this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2025
505 points (99.4% liked)

World News

51013 readers
1642 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

More than 80 people killed in campaign that law-of-war experts have labeled extrajudicial murder

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly gave a verbal order to leave no survivors behind as Donald Trump’s administration launched the first of more than a dozen attacks on alleged drug-running boats that have killed more than 80 people over the last three months.

On September 2, U.S. military personnel fired a missile striking a vessel in the Caribbean that carried 11 people accused of trafficking drugs into the United States.

When two survivors emerged from the wreckage, a Special Operations commander overseeing the attack ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions to “kill everybody,” according to The Washington Post, citing officials with direct knowledge of the operation.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vrek@programming.dev 127 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If they didn't kill everyone, it's possible one of them would be able to prove there were no drugs and this is just racism...

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 66 points 3 days ago (7 children)

It probably was drugs - but that is not the point. It's wildly unethical and a violation of many rules of war to simply kill people like they are doing.

We don't summarily execute people at the president's say.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 32 points 3 days ago

Seriously. Even domestically they aren't allowed to just waltz into a drugden and open fire.

I mean, they still do but they are least have the claim that they fired in self defence. Not so much when you do it with drone strikes and missiles.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We don't summarily execute people at the president's say.

Yeah... no.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 20 points 3 days ago

Sorry, I was using "parent telling a child 'we don't hit people' voice".

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We don’t summarily execute people at the president’s say.

you actually do

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] radiofreebc@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Why would there be 11 people on the boat then? If it was drugs, they would want to maximize the space/weight for cargo...not people.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

It probably was drugs

Based on what do you say it was PROBABLY drugs?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] HailSeitan@lemmy.world 109 points 3 days ago (5 children)

If anybody is still under the impression that someone somewhere in the chain of command might refuse illegal orders, this tells you everything you need to know

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Unfortunately the US doesn't consider that one to be an illegal order. It is heartless, and unnecessary. But ever since the advent of airpower the US has maintained that planes, helicopters, and drones are not required to accept surrender because it is impractical to impossible in any given situation. So the standard is usually to keep firing. Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom had notable exceptions with mass surrender instructions dropped beforehand. And again, I know that's not reassuring. But this is why politics isn't supposed to be a team game. This is the level of power we are making decisions on. For other things that are completely legal but most people don't realize; heavy machineguns can absolutely be used to target individual soldiers; Flamethrowers are still 100 percent legal against military targets; You can be shot after your surrender is accepted, (I'll expand below); You will be shot if you do not or cannot actively surrender; and Nobody respects the rule against shooting medics and medevacs.

To expand on the most inflammatory one, the only time you are "safe" is while you are in custody. Modern combat operations move very fast and surrendering people are often left in place after their weapons are removed/destroyed. If they don't actively surrender again to follow on forces then they are legal targets because we haven't developed psychic powers yet. This especially matters with surrendered wounded who may not be in a condition to surrender again. Shooting bodies as you advance is legal and expected in a war. You just aren't allowed to personally go back and shoot someone again without them presenting a new threat. With that information in mind you should also know the US military and any professional military sends multiple waves across a battlefield. It is incredibly lethal, by design.

I say all this not to call you out but to highlight that war is a giant bag of dicks that most people outside the military are still naïve about.

The other pressing thing here is this is an order to fire on a declared enemy, outside our border. Meaning the president signed a sheet of paper declaring them to be the enemy, Congress hasn't thrown a flag, and they are beyond the jurisdiction of law enforcement. That is very clear cut to the military. If you change any one of those 3 parameters then things go to gray zone or illegal very quickly. Someone asked me some months ago while Trump was vomiting about Greenland if the military would obey that order versus an order to hunt down and kill Americans inside America. And the answer is Greenland would be fucked but those Americans are pretty safe from the military. They are not however safe from anonymous DOJ task forces and DHS.

[–] HailSeitan@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Thanks for the clarification, sadly

[–] saimen@feddit.org 7 points 3 days ago (3 children)

What would even be an illegal order?

[–] ProfessorScience@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

Blowing up the boat in the first place.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

To use force against Americans inside America without martial law, an act of Congress, or an extenuating circumstance like self defense.

Trump really pushed the envelope by ordering troops to accompany ICE raids under the authorization to guard federal property. But they still couldn't do anything but defend themselves technically. It's just that he effectively tied their self defense to the ICE agents defense. I'm pretty sure the courts knocked that one back and the military pulled back though. Which is why they've gone so hard with Border Patrol, ICE, and any volunteers from within DHS/DOJ that have badges.

