SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Pete Hegseth is under increasing fire for a double-tap strike, first reported by The Intercept in early September, in which the U.S. military killed two survivors of the Trump administration’s initial boat strike in the Caribbean on September 2.

The Washington Post recently reported that Hegseth personally ordered the follow-up attack, giving a spoken order “to kill everybody.” Multiple military legal experts, lawmakers, and now confidential sources within the government who spoke with The Intercept say Hegseth’s actions could result in the entire chain of command being investigated for a war crime or outright murder.

“Those directly involved in the strike could be charged with murder under the UCMJ or federal law,” said Todd Huntley, a former Staff Judge Advocate who served as a legal adviser on Joint Special Operations task forces conducting drone strikes in Afghanistan and elsewhere, using shorthand for the Uniform Code of Military Justice. “This is about as clear of a case being patently illegal that subordinates would probably not be able to successfully use a following-orders defense.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 202 points 8 months ago (28 children)

100% nothing will happen, or they will just get pardoned. USA is done. Kaput. All hail Nazi USA.

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 76 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Fairly sure the pardons are already filled out and signed preemptively.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 52 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 45 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    with fascists, every accusation is an admission

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 8 months ago

    with fascists, every accusation is an admission

    Once again, A LITTLE LOUDER FOR THE DOLTS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM.

    When dealing with fascists and Republicans - they are the same but Republicans have less scruples and more money -

    "EVERY ACCUSATION IS AN ADMISSION."

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    It’s fucking comical how many Americans seem to think that the collapse of their entire legal system is just a blip and there’s a “normal” to go back to.

    It’s a bit like going to see a magician- if you catch a glimpse of how the trick is done, the spell is broken. There’s no going back. Everyone is now fully aware that accountability only exists because of shared suspension of disbelief that it might not. A new administration doesn’t fix this. Your constitution and legislation has been fully exposed as lacking enforcement measures. There isn’t any coming back from that, regardless of who’s in the big chair.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    It's already been collapsed for years though. Normal people don't even get trials anymore. We get outrageously high bail amounts and plea-bargains (forced confessions, that's what they are) so we will spend 2 years in prison instead of 5 awaiting trial.

    Want to prove your innocence even if it means spending years in pretrial jail? Guess what? They'll end up dismissing the charges a week before your trial starts because they don't think they'll get a conviction. You're not officially acquitted so the prosecutor's success rate stays high AND you still were imprisoned for years so it's a win-win for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (26 replies)
    [–] 149 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    This is actually the example they use of an illegal order in the DOD manual.

    Page 1117 18.3.2.1 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23892053-dod-law-of-war-manual-june-2015-updated-july-2023/

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 80 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    Held liable by whom? The President who absolutely would say he agreed with it? The legislature that will talk a good game but fold before doing anything important? The courts who are owned by the parties? Or the police who want this to be SOP, and wouldn't enforce any orders for arrest?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    UCMJ is its own system enforced by the military with its own courts. Hegeseth will probably avoid any repercussions, but holding the chain of command responsible for state sponsored murder will send a clear message about obeying illegal orders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 45 points 8 months ago

    They could be, but they won't.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Won't matter if they're held liable by US law.

    We need justice that is not beholden to any king or emperor (or would-be whatever). International courts should rule on this. Because local ones won't do anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 38 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    good. prison for all of them. genocidal nazis all of them. from the leader to the guy who pushed the button.

    ILLEGAL ORDERS MUST BE IGNORED.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 34 points 8 months ago (2 children)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 29 points 8 months ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    Just like the Jan 6 hearings, they will drag it out for political points, but have no intention to seek actual charges, institutional change, military reform or anything.

    It will just be: "Look at all the evil shit they did! Don't you wish something could be done! Oh well. Also Maduro bad m'kay, drugs bad m'kay, Hamas bad m'kay, we love troops m'kay. Hearing adjourned!"

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Could be, but won't. At least, not under this regime.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 23 points 8 months ago

    Spoiler: they won't.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Y'all mother fuckers ebeying in advance. These assholes will be held accountable. Call your representatives! Don't assume their power is so great because it's not!

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 22 points 8 months ago

    He is a murderer... all of them are.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Could be, should be, won't be

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 18 points 8 months ago

    That would require the administration's own people to bring those charges.

    And I can already tell you the words you're going to hear if this makes it to court. "Unlawful Combatant", a designation we created so we could ignore the rules of war while fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Trump declared the Venezuelan drug cartels to be terrorists. Now they're treating them like we treated the Taliban in Afghanistan.

    These guys are literally just waiting for the next outrageous thing to push this one out of the news cycle.

    And yeah, we've been doing airstrikes like this for 20 years.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    "Respect the chain of command." - Babylon 5 TV show

    Same thing Democrats said recently. Same thing Milley said last time Trump put soldiers on streets years ago. Back then Trump also said Milley should be hanged for saying it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago

    Could.

    But won't.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago

    … As they should.

    … But they won’t.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago*

    I worked at Fort Lewis in the RCF (Regional Correctional Facility, aka prison) and we had an Army soldier who got 3 years for 1st degree murder because he mercy killed a combatant after they got covered in white phosphorous. Literally everyone was like "how the fuck do you only get 3 years for first degree murder?" and then when they read his court documents were like "what the fuck, you got screwed and obviously everyone knew it..." They legally determined that at the moment they were no longer fighting back they became non-combatants and to kill a non-combatant instead of rendering aid is murder. Since the judge and jury agreed that it did violate the law, but hoped that if they were ever in that combatant's shoes, they would want someone to do to them what this soldier did, so yeah, guilty, but sentenced to the bare minimum allowed.

    I know for 100% fact there is precedent already. But that is rules for thee, not for them, so I highly doubt we'll see anything happen. I'm sure they'll claim they need immunity because they were operating under special rules of engagement or some bullshit, and it will take years and lots of lawyers and in the end it'll drag on until its forgotten about and gets quietly dismissed somewhere.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 8 months ago

    Could is not news. Ever.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago

    "held liable" means some bad press in 'radical left' media at this point, right?

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago

    Which means, as the law is being followed in the US right now, only the plebs at the bottom might be held responsible.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago

    Sure, sure, right after we convict Bush, Rice et al., for their war crimes in Iraq.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    50/50 they pardon everyone or Trump uses this opportunity to forcefully retire more generals and get Hegseth out.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    What absolute moron would obey that order?

    I could see how maybe you could believe there was justification for the initial strike but there can be no justification for killing people who are now defenceless. Although why not just board the vessel and take everyone into custody, why instantly resort to deadly force, did they have information that the people on the boat were heavily armed or otherwise able to threaten a US naval vessel?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • I won’t claim to have researched it myself, but I’ve seen about a dozen different people quote the section of military law that talks about illegal orders that are so blatant you don’t need to check or think, they’re illegal, and the example they use is “firing upon the shipwrecked”.

    As in, the order to fire upon the shipwrecked should be immediately known to every Navy personnel as blatantly illegal as a precondition of their service.

    If you’re performing the example for an illegal order, you’re executing illegal orders.

    Edit: and I’m realizing now I responded to the wrong person.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 12 points 8 months ago

    That's what should happen, but I won't be holding my breath.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›