco-terrorists are the legal equivalent of pirates, but even Trump doesn't want to open that can of worms.

[TGS]

I suppose it's possible that the navy could be given orders to sink on sight on the high seas, if the CINC got froggy enough and wanted to declare that narco-terrorists are the legal equivalent of pirates, but even Trump doesn't want to open that can of worms.

Hah! We don't even treat pirates like pirates anymore.

We take their weapons, give them water and halal meals, then set them free.

[Drang]

Hah! We don't even treat pirates like pirates anymore.

We take their weapons, give them water and halal meals, then set them free.
Not always, but I take your point.
40115
40117

[TGS]

That was an in-extremis hostage rescue, not just piracy (the act of unlawfully seizing a vessel) in itself. They weren't shot because they were pirates.

It's the policy of CTF-150/151, Ocean Shield, and Atalanta to catch and release armed persons suspected of piracy (i.e. roaming the high seas with weapons, pursuing vessels when evasive action is taken, more people than usual for a boat of its size, and not hauling any cargo or fishing). Those who are caught in the act of attempting to seize a vessel are arrested and sent to Kenya where they are almost always released due to non-prosecution.

The system is incredibly weak; no western nation treats piracy on the high seas as punishable by death anymore.

[KellyinAvon]

Totally bad ass? Yes. Were there better courses of action that could've been taken? Yes. Could you say that about every totally bad ass action in the history of forever? Yes. Did the Union Navy call? Yes. Do they want their ironclad back? Yes.

[Drang]

It's the policy of CTF-150/151, Ocean Shield, and Atalanta to catch and release armed persons suspected of piracy (i.e. roaming the high seas with weapons, pursuing vessels when evasive action is taken, more people than usual for a boat of its size, and not hauling any cargo or fishing). Those who are caught in the act of attempting to seize a vessel are arrested and sent to Kenya where they are almost always released due to non-prosecution.

I can't even begin to tell you how sad that makes me. In the 19th Century and before, the consensus was that pirates were the enemies of all civilization; I see no reason to believe otherwise today.

[Cypher]

Should it be though? Was the “war” on drugs ever brought to a close? I know I got some people fired up in the past for a similar topic, but this one seems to have even more credibility for at least a discussion. These are [presumably] foreign nationals and I assume the USCG had decent reason to believe they were smuggling illegal substances into the country. I’m curious what their ROE/EOF is and if they’re able to use some type of less than lethal/signaling method to remove any doubt that they’re attempting to stop the sub. If compliance isn’t immediate, would it be so bad if lethal force was authorized? What’s the alternative? What’s honestly going to happen to the guys in the sub?

https://i.postimg.cc/3rq0KY3d/20190714-080219.jpg (https://postimg.cc/bdQwgXDh)