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

To use force against Americans inside America without martial law, an act of Congress, or an extenuating circumstance like self defense.

so nothing because the idiot king can declare martial law with no justification just as he has broken rules or laws over 200 times in less than a year

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] davad@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So is running for president as a felon, yet here we are.

[–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

that's not illegal actually. if it were, administrations could try to invent felonies for opposition leaders to have committed. now this particular felon should also have been ineligible to run under the 14th amendment, but he was never charged or tried for those crimes, let alone convicted

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

and they'll do similar mental gymnastics forever…

the military won't save you Americans

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

This has not been adjudicated by anyone. You can say "the US doesn't consider it to be an illegal order". Maybe there is some JAG letter somewhere that says helicopters are not required to accept surrender. But there is nothing that precludes trying everyone involved for war crimes.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Fit_Series_573@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

There was the one high profile commander who stepped down du to this. Wish more would follow suit since it’s technically illegal for all involved to disobey orders unless they all do so collectively.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (1 children)

11 people? There were 11 people on the boat? There's no fucking way that was a drug smuggling boat. 11 people means at least nine people's worth of weight that can't be dedicated to drugs.

[–] answersplease77@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

it was not proven those boats were ~~not~~ carrying drugs nor have fuel capacity to reach the US coasts. They most likely killed fisher boats:

https://factually.co/fact-checks/justice/evidence-vessels-venezuela-us-drug-trafficking-e51d01

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 53 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The "I was just following orders" defense is gonna be used a loooot in the future

[–] DrDickHandler@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

That's very cute of you to think that they will face consequences.

[–] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

When? You expecting an election in the future?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TammyTobacco@sh.itjust.works 41 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Does the Hague not investigate war crimes?

[–] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The U.S. doesn't recognize the ICC and sanctions its officials if they investigate war crimes by the U.S. or its allies.

We briefly ratified the Rome Statute in 2000 but pulled out shortly after invading Afghanistan and shortly before invading Iraq.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, the US would invade the Netherlands if they tried to investigate.

[–] CannedYeet@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Since it's probably not clear to those unfamiliar, this is literally true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act

[–] fluxx@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Only for political opponents of west.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

The us said it would invade the Hague of anyone were tried and attempted to be put on trial.

"all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act

load more comments (1 replies)

I'm a world where laws mattered those words would haunt him all the way to the gallows.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

It is literally a crime against humanity to declare no quarter be given.

Edit: US Code literally prescribes death for war crimes when that crime results in death: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title18-section2441&num=0&edition=prelim

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Too bad laws are only suggestions for the US government.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (4 children)

It's enough for the ICC to put out a warrant

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Darkness343@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

It's the Geneva checklist or Geneva suggestion for a reason.

[–] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 30 points 3 days ago

Dont worry everyone. Republicans will praise the pedophile and friends through tweets. The Democrats will post a mildly worded tweet. No one will actually do anything.

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 29 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Won't be the last time he issues that command

[–] thorhop@sopuli.xyz 10 points 3 days ago

"Sir, what should we do this Martin Luther King day?"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

It's not a warcrime if you've never formally declared war points finger at temple.

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What's the conversion rate on Venezuelans to Austrian Archdukes?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Our ancestors didn't defy kings, battle their own wayward countrymen, charge trenches, and rush fortified beaches headlong into the jaws of death. . .

. . .for. This. Whatever the disgraceful hell this is.

About now, every real patriot for what's good about this country should feel a profound and gnawing agony at every passing day these monsters aren't held to account and rendered incapable of further harm to humanity, whatever form that would take.

We need to make it loud and clear that if "the other team" in places of power doesn't use every single tool at their disposal to end this threat IMMEDIATELY, they are complicit fools and will be held accountable as accomplices to whatever untold horrors would await us, should we refuse to hold the line.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago

Yea, this bothers me. At this point I agree that any politician that doesnt start fighting this Nazi is a traitor to the US.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

God you can just tell that he gets off on the feeling that he had the power to kill people. Gets him moist.

[–] Nomorereddit@lemmy.today 8 points 3 days ago

America: ill do it again!

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But Americans won’t take Hegseth out because that would just be so uncouth and WE WOULD BE NO BETTER THAN HIM.

Cowards.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Man I knew he said that but I didn't know it was in that context. Murderous fucker!

load more comments
view more: next ›