logo
What a single day of migrant distress calls tells us about evolving smuggling tactics

What a single day of migrant distress calls tells us about evolving smuggling tactics

Yahoo28-02-2025

At 16 minutes past midnight on Feb 9, the first distress call came through.
Forty-five migrants were attempting to cross the Channel but encountered trouble and called the number given to them by a French non-profit.
This alert was one of 20 that Utopia 56 would receive over the next 24 hours. Added together, they concerned 655 people trying to make the treacherous crossing.
The actual figures, though, are likely higher. Some 60 migrants made it to the UK that day on two boats, according to Home Office data, while others may not have called for help. The following morning, the bodies of two men washed up on shore.
The Telegraph has mapped the distress calls that day to show the growing stretch of coastline from which people smugglers and migrants are setting sail in order to evade detection from increased patrols, offering a snapshot of the challenge facing French and British authorities in a high-stakes game of cat-and-mouse.
They have also adopted increasingly dangerous tactics – making the task even greater.
Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, visited Bruno Retailleau, her hardline French counterpart, on Thursday to discuss what can be done.
While she was there, Mr Retailleau announced that he was seeking a law change to allow migrants to be tackled out of boats in shallow water.
French law currently prohibits police from tackling a migrant boat once it has entered the water, leaving officers only able to launch a rescue operation.
Smugglers are using increasingly drastic tactics to avoid being stopped. This includes sending densely packed boats from multiple locations, as reflected in the distress calls, moving far beyond Calais, the narrowest point of the Channel at about 20 miles wide.
Departures now run as far north as Dunkirk near the border to Belgium – and sometimes even from Belgium – and as far south as the charming seaside town of Berck, across the Channel from Eastbourne in the UK.
Some smugglers have also moved further inland, attempting to travel from the narrow canals of northern France that flow out into the Channel.
Others continue to sneak migrants on lorries parked in Dunkirk, which then drive down to the port of Calais and load onto ferries bound for Dover.
The fast-evolving tactics mean British and French authorities must contend with more territory, which is becoming near-impossible to police in its entirety: it is not feasible to completely seal off any route.
Discoveries of new departure points and routes often occur once corpses wash up, as it was on Feb 10 when the bodies of two men were found on the sandy beaches of Berck.
Last March, a seven-year-old girl died when a boat overturned in a canal in Gravelines, just next to Dunkirk.
Feyrouz Lajili, a field coordinator in Calais for Doctors Without Borders, said: 'What we see is that more reinforcement of the border doesn't deter people from crossing, but what happens is that people take more and more risks; and more and more people die.
'There are more and more new methods to cross. Now boats are leaving even further south, where the distance can double or triple according to where you leave, which makes the crossings even more dangerous.'
This is reflected in the numbers: 2024 was the deadliest year on record for Channel crossings with at least 80 deaths, including a four-month-old infant, according to the UN's migration agency.
With deaths ticking up, some migrants believe the lorry-to-ferry option will be safer.
Aland and Shino, a couple from Iraq hoping to find refuge in the UK, have attempted this route a few times, as directed by smugglers to whom they paid €10,000 (£8,266).
Shino, 33, said: 'One time, when the driver discovered us, he said to me: 'Sorry, you didn't have luck this time; you'll have to try again.''
What they pay smugglers for is information – where to go, when to go – as well as support to break into the truck and lock the doors behind them.
They can make as many attempts as they're willing to stomach, as long as they have money to cover expenses such as food. The couple will, in the end, pay smugglers the same amount regardless of whether it takes one, or multiple, attempts to arrive in the UK – an arrangement meant as a guarantee for both parties.
Smugglers continue to improvise as French police have deployed more patrols and surveillance technology, bolstered by about £500 million in funding from the UK.
Many roads that turn off toward the coastline have police vans parked on bends. Officers have resorted to puncturing or otherwise sabotaging the boats so they cannot inflate.
Smugglers sometimes float the boat away from the shore with only a few people on board. They then rev the engine and pick up migrants swimming in the cold water to avoid being spotted by drones looking for large groups, in a method referred to as 'taxi boats'.
Boarding the boat this way is a terrifying experience for many people, some of whom sustain injuries or die in the process.
'Deaths are happening closer to shore,' said Ms Lajili, whose organisation routinely treats migrants with cuts, bruises and broken limbs from these rushed departures.
She added: 'People are dying at the moment when they are trying to leave, because there is a big moment of panic.'
