UPDATE: New reports confirm a shocking verbal order from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to “kill everyone” during a military strike on a suspected drug trafficking boat on September 2, 2023, in the Caribbean Sea. This has ignited a firestorm of controversy and renewed scrutiny of Hegseth’s previous remarks about military engagement rules.
Hegseth’s statements, made to over 800 top military officers during a speech at Quantico, Virginia, have resurfaced in light of the allegations. He criticized what he called “stupid rules of engagement,” declaring, “We fight to win… no more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement.” These comments came just weeks before the alleged order to eliminate survivors of a naval strike, raising serious legal and ethical questions.
According to the Washington Post, U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Frank Bradley, in charge of the Joint Operational Command, reportedly followed Hegseth’s directive to eliminate two survivors from the initial strike. Legal experts warn that such orders could constitute a war crime, citing the lack of a legitimate war and the absence of an imminent threat to the U.S.
Former military lawyer Todd Huntley stated that Hegseth’s directive, which implied no quarter would be given, is a clear violation of armed conflict laws. He emphasized that killing the occupants of the drug boats, especially in the absence of a declared war, could amount to “murder.”
This situation is further complicated by the Pentagon’s claims of ongoing operations against “designated terrorist organizations,” justifying military actions. However, with at least 80 people reportedly killed in these strikes, including 22 additional operations since the September incident, lawmakers are raising alarms on both sides of the aisle about the legality and morality of these actions.
Huntley highlighted that the perceived legitimacy of the strikes is critically undermined by the absence of a declared state of war. He noted that the ongoing military actions, including the controversial September 2 strike, have turned into a contentious debate about the rules governing armed conflict.
As this situation unfolds, the implications of Hegseth’s orders and the subsequent military actions could have far-reaching effects on U.S. military policy and international legal standards. Observers are closely monitoring responses from Congress and the Pentagon, as calls for accountability grow louder.
Stay tuned for further developments as this urgent story continues to evolve.
