this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
357 points (98.6% liked)

News

36889 readers
3816 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
 

TWO MEN CLUNG to what remained of their capsized boat. One moment, they had been cutting through the warm waters of the Caribbean Sea at a rapid clip. The next, their vessel exploded and was engulfed in fire and shrouded in smoke. The men were shipwrecked, helpless or clearly in distress, six witnesses who saw video of the attack say. The survivors pulled themselves onto the overturned hull as an American aircraft filmed them from above. The men waved their arms.

Minutes ticked by. Ten. Twenty. Thirty. As the men bobbed along, drifting with the current, for some 45 minutes, Adm. Frank Bradley — then the head of Joint Special Operations Command — sought guidance from his top legal adviser. At Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on September 2, he turned to Col. Cara Hamaguchi, the staff judge advocate at the secretive JSOC, The Intercept has learned.

Could the U.S. military legally attack them again?

How exactly she responded is not known. But Bradley, according to a lawmaker who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified briefing, said that the JSOC staff judge advocate deemed a follow-up strike lawful. In the briefing, Bradley said no one in the room voiced objections before the survivors were killed, according to the lawmaker.

Five people familiar with briefings given by Bradley, including the lawmaker who viewed the video, said that, logically, the survivors must have been waving at the U.S. aircraft flying above them. All interpreted the actions of the men as signaling for help, rescue, or surrender.

“Obviously, we don’t know what they were saying or thinking,” one of the sources said, “but any reasonable person would assume that they saw the aircraft and were signaling either: don’t shoot or help us.”

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] snooggums@piefed.world 107 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They shot them 45 fucking minutes later?

Jesus fucking Christ. Everyone involved needs to face a court martial and should hang.

[–] ngdev@lemmy.zip 29 points 3 months ago

and memos circulated detailing why the ones who gave the orders are hanging and why the ones who pulled the trigger are hanging

[–] RamRabbit@lemmy.world 53 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

What's the proper way? Seems being shipwrecked is a perfectly valid surrender by itself.

[–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 34 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Clearly a proper surrender is to give Trump $10M each.

[–] lectricleopard@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

This is the only way to get anything done in US government. Money is speech.

[–] bus_factor@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago

I guess they could have been making some interpretations of their hand gestures, deliberately ignoring that Venezuelan ~~fishermen~~ drug smugglers are unlikely to know the hand signals of American military?

When American photographer Carl McCunn was stranded in Alaska, he was discovered by a state trooper plane. He cheerfully raised his fist in celebration. The plane left and never came back. Between this incident and perishing there he read up on hand signals, and learned that he had inadvertently signaled "all is well".

[–] UltraMagnus@startrek.website 2 points 3 months ago

Apparently, waving two hands instead of one hand.

Under no circumstances should you expect a random civilian from another country to be familiar with specific US military procedures, particularly when they are clinging to the wreckage of their ship to avoid drowning.

And this is besides the fact that shooting shipwreck survivors in the first place is a war crime, regardless of whether they were surrendering.

Everyone in the chain of command on this one needs to face prosecution.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago (4 children)

We need to invent new words to describe this level of evil. Every single person in that chain of command should be in a mental asylum and be treated for their psychopathic disorders.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

We have words. We just kept being told “oh, everything you don’t like is a Nazi, isn’t it?”

And we still are. It’s disappointing how many Nazis are out there, crying foul.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

As a German, and one that uses the word Nazi too much already, I have to remark that the atrocities committes by the "OG" Nazis were so much worse in sheer numbers at least. The term death camps might as well have been death factories, because that is how the mass murders were organized. That level of evil was most likely only matched by Kissinger, may he forever rot in hell.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

There's also the facetious "whatever happened to the tolerant left" when we deem child-raping Nazis incompatible with civilized society

[–] grue@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, that denies their culpability. They aren't insane; they're criminally evil and need to pay.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Yes, it denies their culpability. Yet it still is the way I choose to see the world. I firmly believe that the process in which people become psychopaths like that involves a sort of brain damage that enables you to perform such truly evil acts. A normal person would feel empathy for a victim and could not possibly cause such suffering.

These people are not normal, and the worst punishment they could suffer is to be taught an empathetic understanding of the suffering they have caused. Likely most are too far gone for that, so keeping them locked away for the rest of their existence seems to be the second best option. Not as punishment, but as a means to protect society.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We need to invent new words to describe this level of evil.

Oh now you think it's evil. Bitch, please.

This is how USA has always been.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

I seem to recall that previously, US war crimes had been committed almost entirely within the context of a war. Now they murder random civilians in international waters to distract from a government full of child rapists and murderers.

[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Oh, please, this level of evil is pretty commonplace in war in general and there have been much worse acts committed throughout history. I’m not defending it, obviously, but we hardly need new words to describe it.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Undoubtedly much worse has been done, but I only have vocabularly to describe the worst of all, the Holocaust. I am honestly missing words for the in- between evil, because calling these acts "monstrous" is unfair to monsters.

[–] Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Please don't justify the indefensible.

[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Please, point out where I’m justifying it.

[–] Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

....this level of evil is pretty commonplace in war in general and there have been much worse acts committed throughout history.

[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

How is that justifying it?

[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

“but any reasonable person would assume that they saw the aircraft and were signaling either: don’t shoot or help us.”

Well clearly anyone in command of the US armed forces cannot be reasonable and must have reached that position being that way.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

They killed them to eliminate witnesses in a future war-crimes prosecution. The article just reports a lazy-ass pretext.

[–] CircaV@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 months ago
[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 months ago

The purpose of a system is what it does.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Were they cops? Y’know, shooting unarmed people already laying down in surrender?

[–] Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Stoopid latin monkey. Don't you know how to do anything right.

/s

I so want everyone including the pilot to spend the rest of their days busting large rocks in to small rocks. The only real justice is to send a message to soldiers that if a order violate the uniform code they should never carry it out.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)