Add Murderer to someone who was accused of rape, excessive drunkenness and Incompetence (Signal Gate). Hegseth was chosen to lead the Department of Defense because he “looked the part”. If the Republican senators truly cared about our country, he would have failed in his nomination hearing by a Huge margin - WaPo Comment
"Service members have a right to disobey unlawful orders and are, in fact, required to do so under U.S. military law and international standards. An order is unlawful if it directs a service member to commit a crime, violates the Constitution, or goes against international human rights law. While disobeying a lawful order is insubordination, disobeying a manifestly unlawful one is not." - Facebook comment
The rules governing combat in a war theater are very well defined by the Geneva Convention. To wit, after an attack- say on a presumed enemy ship - if all are killed except for a few survivors - you cannot execute them in cold blood. The most you are allowed to do is to take them prisoner and hold them for subsequent disposition. This the U.S. criminal regime in power did not do, instead the drunken no -count goon who tries to pass as "defense secretary' ordering all survivors be killed in a recent U.S. military boat strike - ordered by the felon and traitor, Trump.
A live drone feed showed two survivors from the original crew of 11 clinging to the wreckage of their boat after the initial missile attack Sept. 2, The Post reported Friday afternoon. The Special Operations commander overseeing the operation then ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation, killing both survivors.
Let us be very clear here: that special operations commander had the DUTY to disregard an unlawful order from Hegseth and didn't do so. He therefore violated understood law. The UCMJ contains several provisions and articles that stipulate that service men and women are liable for a wide variety of rules and regulations, regardless of whether they were ordered by a superior officer. That includes burglary, murder, assault, rape and property destruction. UCMJ's Article 134 is a broad provision that prohibits "all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital," and is punishable in military court.
Article 90, which covers the rules over "Willfully Disobeying Superior Commissioned Officer," explicitly prohibits orders that "without such a valid military purpose, interfere with private rights or personal affairs." They are also bound to follow international agreements to which the U.S. is a signatory. The International Committee of the Red Cross, which protects victims under the rules of the Geneva Convention, also states that armed service members are liable for criminal responsibility "if the subordinate knew that the act ordered was unlawful or should have known because of the manifestly unlawful nature of the act ordered."
I submit that the Special operations commander who complied with Hegseth's order had the duty to recognize it as blatantly unlawful but failed to do so. Indeed, current and former U.S. officials and law-of-war experts have said that the Pentagon’s lethal campaign — which has killed more than 80 people — is unlawful and may expose those most directly involved to prosecution. Despite the blatherings of Dotard and his fellow criminals the alleged traffickers pose no imminent threat of attack against the United States and are not in an “armed conflict” with the U.S., these officials and experts say.
More serious than this, Trump the traitor plans to pardon an ex-Honduran cocaine dealer, actually prosecuted in Trump's 1st term. E.g.
How can you claim righteousness to kill "drug traffickers" in international waters, then turn around and pardon one of the most powerful drug traffickers? It makes a mockery of your claim and reveals it is bogus and the strikes as criminal aggression.
At least the disclosure of Hegseth's strike on survivors has finally elicited outrage from the Reeps in congress. Yes, they seem to have finally found their balls. Evidently. Republican-led committees in the Senate and the House say they will amplify their scrutiny of the Pentagon after a Washington Post report revealing that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken order to kill all crew members aboard a vessel suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea several weeks ago.
This nearly coincided with a group of former military attorneys who have scrutinized the
Trump administration’s aggression in Latin America. The group released an assessment Saturday outlining relevant
international and domestic laws, and said that regardless of whether the U.S.
is in an armed conflict, conducting law enforcement or other military
operations, the targeting of defenseless people is prohibited.
Specifically - under the Geneva Accords:
"Not only does
international law prohibit targeting these survivors, but it also requires the
attacking force to protect, rescue, and, if applicable, treat them as prisoners
of war. Violations of
these obligations are war crimes, murder, or both. There are no other options.”
Meanwhile, hollow babble from the Joint Special Operations Command claimed that the purpose of the “double-tap”
strike was to sink the boat to avoid any navigation hazard to other vessels,."
To which Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Massachusetts) responded in a statement to The Post:
“The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal."
Aside from Rep. Moulton, historians also giving their inputs have declared the Pentagon in this effort poses a unique threat to American democracy. Long-standing taboos against using the armed forces to further a president’s political machinations have helped ensure that service members obey their civilian leaders — and prevent this powerful institution from being used to suppress Americans’ constitutional rights. Discarding that standard, experts say, risks setting a harmful precedent.
“The best way to stop a politicization death spiral,” said
Peter Feaver, who studies civil-military relations at Duke University, “is to
never start it.”
Which is why Hegseth and Trump both be held accountable, Hegseth by summry dismissal and Trump by impeachment or removal under the 25th amendment.
Lastly, the 6 Dem Senators who circulated a video on the duty to reject illegal orders did not encourage "disobedience" or mutiny. (WSJ, 'Disobeying Military Orders Is Full Of Risk', p. A15, Nov. 28) As per an AP report Sunday, a group of former military lawyers made it clear Sen. Mark Kelly did not violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to the JAG Working Group:
"The video release simply described the law as it pertains to unlawful orders. It did not suborn mutiny or otherwise encourage military service members to disregard or disobey lawful orders issued to them."
Further, the JAG lawyers made it clear uniformed commanders have specific obligations to reject orders that are unlawful. Adding that broad legal precedence also holds that 'just following orders' - colloquially known as the 'Nuremberg defense' used by Nazi war criminals tried at Nuremberg, does not absolve these commanders. Or those who ordered them to commit the war crimes.
Just ask Alfred Rosenberg, one of the Nazis tried at Nuremberg, who bears an unsettling resemblance to Pete Hegseth. (See top photo).
Oh, the choicest bit of baloney to emerge from this whole, sorry incident? Hegseth claiming to Trump he never issued the order to kill survivors. Tell that to the Senate Armed Services Oversight hearing, and under oath, Petey!
by Thom Hartmann | November 30, 2025 - 6:41am | permalink
Shocking as this moment is, none of us should pretend we weren’t warned. When Donald Trump installed Pete Hegseth — a television provocateur whose public record is soaked in belligerence, booze, and culture-war performance — as America’s Defense Secretary, the world could see exactly where it was headed.
Still, nothing prepared us for the Washington Post’s revelation that Hegseth personally ordered U.S. forces to “kill everybody” on a small wooden boat off the coast of Trinidad on September 2.
You’d expect rogue militias or failed–state paramilitaries to speak that way. You don’t expect it from the man running the Pentagon.
What the Post reports is almost too grotesque to absorb.
After the first U.S. missile ripped the boat apart and set it burning, commanders watched on a live drone feed as two survivors clung desperately to the charred wreckage.
by Vijay Prashad | December 1, 2025 - 5:51am | permalink
US President Donald Trump has authorised the USS Gerald R. Ford to enter the Caribbean. It now floats north of Puerto Rico, joining the USS Iwo Jimaand other US navy assets to threaten Venezuela with an attack. Tensions are high in the Caribbean, with various theories floating about regarding the possibility of what seems to be an inevitable assault by the US and regarding the social catastrophe that such an attack will occasion.
CARICOM, the regional body of the Caribbean countries, released a statement affirming its view that the region must be a “zone of peace” and that disputes must be resolved peacefully. Ten former heads of government from Caribbean states published a letter demanding that “our region must never become a pawn in the rivalries of others”.
No comments:
Post a Comment