Coast Guardsmen jump onto moving narco-sub

[TGS]

NatGeo documentary on Narco subs:

[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.

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