US deploying stealth fighter jets to Caribbean
for drug fight as tensions with Venezuela
rise, sources say
Reuters,
by
Steve Holland
&
Phil Stewart
Original Article
Posted By: JoElla Bee,
9/5/2025 4:42:48 PM
WASHINGTON - The United States has ordered the deployment of 10 F-35 fighter jets to a Puerto Rico airfield to conduct operations against drug cartels, sources say, adding more firepower to intensifying U.S. military operations in the Caribbean that are stoking tension with Venezuela. The new deployment comes on top of an already bristling U.S. military presence in the southern Caribbean as President Donald Trump carries out a campaign pledge to crack down on groups he blames for funneling drugs into the United States.
Post Reply
Reminder: “WE ARE A SALON AND NOT A SALOON”
Your thoughts, comments, and ideas are always welcome here. But we ask you to please be mindful and respectful. Threatening or crude language doesn't persuade anybody and makes the conversation less enjoyable for fellow L.Dotters.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
itsonlyme 9/5/2025 5:13:33 PM (No. 1999942)
The Democrats may find a black robe political activist Knotsee judge who says:
You Cannot Do That. 30 Day Injunction. The Verge Of An Emergency Constitutional Crisis. 10 Fighter Jets In My Courtroom, NOW!
12 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
crashnburn 9/5/2025 5:23:26 PM (No. 1999943)
From what I know about the government's photo-recon capabilities* (all unclassified), they probably have high-res face on shots of all of the crew members, much better quality than the usual mug shot, and probably ran the pictures through facial recognition software to ID them,
Years ago, the SR-71 was taking one foot resolution photos from at least 85,000 feet. Think what today's technology can do, especially at much lower altitudes.
16 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
DVC 9/5/2025 5:55:55 PM (No. 1999952)
Tom Clancy wrote a novel, in it they wiped out a bunch of cartel leaders with a glide bomb. Sounds like a plan to me. And not just ONE, many.
18 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
DVC 9/5/2025 6:06:21 PM (No. 1999955)
Re #2, the issue on resolution boils down to what is called "aperture", and it applies to any lens or mirror system using light. The resolution is controlled by the size of the largest lens or mirror in the system. I demonstrated this one evening, inadvirtently while observing Jupiter with two scopes, both high quality instruments, and using the same eyepiece, swapping between scopes so ONLY the objective size was different. One was a 8" mirror scope, the other a very high quality 3 inch lens system. I could clearly see a black circular shadow of one of Jupiter's moons on the planet's clouds with the 8 inch scope, but when the eyepiece was swapped to the 3 inch instrument, the high contrast shadow was just NOT present. It was beyond the resolving power of that size of an aperture (primary lens or mirror).
What does this have to do with your comment? Aircraft cameras have a certain size primary lens, so their resolution is not controlled by 'quality' but by the lens size, and this is an immutible limit, due to physics of lens systems. The only way to get more resolution is to use a bigger lens....this is why the really serious interplanetary instruments use HUGE mirrors, many feet or tens of feet across, to get more aperture.
So, "newer cameras" don't necessarily help, but lower altitude photos DO help, and a larger camera lens will help. I tend to think that the size of the lenses used on photo recon aircraft have reached a limit long ago of what will physically fit in an aircraft. So, we may only have better shots of these folks with lower altitude photo runs.
I had this all explained to me by an optical expert at work years ago who had once worked on satellite spy camera systems which were on orbit. He told me only about the limits of the physics of optical systems, nothing classified. But it was later that I saw the real world verification in my own back yard, by accident.
24 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
volksford 9/5/2025 6:13:53 PM (No. 1999957)
That old fool Biden left us a helluva mess
17 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
EQKimball 9/5/2025 6:19:38 PM (No. 1999959)
Suppose a group of American arms smugglers were aboard a private craft on the high seas en route to supply Venezuelan rebels. Would the American government be rightly indignant if the Venezuelan navy blew them out of the water? Would we send fighters to protect them?
1 person likes this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Axeman 9/5/2025 6:19:47 PM (No. 1999960)
++++! On what #4 said.
Not just the lens size but the precision of the curve ground into the lenses. And other considerations, if it's full color, having to do with refractive index.
It IS just physics and can be easily calculated and modeled.
It doesn't matter so much the megapixels if the lens focuses to a larger dot than a pixel size.
Oh, and to Maduro...
Watch your surroundings.
7 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Phantomll 9/5/2025 7:10:05 PM (No. 1999975)
Hey Reuters - the F-35 is a jet fighter, not a "fighter jet." Actually, why not just call them "fighters"? I don't think there are any non-jet fighters around any more.
11 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
franco 9/5/2025 8:54:49 PM (No. 2000010)
Heard a radio talker late this PM say that the rules of engagement had been changed (by order of POTUS) so that if the Venezuelans attempt a repeat engagement, they will be splashed before getting close. Much more preferable to being a sitting duck having to absorb a first punch before flattening the adversary.
10 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Grateful 9/5/2025 9:09:30 PM (No. 2000018)
The USS Iwo Jima amphibious group is deployed to the Caribbean. The ship carries Marine fighter aircraft that can reach the area off the Venezuela coast in short order. Much quicker than aircraft based in Puerto Rico.
7 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
JHHolliday 9/6/2025 12:18:21 AM (No. 2000062)
No 2 is right and not just the SR and the resolution. An Air Force guy I knew who was in intelligence said their reconnaissance aircraft could count the change in your hand and this was some 20 years ago.
8 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
MickTurn 9/6/2025 12:42:59 AM (No. 2000068)
How about we just cut to the chase...Give Maduro the Kadafi Treatment .... BOOM!
6 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Strike3 9/6/2025 7:40:30 AM (No. 2000106)
Every drug-running boat that we pulverize saves thousands of American lives. If democrat activist judges are against that then I suggest they keep a close eye on their own kids, who may be exposed to that poison one day. The killing of Americans by a foreign power is an act of war no matter how it's done.
7 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Daisymay 9/6/2025 8:19:56 AM (No. 2000125)
I hope the Cruise Industry keeps their ships out of that area. Wouldn't Maduro just love to take out a Ship with 4 or 5,000 Passengers! I know I'm going to stay away from the Caribbean! The Ships can handle a few Crazies trying to Board the Ship while cruising, but I don't think it wise to get anywhere near Trump's War with Maduro!
3 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Zigrid 9/6/2025 9:08:51 AM (No. 2000157)
WE all know the democrat play book...they'll find a wokey judge to stop it for 30 days and then WE'll be able to protect our military....it's so absurd ...the democrats are digging their whole deeper and wider each day....and tampon Timmy of Minnesota...hoping for President Trump to pass on when PRESIDENT TRUMP is out on the golf course playing golf with family and friends....
1 person likes this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Venturer 9/6/2025 9:26:35 AM (No. 2000165)
When President trump starts a war on drugs he is not Pharting around.
3 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Strike3 9/6/2025 9:37:21 AM (No. 2000175)
For those who might be concerned about "forever wars" Venezuela would take less than a week and their citizens would be thanking us. Once Maduro is forced to stop paying his police force and military with drug money, he might be taken out by his own subjects.
5 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
paral04 9/6/2025 11:19:17 AM (No. 2000218)
I am glad we kept some military presence down there. We closed on airbase and two army bases along with a major navy port at Roosevelt Roads. We kept Puerto Rico as a part of the US after the Spanish American war because of its tactical location.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "JoElla Bee"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)