It is this tactic that the new French initiative is targeting. The rule change will allow police to use their own boats for the first time, and tackle migrants out of the vessels.
With ramped-up border enforcement, smugglers have also begun overloading the boats with more migrants in hopes of getting a larger batch to the UK in one go, as they are typically paid only after migrants arrive.
Authorities have found as many as 90 people crammed onto a single vessel designed to hold far less in weight, increasing the chance of capsizing at sea.
This is reflected in government data. In 2024, almost 37,000 migrants arrived in the UK on about 690 boats – more than four times the number of people crossing the Channel in 2020, but on roughly the same number of vessels.
Adil, another Iraqi Kurd whom Aland and Shino met in France, also previously tried to go by boat, but police shot tear gas and ruptured the vessel. The violence and danger pushed him toward the lorry route, which he has tried a few times, also guided by a smuggler.
Adil spent his 28th birthday squeezed into a freezer truck full of apples. Police caught him seven hours later in Calais just before the lorry was due to load onto the ferry bound for Dover.
'When the police found me, they seemed so relieved that I was at least alive, and not dead, that they just let me go,' said Adil, whose black-and-white hoodie read 'Dream maker'.
For Adil, Aland and Shino, this has become somewhat of a daily routine – chased off a truck, occasionally taken into police custody and released, all before boarding a bus from Calais back to Dunkirk to try yet again with new directions in a phone call from the smuggler, usually in the late afternoon or early evening.
On the morning when those two bodies washed up in Berck, Aland and Shino were detained after French authorities found them sandwiched between palettes – particularly uncomfortable for Aland, 27, as she is expecting their first child.
'I'm either in prison, or on the truck,' Adil said, aboard a bus going toward Dunkirk as a mix of teenaged students, pensioners and more migrants climbed aboard. Dozens of migrants, lugging bags big and small, could be spotted waiting at bus stops along the route.
Adil is determined to get to the UK; over the past four years, he has tried three times to get to Europe, succeeding finally in January.
He changed his name and obtained a new passport to enter Turkey from Iraq – all to circumvent an entry ban as authorities had deported him after a failed attempt to journey to Europe.
This time, after arriving in Istanbul, he easily snuck overland thanks to a string of drivers who sped him from Turkey to Bulgaria, then onward to Germany.
'I got out of the car and walked around; I looked everywhere, to make sure that I really was in Germany,' Adil said.
Only then did he call his brother back in Iraq, who handed $12,000 (£9,469) in cash to a people smuggler.
Stowaways on lorries and via boats – often refugees from Sudan who risk life and limb to cross for free, as they cannot afford to pay smugglers – are also a challenge to authorities.
Malik, a 24-year-old from Sudan, fled to Libya from where he snuck onto a ship without knowing where it was headed. He ended up in Italy.
From there, he made his way to France and started figuring out how to jam himself onto a boat bound for the UK – all without paying a penny to a smuggler.
Two months ago, he managed to follow a group of people all the way to the beach and even boarded the dinghy. But just as they tried to get the engine roaring, the French police pulled them back.
Some Sudanese migrants negotiate directly with smugglers on the beach loading boats.
These days, they are more likely to agree in order to prevent a fight, which could alert police and mean yet another stalled boat. Not all smugglers do, however, and instead shoot guns to scare people away and off the boat.
Others have tried to jump onto lorries when drivers park up or slow down at roundabouts, aiming for the space between the driver's cabin and the cargo bed. This is an extremely hazardous option that has led to at least one known fatality – a 20-year-old Sudanese man – in recent weeks.
In response, smugglers are beginning to offer lower rates for Sudanese migrants compared with the thousands of dollars or euros that others pay.
Police operations go beyond the beaches to tent sites – encampments guarded by smugglers armed with guns that are periodically cleared by officers, and spring up again elsewhere. Both officers and smugglers have died in camp altercations over the years.
'Killing in the jungle is even easier than lighting a cigarette,' said Adil.
Sometimes, he, Aland and Shino return to their tents in Grand-Synthe, hidden behind bare trees off a highway strip, to rest.
Despite several failed attempts, all three remain determined to stay the course.
'I want to join the rest of my family in the UK,' said Aland, who wants to give birth and raise her child in Britain.
Ms Lajili said: 'It's simple when you say it like that…they want to join their parents, sister or brother in the UK. We advocate for safe routes for people to be able to reach their destination without having to put themselves in danger and having to die.'
Shino said: 'Even if it cost 20,000 euros for each of us, I would pay.'
Additional reporting by Halan Akoiy
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Betting Market in Disarray Over Zelensky Suit That's Also Maybe Not a Suit
Betting Market in Disarray Over Zelensky Suit That's Also Maybe Not a Suit

