'Strike first, find legal justification later' will cause U.S. to lose partners: Ret. USCG Admiral

Drug Interdiction Strategy Comparison - The report contrasts Coast Guard's law enforcement approach with DoD's military strikes against drug vessels, questioning the legal justification for the latter [1][2] - The industry suggests that military strikes may hinder intelligence gathering and prosecution efforts, as killing suspects prevents obtaining information and achieving legal convictions [3] Resource Allocation and Effectiveness - The analysis indicates that the Coast Guard's methods, including precision gunfire to disable engines, are understood and accepted by partner nations [5] - The industry argues that the primary issue is not a lack of knowledge or capability, but insufficient resources dedicated to interdiction efforts [2][7] International Partnerships and Intelligence - The report highlights the risk of losing international partnerships and intelligence sources due to the "strike first, look later" approach [4][6] - The industry emphasizes the importance of cooperation with other nations and maintaining established relationships for effective drug interdiction [5]