In general, do you support or oppose the Trump admin’s recent military actions in the waters near South America?

Support (31%) – "When you look at the major cities that Trump is trying to clean up, you might notice a high amount of drug use. When you look at our small cities, you see this creeping into them as well. Add to it economic pressure and you have the makings of a very sad state. Where are all these drugs coming from? Do we want to see our communities hurt more? Stop the drugs at their source. That's what Trump is trying to do. Time we recognize he is trying to truly make America great again for ALL its citizens - not just a few."

• "I choose this because, while I think the Executive branch have found creative ways to get around Congress in the past, and I do think more offical evidence would be nice, I think the positive impacts this would have on America far out weight those possible harms."

"Since the corrupt leadership of drug smuggling countries in South America refuse to do anything to effectively eradicate the profitable but destructive drug cartels in their countries it is up to us to protect ourselves from them. If they were consuming them in their own countries would we intervene? NO, but when they are selling/shipping them here, YES. I believe the 'proof' and 'evidence' is there but not publicized to keep the people exposing these operations alive; consider it classified and most of Congress and the media untrustworthy to receive ANY information about it; that said, it may be a good idea to find one person from each party to inform and let them say, 'Yes, there is proof that this operation is justified' and then put them in jail if they 'leak' the actual information."

Oppose (51%) – "I think that without a formal declaration of war or the seeming lack of presence of any investigatory measures into the boats or the people on them, the US should not be carrying out such strikes. There is also the issue of geopolitical repercussions considering that these strikes are taking place within international waters without any global advisory bodies consulted."

• "There is no confirmation that these ships were trafficking- drugs or otherwise. There was no investigation, no proof, nothing. They simply blew up the boats and killed everyone on board. If they can send missiles to these ships, why can't they send troops to search them? Why must the first course of action be destruction? If they were smuggling drugs to America, why not follow them and arrest them when they land? What happened to due process, to the law? This isn't "saving the country." This is government-sanctioned murder."

"Absolutely no rationale. The United States has already usurped power in Venezuela through military coups (attempted and successful) and sanctions thus creating instability and chaos in the region. In short, we have caused the very problems Trump claims he's fixing... And the method by which he's conducting these "solutions" are ill-advised, profoundly cruel, and essentially exasperating the issue. Just a waste of American tax dollars. Millions to attack Venezuela, and billions to support the genocidal regime in Israel. We can afford healthcare, housing, and education for all. This is absurd."

• "I want my drugs. My body, my choice. History will continue to repeat when the masses just consciously sit back and accept a human-based "authority" controlling and punishing those for consensual relationships and transactions."

"We aren't "at war" with the cartels. Which cartels? What legitimacy do they have as a government? What constitutes a success scenario that means we "win" this altercation? Who would surrender to us? This is political theater with (presumably) the end game of upending the current government of Venezuela - which, to be clear, is pretty illegitimate in its own right - and it's being conducted in pretty blatant violation of national and international standards. I think there's an argument to be made for addressing the drugs flowing out of South America to Europe and North America, and I think military action could be a PART of that action, and I don't even disagree that the Maduro regime needs to fall or change dramatically for regional stability. The president of one country should not unilaterally be able to do these things without even the buy-in of his own governing parties. That's dangerous. For that reason, I disapprove."

Unsure/other (18%) – "There is not enough information to form an opinion in favor or opposing the president's military actions. Speculation is the best one can go off in this situation, which is useful for considering possibilities, but not on judging said actions."

• "How could anyone who is commenting here support OR oppose these actions when there is so little we could possibly know about what’s going on behind the scenes. If it’s a right wing move, the left will have a meltdown, if it’s a left wing move, the right will have a meltdown. The outcome will determine the legitimacy of the actions. If we lived in the United States instead of the divided states because of politics (and what’s best regardless of how it might swing voters), we wouldn’t have to worry that every freakin’ issue will be a win or loss for our party, but will be what’s best for all of us."