Newsweek

time3 hours ago

  • Newsweek

Betting Market in Disarray Over Zelensky Suit That's Also Maybe Not a Suit

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A major crypto-currency prediction market placed the odds of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wearing a suit before the end of June at just 3 percent on Sunday, with confusion reigning over the Ukrainian leader's attire days after he appeared to don a suit-style outfit for a series of meetings with world leaders. Polymarket, a platform that allows users to trade on the outcomes of real-world events using cryptocurrency, currently includes a market where users can place wagers on whether or not Zelensky will wear a suit before July. It was intended to resolve based on whether the Ukrainian leader was photographed or videotaped wearing a suit between May 22 and June 30, 2025. It attracted over $12 million in volume, but instead of resolving cleanly, it has ignited a furious debate online and among bettors, despite international news coverage and Polymarket's own descriptions seemingly confirming the appearance of a suit. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrives ahead of a formal dinner at the Paleis Huis ten Bosch ahead of the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, Tuesday, June 24, 2025. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrives ahead of a formal dinner at the Paleis Huis ten Bosch ahead of the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, Tuesday, June 24, 2025. AP Photo/Markus Schreiber Zelensky, attending the NATO summit in The Hague earlier this week, looked to choose a military-style yet formal blazer with a buttoned-up black shirt, including for his arrival to a formal dinner hosted by Dutch royalty on Tuesday. He also appeared alongside world leaders in the Netherlands in a black utility-style collared jacket, a noticeable departure from his wardrobe choices prior to his now-infamous and disastrous White House meeting in February. Zelensky chose a similar jacket for a meeting with British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in London just ahead of the NATO summit. The Polymarket chance of Zelensky wearing a suit by July jumped to 19 percent the day after the summit ended. Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, left, welcomes Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Downing Street in London, Monday, June 23, 2025. Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, left, welcomes Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Downing Street in London, Monday, June 23, 2025. AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth The Ukrainian president's outfit choices have drawn persistent attention and occasionally criticism, not least during his ill-fated trip to the Oval Office earlier this year. Zelensky's team was repeatedly told by President Donald Trump's advisers that Zelensky should opt to swap out his typical khaki or black military dress when visiting the White House, Axios reported in late February, citing two sources with direct knowledge of the topic. "He's all dressed up today," Trump told cameras as he greeted Zelensky at the White House. Zelensky arrived dressed all in black — but not in a suit. Gathered with Trump, Vice President JD Vance and other senior administration officials, Zelensky was prodded by a reporter on why he had not donned a suit. The Ukrainian leader shoots back that he will wear a suit "after this war finishes." From left, European Council President Antonio Costa, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pose for photographers prior to a meeting on the sidelines of... From left, European Council President Antonio Costa, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pose for photographers prior to a meeting on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, Tuesday, June 24, 2025. More AP Photo/Geert Vanden Wijngaert Zelensky typically wears military-style fatigues, or clothing boasting the Ukrainian trident, a nod to his role as a war-time leader showing solidarity with frontline troops, rather than a peace-time politician. There is a "political message" in Zelensky's choices, reminding the world he is a president representing a country actively at war, said Oleksandr Merezhko, the head of Ukraine's parliamentary foreign affairs committee and a member of Zelensky's Servant of the People party. "Psychologically, the fact the President doesn't wear a suit might irritate only those who don't like Ukraine," Merezhko told Newsweek. "It's about them, not about what the President wears." Zelensky's dress should depend on the situation, Merezhko said. "While the war continues, the President should somehow in his attire to emphasize that he is commander in chief," he said. "In some rare cases he might wear a suit," but one adjusted to nod to the military, Merezhko added.

