By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The White House confirmed Admiral Frank M. Bradley ordered the second strike on the alleged drug-carrying vessel in the Caribbean, which resulted in the death of two survivors. This confirmation follows reports and allegations that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth commanded military personnel to “kill everybody” on board. While Leavitt stated Bradley was within his authority, the Pentagon’s Law of War Manual prohibits attacking the wounded, sick, or shipwrecked. This incident has led to increased scrutiny, with members of Congress and experts calling for investigations into potential war crimes amidst growing questions about the Trump administration’s lethal campaign.
Read the original article here
White House says admiral directed second strike that killed alleged drug boat survivors in ‘self defense.’ Well, it seems we’re wading into some seriously murky waters here, and the White House is trying to steer us through with a story that’s, frankly, raising more questions than answers. The core of it, as the narrative goes, is that an admiral made the call to launch a second strike, wiping out the survivors of a previous attack on what’s alleged to be a drug-running vessel. The justification? Self-defense.
But here’s the kicker, the official line appears to be that the admiral acted independently, and not under the direction of higher-ups like Hegseth. This certainly looks like a classic move to deflect blame, to insulate the higher-ups from accountability.
This whole situation stinks to high heaven of a cover-up, and you can practically hear the wheels of the blame game turning. The story went from there being no second strike at all to one executed by the Admiral and not Hegseth. It’s almost comical, if the implications weren’t so grim. The claim that the attack was in “self-defense” is just insulting. What possible threat could survivors in the water pose to a naval vessel bristling with weaponry? It strains credulity to believe that these individuals, struggling to survive after their boat was destroyed, were somehow a legitimate threat justifying the use of lethal force.
This also brings up some truly troubling thoughts about the concept of following orders. If an Admiral can order the death of people in the water, what is the boundary for what military leaders will do? What happens when these illegal orders and war crimes are committed by military leaders that are in charge of these troops? Does anyone really think these higher-ups will go down with the ship, or is it likely a case of the higher-ups passing along the blame?
It’s crucial to remember that the military is designed to obey, and if they’re given illegal orders, they might be in a very tough situation.
The entire “self-defense” argument is a slap in the face to anyone with a basic understanding of military protocols and international law. There’s no scenario where someone struggling for their life in the water presents an immediate threat requiring lethal force. It just doesn’t compute.
Furthermore, the White House is already losing credibility when they seem to be using propaganda to defend themselves.
The level of audacity is astounding. The suggestion that some survivors were actively threatening a destroyer is not only absurd but also insulting to our intelligence. It’s an attempt to manipulate the narrative, to create a false reality where the actions taken were justifiable.
The fact that the admiral may be facing the fall raises concerns. Is this just the latest attempt by the administration to shield itself from the consequences of its actions? The admiral may well be facing jail. In this scenario, it is very sad.
This whole saga highlights a deeper problem: the erosion of accountability and ethical standards within the administration. The pattern of deception, the willingness to bend the truth to suit their needs, has become the norm. The suggestion that the administration is above the law is concerning.
What the public needs is truth, transparency, and accountability. It’s essential that this situation is thoroughly investigated.