More than 80 people killed in campaign that law-of-war experts have labeled extrajudicial murder

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly gave a verbal order to leave no survivors behind as Donald Trump’s administration launched the first of more than a dozen attacks on alleged drug-running boats that have killed more than 80 people over the last three months.

On September 2, U.S. military personnel fired a missile striking a vessel in the Caribbean that carried 11 people accused of trafficking drugs into the United States.

When two survivors emerged from the wreckage, a Special Operations commander overseeing the attack ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions to “kill everybody,” according to The Washington Post, citing officials with direct knowledge of the operation.

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    20 hours ago

    It probably was drugs - but that is not the point. It’s wildly unethical and a violation of many rules of war to simply kill people like they are doing.

    We don’t summarily execute people at the president’s say.

    • radiofreebc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Why would there be 11 people on the boat then? If it was drugs, they would want to maximize the space/weight for cargo…not people.

    • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      i doubt it was drugs. venezuela doesn’t have an expressive drug trade and i don’t remember the us offering any proof yet.

      its just terrorism for an excuse to invade venezuela. more wmds.

      and yes you do execute people without any due process when you go to war with a 3rd world country you want something from, thats pretty common.

    • Jhex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      We don’t summarily execute people at the president’s say.

      you actually do

    • Pyr@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Seriously. Even domestically they aren’t allowed to just waltz into a drugden and open fire.

      I mean, they still do but they are least have the claim that they fired in self defence. Not so much when you do it with drone strikes and missiles.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      We don’t summarily execute people at the president’s say.

      What do you think a war is? We already set the precedent of being able to declare war on non-state actors and the War Powers act gives him the authority to start shooting without Congressional approval. Which means an American President can legally, (to the US), tell the military they need to go kill cocaine farmers until Congress passes a bill to stop him. And the President can veto that bill. Meaning the legal threshold for Congress to stop the military from killing foreigners in foreign places is the same threshold as impeaching the President.

      The War Powers resolution worked as long as it did because it was actually one of many gentleman’s agreements that are now defunct.