What are the rules of engagement for the drug boat strikes?

Rules of engagement for military operations are classified. But they are becoming more and more important in relation to the cntinuing strikes on suspected drug boats that are still, amazingly, setting off from Venezuela and heading across the Caribbean Sea. You do wonder how it is that these alleged drug traffickers are not being deterred from leaving the safety of the shore. They can see the mighty aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R Ford, on the horizon, and yet they still risk the trip across the water. They must be getting a big fat wad of money to risk their lives against the massive US Navy firepower waiting for them. Everyone from the top admiral to the US Navy Seal operators carrying out the drone hits is subject to the same rules of engagement. The only sentence in the list of rules I know will be there authorises the military to use force for self-defence. So if they get fired on by the drug traffickers they can answer back. But as far as I know, there has beden no exchange of fire which would justify the self-defence protocol. So the rest of the rules of engagement must specify that for this mission, codenamed Operation Southern Spear, the US Navy and associated units are authorised to target any boat suspected, based on intelligence, to be carrying drugs. That has to be part of the rules, because more than 20 boats have been hit. It must also presumably say that authorisation is given to target whoever is in the boats. But it won't say, "ensure there are no survivors". You couldn't put that in any rules of engagement. The lawyers would go spare. Still so many unanswered questions about this second strike on a drug boat on September 2 which killed two "survivors".