'Hegseth did exactly what…': Navy admiral tells lawmakers there was no ‘kill them all’ order

Key Concepts

Naroterrorists: Individuals involved in drug trafficking who are also designated as terrorists.
Lawful and Needful Strikes: Military actions deemed to be in accordance with legal principles and necessary for achieving objectives.
Laws of Military Warfare/Laws of War: International rules governing the conduct of armed conflict.
Non-combatants: Individuals not participating in hostilities, who are protected under the laws of war.
Distressed or Shipwrecked: Individuals in a state of peril at sea, requiring assistance under maritime law and the laws of armed conflict.
Operation Order: A formal directive outlining the plan and execution of military operations.
Kill All Order/No Quarter Order: A directive to show no mercy and kill all enemy combatants, which can be a violation of the laws of war.

Strikes on September 2nd and Subsequent Operations

This summary details the congressional briefings concerning military strikes conducted on September 2nd, targeting alleged naroterrorist drug boats in the Caribbean. The briefings, featuring Admiral Frank Kendall Bradley and General Kaine, aimed to address concerns raised by a Washington Post report and subsequent controversy regarding the legality and justification of these operations.

Justification for the Strikes

Target Identification: The primary targets were described as "naroterrorists" engaged in trafficking drugs destined for the United States. These drugs are attributed to causing significant harm, including the deaths of "thousands of our citizens and millions of Americans."
Lawfulness and Necessity: The strikes on September 2nd, comprising four distinct actions, were characterized by Senator Tom Cotton as "righteous strikes," "entirely lawful and needful," and consistent with expected military commander actions.
Presidential Mandate: The President has reportedly declared this a state of "war" regarding actions with Venezuela, indicating a broader strategic shift to combat drug cartels. The rationale is that these cartels have been "waging war against the American people for decades," and the US is now "finally simply joining it."

The Second Strike and Survivor Incident

Video Evidence: A "stark video" of the second strike was presented, which some lawmakers found disturbing. The video reportedly showed two survivors attempting to right a drug-laden boat.
Admiral Bradley's Account: Admiral Bradley asserted that he received "no such order to give no quarter or to kill them all." He stated that the survivors were seen trying to "flip a boat loaded with drugs bound for the United States back over so they could stay in the fight and potentially given the all the contacts we heard of other naroterist boats in the area coming to their aid to recover their cargo and recover those narotists."
Comparison to Other Operations: The action was compared to striking a boat off the Somali or Yemeni coast that still contained terrorists or explosives, implying a need for follow-on strikes to neutralize the threat.
Congressional Disagreement: While some, like Senator Cotton, found the actions justified and "gratifying," Congressman Heim expressed that, based on the video, the survivors were in no condition to conduct further operations. This highlights a divergence in interpretation of the situation and the intent of the survivors.

Legal Scrutiny and JAG Opinion

Violation Concerns: Legal experts have suggested that a strike targeting survivors could constitute a violation of the laws of military warfare.
Military JAG Confirmation: It was confirmed that a military Judge Advocate General (JAG) stated that the second and follow-on strikes were "all lawful."
Witnesses and Oversight: The operations were witnessed by "hundreds of uniformed and civilian personnel at the Pentagon, at Fort Bragg, at other installations," including "dozens of lawyers." This extensive oversight is presented as evidence of adherence to legal standards.
No Change in Guidance: There has been "no change in the guidance or the order that the secretary has given to our troopers" since the initial strikes.

Differentiating Treatment of Survivors

Subsequent Strike Example: An example was provided of a subsequent strike where survivors were "shipwrecked and distressed and not trying to continue on their mission." In this instance, they were treated as "non-combatants" and "picked up by US forces," demonstrating adherence to the laws of war.
Distinction in Intent: The key distinction drawn between the September 2nd incident and the later one is the survivors' actions. In the former, they were attempting to "continue on their mission," whereas in the latter, they were "distressed or shipwrecked."

Future Operations and Scope

Continuation of Strikes: There is a strong expectation and hope that these strikes will continue.
Land Operations: The possibility of strikes on land was discussed, with support expressed if "necessary to stop the flow of drugs into the United States and protect our communities and our children." The sentiment is to "take force to these cartels wherever they are."
Congressional Involvement: While acknowledging the President's declaration of war, the view was expressed that Congress should not "sharpshoot every single tactical decision." However, the initial briefing was deemed necessary due to "lies that were in the Washington Post."

Transparency and Media Release

Addressing Controversy: The briefings were intended to "clear the air" regarding the controversy stemming from the Washington Post report.
Recommendation for Immediate Release: It was advised that information similar to what was presented in the briefings should be immediately released to the public to prevent prolonged controversy.
Video Release: The release of the full video was left to the Department of Defense, with the assertion that there was "nothing in there that concerned me." The precedent of releasing videos of drone and helicopter strikes on terrorist groups was cited, suggesting no novelty in releasing such footage from naval operations.

Operational Details and Timing

Number of Strikes: There were four strikes on September 2nd.
Timing of Strikes: The strikes were "several minutes apart." Obscurants like smoke from the first strike and cloud cover were present, making precise timing difficult to ascertain.

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

The briefings aimed to reassure lawmakers that the strikes on September 2nd were lawful, necessary, and conducted under clear legal authority. Admiral Bradley and General Kaine maintained that no "kill all" order was issued and that the military consistently adheres to the laws of war, as evidenced by the treatment of shipwrecked individuals in a subsequent operation. The core argument is that the US is responding to a long-standing "war" waged by drug cartels against American citizens, and these strikes are a necessary component of that response. The controversy appears to stem from differing interpretations of the video evidence and the intent of the survivors of the second strike. The consensus among some lawmakers is that the operations are justified and should continue, with a call for greater transparency to preempt public misunderstanding.