Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

Vessel type and Starlink feasibility

• Commenters stress these are semi‑submersible surface craft, not true submarines: mostly underwater but operating at/near the surface.
• Starlink (and similar high‑frequency satcom) does not work underwater; the craft must surface or keep the antenna above water.
• Some complain media calling them “submarines” is misleading; “semi‑submersible” or “low‑profile vessel” is seen as more accurate.

Why use Starlink at all? Autonomy vs control

• One side argues Starlink is a poor choice: it makes the craft highly discoverable, and a GPS‑guided, mostly autonomous boat with minimal comms should be enough.
• Others say high‑value, illegal cargo justifies real‑time telemetry and two‑way control:
  • Monitor progress, troubleshoot failures, change routes, and confirm delivery.
  • Reduce automation complexity by keeping a human “pilot in the loop.”
  • Telemetry helps improve designs instead of a simple “arrived/didn’t arrive” signal.
• Alternatives debated:
  • Low‑bandwidth radio bursts or GSM near shore to send minimal position data.
  • Following a visible surface “beacon” vessel with no active comms on the sub.
  • Concern that recurring RF patterns would still be trackable over time.

Detection, tracking, and law‑enforcement tactics

• Some think Starlink terminals at sea are easy to flag by correlating their paths with known ship tracks; speculation that Starlink data might already feed enforcement.
• Questions arise why Colombia seized an apparently empty craft rather than tracking it to higher‑value targets; replies suggest it might have been a test run, or authorities feared losing it or being seen via onboard cameras.
• Technical side notes:
  • Actuated dishes at sea have safety/operational caveats.
  • Solar‑electric “narco subs” are proposed but largely dismissed as underpowered, too visible, and impractical for ocean conditions.

Drug trade geography and cartel economics

• Discussion that Colombia remains the dominant cocaine producer, but much of the profit and power has shifted to Mexican cartels controlling smuggling and distribution.
• South America (including Ecuador and Peru) is still described as the main production hub and origin of sea routes.
• Cartels are said to be diversifying into other rackets (gold, extortion, human trafficking), with debate over how much legalization of drugs would actually reduce their power.

Drug policy: legalization, regulation, and harm reduction

• Many argue the “war on drugs” has failed: it fuels violence, corruption, unsafe supply (e.g., fentanyl), and mass incarceration.
• Pro‑legalization/decriminalization points:
  • Legal status enables quality control, dosing, labeling, age limits, and medical support.
  • Focus should shift to treatment and addressing social drivers of addiction.
  • Examples like cannabis and some European models are cited as showing that liberalization plus support can reduce harms.
• Skeptical/partial‑reform views:
  • Worry that wider legal availability (especially with marketing) could create new cohorts of hard‑drug users who currently abstain due to access or legal risk.
  • Suggest decriminalizing possession and emphasizing harm reduction while keeping distribution of hard drugs tightly controlled or illegal.
  • Emphasize the opioid epidemic as evidence that under‑regulated legal supply can also be disastrous.
• Ongoing disagreement over whether “legalization of all drugs under regulation” is realistic and humane, or an ideologically driven overcorrection.

Miscellaneous themes

• Some see cartels as de‑facto parallel governments or corporations, with substantial manufacturing and engineering capacity (e.g., building these vessels).
• There is curiosity and dark humor about what it’s like to be an engineer for a cartel and speculation about future “narco infrastructure” (private fiber, custom satellites, etc.).