How Europe got tough on migration
How Europe got tough on migration

Boston Globe

time5 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

How Europe got tough on migration

Advertisement Procaccini's party, Brothers of Italy, is now very popular in Italy. Its leader, Giorgia Meloni, is the country's prime minister. And Procaccini is a chair of the European Conservatives and Reformists group, a big force in the European Parliament. Across the political spectrum in Europe, leaders, right and left, are pushing a tougher line on migrants lacking permanent legal status. The shift has not set off the same turmoil that President Trump's immigration crackdown has stirred in the United States, but it is already being seen as entrenched and profound. In nations across the European Union, centrists are joining staunch conservatives to roll back protections in an effort to make it easier to deport migrants lacking permanent legal status. Denmark's 'zero' refugee policy has become a model other leaders want to replicate. European Union officials are working on new rules that would help to send asylum-seekers to third countries. The bloc struck a recent deal to deploy agents in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is not an EU member, to better police borders. Advertisement Some of those ideas have previously met with criticism from European Union officials. 'There is now this really broad consensus among almost all political camps ," said Martin Hofmann, an adviser at the International Center for Migration Policy Development. 'We will be tougher, we will be stricter. " The shift has steadily built with the voter backlash that helped fuel nationalist, far-right, and populist parties after Europe took in more than 1 million Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, and others seeking asylum a decade ago. Migration picked up again, though less drastically, just after the peak of the coronavirus pandemic. But since then, the number of migrants arriving has fallen. They declined about 20 percent in the first five months of 2025, after a sharp decline last year, according to preliminary data collected by Frontex, the European Union's border agency. At the same time, expulsions have slowly increased. But migration along some routes remains significant. Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the bloc's executive arm, emphasized in a recent letter to political leaders that arrivals from Libya into Greece are surging, and said that Europe must 'insist on strengthening border management.' Hofmann said that because anti-immigrant sentiments are often a proxy for wider frustration with a perceived lack of opportunities, high costs of living, and a loss of social status, a drop in migrant arrivals alone was unlikely to blunt the issue's potency. In his view, policies that seem to be working to stem immigration are likely to retain their appeal and continue to gain momentum. That includes offshoring asylum requests, which the European Commission is exploring. Advertisement Not long ago, when the British government proposed sending asylum-seekers to Rwanda, the Council of Europe's commissioner for human rights said the plan was another representation 'of an ongoing trend towards externalization of asylum and migration policy in Europe,' which he said was 'a matter of concern for the global system of protection of the rights of refugees.' Now, the policy of offshoring asylum requests has become a signature of Meloni, who has tried to hold asylum-seekers in Albania while their cases are processed. Though Italian judges have blocked her effort for now, von der Leyen called it 'an example of out-of-the-box thinking.' Now the European Union is seeking to redirect applicants to third countries while it works to streamline the deportation process for asylum-seekers whose applications have been rejected. The depth of the change was on full display last month when Mette Frederiksen, the Social Democratic, left-leaning Danish prime minister, stood alongside the staunchly conservative Meloni in Rome to support tougher migration rules. Frederiksen, whose country has relatively few asylum requests, has for several years overseen one of Europe's most restrictive policies. Others are now seeking to adopt a similar approach. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, the center-right leader of Europe's largest economy, this month called Denmark a 'role model' on migration policy. Meloni and Frederiksen presented an open letter in which they argued that the European Convention on Human Rights, the 75-year-old cornerstone for the protection of human rights in Europe, 'posed too many limitations on the states' ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.' Advertisement It was also signed by leaders from Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. Germany has now instituted checks on its land borders, a step that opponents, including some of its neighbors, have criticized as undermining the commitment of EU members to free movement within the bloc. The Polish government suspended asylum rights as migrants have massed at the border with Belarus, which is outside the European Union. Poland argued that Russian and Belarusian officials were deliberately encouraging migration in a bid to destabilize Europe. Some worry that the shift in tone around migration could harm newcomers who remain in Europe. In recent Polish presidential elections, the nationalist candidate won by running in part on a 'Poland first, Poles first' tagline. The shift in tone is striking even to those who have long been proponents of tougher measures. A decade ago, when Australia barred migrants trying to enter the country by sea from resettlement and sent asylum-seekers to Papua New Guinea, rights groups said the policy provoked human rights violations. The European Union was also critical, said Alexander Downer, an Australian former foreign minister. 'They used to give me lectures all the time about how naughty we were,' Downer said. 'Von der Leyen has embraced it now.' This article originally appeared in

