News

35724 readers

2514 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

977

Entire Chain of Command Could Be Held Liable for Killing Boat Strike Survivors, Sources Say (theintercept.com)

submitted 2 months ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world

137 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 13 points 2 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?

[–] notgivingmynametoamachine@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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.

[–] warbond@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

In my mind the rules are clear on that: to use deadly force there must be an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. Potential future harms can't even begin to be accounted for, so the standard has to be judged with those immediate circumstances in mind.

Even in that situation there are means to deter a threat or determine a person's intent prior to employing any sort of lethal force. There's nothing justifiable about this.