US Military Conducts Deadly Strike on Boat Suspected of Carrying Narcotics in Pacific
In a latest development, the Pentagon announced Thursday that it has carried out another lethal strike on a boat suspected of carrying illicit narcotics, killing four men in international waters in the eastern Pacific. The operation was conducted at the direction of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and is part of an ongoing campaign to target narco-trafficking routes.
The US southern command, based in Florida, released footage of the strike, which showed a large explosion suddenly engulfing a small boat as it sailed through the water, followed by images of the vessel on fire and dark smoke billowing into the air. The strike is the 22nd carried out by the US military against boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean since September, when the campaign began.
The Pentagon has come under scrutiny over the legality of the strikes, with lawmakers questioning whether they are lawful under international law. In a report released earlier this week, it was found that Defense Secretary Hegseth had verbally directed the military to "kill them all", raising concerns about the rule of law. Despite this, an impeachment effort against Hegseth is unlikely to succeed.
The latest strike has sparked controversy over whether those on board were legitimate combatants or simply desperate survivors clinging to wreckage. US lawmakers, including Senator Jim Himes and Senator Tom Cotton, have differing views on the matter. While some argue that the footage shows individuals actively engaged in combat activities, others believe it is clear that the two survivors were in no condition to engage in such activities.
Experts, however, overwhelmingly reject the Pentagon's framing of the situation as an "armed conflict". According to Rebecca Ingber, a professor at Cardozo law school and former state department legal adviser, killing someone who has been shipwrecked is "manifestly unlawful".
In a latest development, the Pentagon announced Thursday that it has carried out another lethal strike on a boat suspected of carrying illicit narcotics, killing four men in international waters in the eastern Pacific. The operation was conducted at the direction of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and is part of an ongoing campaign to target narco-trafficking routes.
The US southern command, based in Florida, released footage of the strike, which showed a large explosion suddenly engulfing a small boat as it sailed through the water, followed by images of the vessel on fire and dark smoke billowing into the air. The strike is the 22nd carried out by the US military against boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean since September, when the campaign began.
The Pentagon has come under scrutiny over the legality of the strikes, with lawmakers questioning whether they are lawful under international law. In a report released earlier this week, it was found that Defense Secretary Hegseth had verbally directed the military to "kill them all", raising concerns about the rule of law. Despite this, an impeachment effort against Hegseth is unlikely to succeed.
The latest strike has sparked controversy over whether those on board were legitimate combatants or simply desperate survivors clinging to wreckage. US lawmakers, including Senator Jim Himes and Senator Tom Cotton, have differing views on the matter. While some argue that the footage shows individuals actively engaged in combat activities, others believe it is clear that the two survivors were in no condition to engage in such activities.
Experts, however, overwhelmingly reject the Pentagon's framing of the situation as an "armed conflict". According to Rebecca Ingber, a professor at Cardozo law school and former state department legal adviser, killing someone who has been shipwrecked is "manifestly unlawful".
I just read about the US military striking down a boat in the Pacific suspected of carrying narcotics. Four guys lost their lives in that strike... 
it's sad. I don't really understand all the rules around this stuff, but from what I see, it looks like they might've killed people who were just trying to survive after their boat sank. That doesn't seem right to me... 
But if there was no one actively fighting back, shouldn't they be okay? 
I don't know, it all seems kinda grey to me... 
they're just killin people left & right in the pacific without even tryin to figure out if they're doin it legit or not. and now ppl are talkin about impeachin defense sec Pete Hegseth over him sayin 'kill them all' lol like what's next? 
but seriously, who cares about laws when you got politicians just lookin for clicks & votes 
. it makes me wonder if we're just perpetuating this cycle of violence without ever really stopping to think about the human cost 
.
I mean, what if those guys were just trying to make a living at sea and got caught up in something they didn't know anything about? 4 lives lost over a boat full of people who might be innocent. It's like our military is playing a game of "good guy/bad guy" where the stakes are way too high. 
. And what about all these allegations of Defense Secretary Hegseth saying "kill them all"? If that did happen, that's straight-up war crimes, in my book 
. The Pentagon's always trying to spin things their way, but we need some real proof here before I believe it 
. Sources, anyone?
. Like we should be working together as humans, not trying to kill each other over some narcotics 
.
The US military just carried out another one of these lethal strikes without considering the consequences? I mean, we're talking about human lives here! 
. The fact that lawmakers can't agree on what constitutes an "armed conflict" is terrifying. And we're still debating whether it's lawful under international law? How can we trust our leaders to make decisions that affect our lives when they can't even get basic facts right? 
. We need people who understand the laws and consequences of these actions to sound the alarm before it's too late! 
honestly, if it's a question of whether those survivors were 'legitimate combatants', isn't it like saying if you're drowning and clinging to a piece of wood, do you have to put up a fight against the boat that's sinking or just hold on for dear life? 
.
It's like they're just throwing out their guns and firing without thinking. Four people died and it's all because of a boat carrying some stuff that might be bad for us? 
And what's with the Pentagon saying they're fighting an "armed conflict"? That doesn't sound right to me... seems like a bunch of people just got killed by mistake 
i mean i get that they're trying to target narco-trafficking routes but can't they do it in a way that doesn't involve taking innocent lives? 
The US military's drone strike on that boat in Pacific waters raises serious questions about their definition of 'narcotics' 
Those guys are either super lucky or they were really trying to stay alive. Who decides who gets killed in a 'strike' against narco-trafficking? 
.