How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes
How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes

Atlantic

time7 hours ago

  • Atlantic

How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes

In August 1941, the British government received a very unwelcome piece of analysis from an economist named David Miles Bensusan-Butt. A careful analysis of photographs suggested that the Royal Air Force's Bomber Command was having trouble hitting targets in Germany and France; in fact, only one in three pilots that claimed to have attacked the targets seemed to have dropped its bombs within five miles of them. The Butt report is a landmark in the history of 'bomb damage assessment,' or, as we now call it, 'battle damage assessment.' This recondite term has come back into public usage because of the dispute over the effectiveness of the June 22 American bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump said that American bombs had 'obliterated' the Iranian nuclear program. A leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency on June 24 said that the damage was minimal. Whom to believe? Have the advocates of bombing again overpromised and underdelivered? Some history is in order here, informed by a bit of personal experience. From 1991 to 1993 I ran the U.S. Air Force's study of the first Gulf War. In doing so I learned that BDA rests on three considerations: the munition used, including its accuracy; the aircraft delivering it; and the type of damage or effect created. Of these, precision is the most important. World War II saw the first use of guided bombs in combat. In September 1943, the Germans used radio-controlled glide bombs to sink the Italian battleship Roma as it sailed off to surrender to the Allies. Americans developed similar systems with some successes, though none so dramatic. In the years after the war, precision-guided weapons slowly came to predominate in modern arsenals. The United States used no fewer than 24,000 laser-guided bombs during the Vietnam War, and some 17,000 of them during the 1991 Gulf War. These weapons have improved considerably, and in the 35 years since, 'routine precision,' as some have called it, has enormously improved the ability of airplanes to hit hard, buried targets. Specially designed ordnance has also seen tremendous advances. In World War II, the British developed the six-ton Tallboy bomb to use against special targets, including the concrete submarine pens of occupied France in which German U-boats hid. The Tallboys cracked some of the concrete but did not destroy any, in part because these were 'dumb bombs' lacking precision guidance, and in part because the art of hardening warheads was in its infancy. In the first Gulf War, the United States hastily developed a deep-penetrating, bunker-busting bomb, the GBU-28, which weighed 5,000 pounds, but only two were used, to uncertain effect. In the years since, however, the U.S. and Israeli air forces, among others, have acquired hardened warheads for 2,000-pound bombs such as the BLU-109 that can hit deeply buried targets—which is why, for example, the Israelis were able to kill a lot of Hezbollah's leadership in its supposedly secure bunkers. The aircraft that deliver bombs can affect the explosives' accuracy. Bombs that home in on the reflection of a laser, for example, could become 'stupid' if a cloud passes between plane and the target, or if the laser otherwise loses its lock on the target. Bombs relying on GPS coordinates can in theory be jammed. Airplanes being shot at are usually less effective bomb droppers than those that are not, because evasive maneuvers can prevent accurate delivery. The really complicated question is that of effects. Vietnam-era guided bombs, for example, could and did drop bridges in North Vietnam. In many cases, however, Vietnamese engineers countered by building 'underwater bridges' that allowed trucks to drive across a river while axle-deep in water. The effect was inconvenience, not interdiction. Conversely, in the first Gulf War, the U.S. and its allies spent a month pounding Iraqi forces dug in along the Kuwait border, chiefly with dumb bombs delivered by 'smart aircraft' such as the F-16. In theory, the accuracy of the bombing computer on the airplane would allow it to deliver unguided ordnance with accuracy comparable to that of a laser-guided bomb. In practice, ground fire and delivery from high altitudes often caused pilots to miss. When teams began looking at Iraqi tanks in the area overrun by U.S. forces, they found that many of the tanks were, in fact, undamaged. But that was only half of the