By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has dismissed reports of potentially illegal orders regarding military strikes in the Caribbean as “fake news,” maintaining that the attacks were lawful. These remarks followed a Washington Post report alleging Hegseth ordered the killing of everyone on targeted boats, with over 80 people killed in the strikes so far. In response to the reports, a Senate committee announced an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the military operations. The administration justifies the strikes by claiming those on the boats are drug traffickers, primarily members of Tren de Aragua, though the administration’s claims about the nature of those killed, along with the legality of the attacks, are being questioned.
Read the original article here
Pete Hegseth denies that he gave orders to ‘kill everybody’ on alleged ‘narco-boat’, and honestly, the reaction to this denial is pretty telling. It seems like a lot of people aren’t buying it, and it’s easy to see why. The core of the issue boils down to a fundamental lack of trust. Given everything that’s been said and done, there’s a widespread feeling that Hegseth’s word just isn’t worth much. The question arises: is he a tough military leader or someone who can’t take responsibility for his actions? The implication being, the orders were either given by him, or given despite his orders – he needs to own the truth, whatever it might be.
The idea that the whole incident was legal and thus justifiable doesn’t sit well with many, either. Many people are quick to point out that even if something *technically* fits within the bounds of legality, it doesn’t automatically make it morally right, especially when it comes to the potential taking of innocent lives. The cynicism is palpable. It seems like there’s a pre-emptive expectation that any consequences will be swept under the rug, maybe even with a presidential pardon. The phrase “lying drunk” keeps popping up, suggesting that the black out state or a drunken memory lapse is a convenient excuse, and that the truth is much darker.
The claims that this administration is potentially creating future terrorists are quite harsh, but the sentiment behind them speaks volumes. When actions are perceived as unlawful or even barbaric, they can easily breed resentment and fuel extremist ideologies. The implication is that if these actions go unpunished or even celebrated, the United States runs the risk of doing the very thing it claims to be fighting against: terrorism. The fact that many people believe this event could bring charges if another democratic administration comes into power is a sign of how divisive the issue has become.
There’s even a song reference included. The frequent mentions of drinking, and the accusations of Hegseth’s actions being under the influence of alcohol, are noteworthy. It suggests a pattern of behavior where intoxication may be a factor in poor decision-making. The lack of faith in Hegseth’s honesty seems almost complete, to the point where even his casual remarks are met with deep suspicion.
It’s pretty clear that many people anticipate a pattern of deflection and excuse-making. A lot of the comments seem to believe that the blame will be passed, or forgotten. The suggestion that he might be arrested on an international trip if Trump does not pardon him, is a strong condemnation. The lack of denial, the use of phrases like “fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting” are seen as typical tactics used by certain political figures to avoid accountability.
The specific allegation that he ordered the killing of everyone on the boat, and the denial that this happened, is the focus. Some of the language used, like the reference to “warriors” and the idea of “killing everyone” seems to point towards a dangerous disregard for human life. The fact that he’s potentially accused of going against the core tenets of modern warfare, such as not firing on the injured, is something that has many people seeing this as a potential war crime.
It’s a complete lack of faith in Hegseth’s word, and a belief that he’s capable of anything. The comments suggest that if these actions took place, it wasn’t about strength, it was about a desperate, panicked attempt to maintain control of the narrative. It’s a sign of a society deeply divided, where trust in authority is at an all time low. The ultimate sentiment here is one of disgust, frustration, and a real fear that there may be no justice. The question of whether this will remain unpunished or if it will be exposed is at the heart of the matter.