.jpg)
The Shadow of a Second Strike: Growing Scrutiny of Naval Engagements and Allegations of Unlawful Killings
Recent reporting by The Washington Post has ignited a firestorm of controversy surrounding a series of naval engagements, specifically allegations that U.S. forces intentionally targeted survivors of a destroyed vessel. The report details claims that, following the sinking of a boat deemed a threat, a follow-up strike was ordered against individuals attempting to survive on a life raft. This alleged “second strike” has prompted a rare moment of potential bipartisan concern, even as the Management defends its actions.
The initial boat strikes, conducted under the authority of Rear Admiral Christopher Bradley, were presented as necessary to eliminate a perceived threat to U.S. interests. However, the Post report suggests a disturbing escalation. Sources allege that Sebastian Gorka, a former Deputy Assistant to the President, and Pete Hegseth, a conservative media personality wiht close ties to the Administration, were involved in discussions regarding the aftermath of the sinking.The report indicates a suggestion to “make them the object of attack,” a proposition that even former President Trump appeared to find unsettling, publicly stating his confidence that Hegseth hadn’t issued such an order and that he “wouldn’t have wanted that. Not a second strike.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later offered a contrasting defense,asserting that Admiral Bradley “worked well within his authority and the law,directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”
The timing of the post report coincided with a public statement from six Democratic members of Congress – all veterans of military or intelligence service – who released a video reminding service members of their right, and duty, to refuse unlawful orders. senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, a retired Navy captain, explicitly stated, “Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders.” The Administration responded swiftly and forcefully. Trump condemned the video as “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” and the Pentagon initiated an inquiry into Senator Kelly for ”serious allegations of misconduct,” potentially opening the door to his recall to active duty and court-martial.The FBI subsequently began seeking interviews with all lawmakers involved in the video’s release, with the exception of those whose service records did not qualify them for Pentagon jurisdiction or, in the case of Senator Elissa Slotkin, who served with the CIA.
While the Administration has staunchly defended its actions, the allegations have begun to draw scrutiny from both sides of the aisle. Following the publication of the Post story, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee pledged ”vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances.” Similar commitments were made by the chair and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee to “gather a full accounting of the operation in question.” Republican Congressman Mike Turner of Ohio, speaking on CBS News, acknowledged that if the post’s reporting proved accurate, it woudl constitute “a very serious, and…an illegal act.” Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska echoed this sentiment, expressing “suspicion” regarding Hegseth’s involvement and stating that survivors attempting to survive “would pose an imminent threat.” He emphasized that targeting surrendering individuals violates the law of war.
Despite these initial expressions of concern, skepticism remains regarding the likelihood of sustained legislative action, given the current political climate. Though, the potential release of video footage of the incident – a redacted version of which already exists – could prove to be a pivotal moment.As one former service member, identified only as Lepper, stated, “We’re supposed to be the good guys…We have crossed the line here into clear illegality and clear dishonor.” The unfolding situation evokes historical parallels to events like my Lai and Abu Ghraib, moments when public outrage forced a national reckoning with the conduct of U.S. forces and a re-examination of core values.