story. Iraqi tank crews were so sufficiently terrified of American air power that they stayed some distance away from their tanks, and tanks immobilized and unmaintained for a month, or bounced around by near-misses, do not work terribly well. The functional and indirect effects of the bombing, in other words, were much greater than the disappointing physical effects. Many of the critiques of bombing neglect the importance of this phenomenon. The pounding of German cities and industry during World War II, for example, did not bring war production to a halt until the last months, but the indirect and functional effects were enormous. The diversion of German resources into air-defense and revenge weapons, and the destruction of the Luftwaffe's fighter force over the Third Reich, played a very great role in paving the way to Allied victory. At a microlevel, BDA can be perplexing. In 1991, for example, a bomb hole in an Iraqi hardened-aircraft shelter told analysts only so much. Did the bomb go through the multiple layers of concrete and rock fill, or did it 'J-hook'back upward and possibly fail to explode? Was there something in the shelter when it hit, and what damage did it do? Did the Iraqis perhaps move airplanes into penetrated shelters on the theory that lightning would not strike twice? All hard (though not entirely impossible) to judge without being on the ground. To the present moment: BDA takes a long time, so the leaked DIA memo of June 24 was based on preliminary and incomplete data. The study I headed was still working on BDA a year after the war ended. Results may be quicker now, but all kinds of information need to be integrated—imagery analysis, intercepted communications, measurement and signature intelligence (e.g., subsidence of earth above a collapsed structure), and of course human intelligence, among others. Any expert (and any journalist who bothered to consult one) would know that two days was a radically inadequate time frame in which to form a considered judgment. The DIA report was, from a practical point of view, worthless. An educated guess, however, would suggest that in fact the U.S. military's judgment that the Iranian nuclear problem had suffered severe damage was correct. The American bombing was the culmination of a 12-day campaign launched by the Israelis, which hit many nuclear facilities and assassinated at least 14 nuclear scientists. The real issue is not the single American strike so much as the cumulative effect against the entire nuclear ecosystem, including machining, testing, and design facilities. The platforms delivering the munitions in the American attack had ideal conditions in which to operate—there was no Iranian air force to come up and attack the B-2s that they may not even have detected, nor was there ground fire to speak of. The planes were the most sophisticated platforms of the most sophisticated air force in the world. The bombs themselves, particularly the 14 GBU-57s, were gigantic—at 15 tons more than double the size of Tallboys—with exquisite guidance and hardened penetrating warheads. The targets were all fully understood from more than a decade of close scrutiny by Israeli and American intelligence, and probably that of other Western countries as well. In the absence of full information, cumulative expert judgment also deserves some consideration—and external experts such as David Albright, the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, have concluded that the damage was indeed massive and lasting. Israeli analysts, in and out of government, appear to agree. They are more likely to know, and more likely to be cautious in declaring success about what is, after all, an existential threat to their country. For that matter, the Iranian foreign minister concedes that 'serious damage' was done. One has to set aside the sycophantic braggadocio of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who seems to believe that one unopposed bombing raid is a military achievement on par with D-Day, or the exuberant use of the word obliteration by the president. A cooler, admittedly provisional judgment is that with all their faults, however, the president and his secretary of defense are likely a lot closer to the mark about what happened when the bombs fell than many of their hasty, and not always well-informed, critics. *Photo-illustration by Jonelle Afurong / The Atlantic. Source: Alberto Pizzoli / Sygma / Getty; MIKE NELSON / AFP / Getty; Greg Mathieson / Mai / Getty; Space Frontiers / Archive Photos / Hulton Archive / Getty; U.S. Department of Defense

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store