Pete Hegseth, the US Secretary of Defense, should be charged with murder due to his involvement in strikes on boats in the Caribbean, resulting in the deaths of approximately 83 civilians. Despite claims of a “war” against drug cartels, the article argues that these actions constitute murder, as the victims were unarmed civilians not posing an imminent threat. Even if a war were declared, international laws of war still prohibit the intentional killing of non-combatants, making the attacks war crimes. Hegseth’s alleged order to “kill everybody” after an initial strike and his subsequent statements reinforce the argument that his actions are criminal and warrant prosecution under federal murder statutes.
Read More
Rand Paul’s assessment of Pete Hegseth – that he’s either “lying to us” about the boat strike or “he’s incompetent” – has sparked a pretty interesting reaction, haven’t you noticed? It’s like, okay, sure, that’s a reasonable observation, but the real question seems to be, “Why are we even having to entertain this as a binary choice?” The general consensus appears to be that the situation is far more likely a “both/and” scenario.
It’s not exactly rocket science, is it? Plenty of people seem to think that Hegseth is probably both lying *and* incompetent. It’s almost expected at this point, sadly.… Continue reading
In his book, Hegseth recounts an instance where he directly contradicted military briefings, instructing his platoon to engage and eliminate any perceived threats, disregarding what he deemed as “bullshit rules.” The article highlights Hegseth’s disdain for regulations, as seen in his criticism of rules he felt were arbitrarily enforced, potentially endangering soldiers for the sake of international approval. Hegseth often lauded his commander, Colonel Michael Steele, who later faced reprimand for reportedly issuing orders to eliminate all military-aged males during a raid.
Read More
The central issue revolves around Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and allegations of war crimes, specifically concerning the killing of Venezuelan boat crews. Hegseth is accused of ordering the deaths of those aboard these vessels, with the most damning claim being the order to “kill them all.” Military experts are questioning the legality of these actions, as well as President Trump’s stance on them, particularly concerning the apparent indifference towards the laws of war, and any potential consequences that may arise. Trump’s handling of the situation and whether Hegseth is fired, or worse, indicted, could have far-reaching effects on military morale and civil-military relations, potentially emboldening violations of the law.
Read More
Following reports of a deadly strike in the Caribbean against an alleged drug-running boat, bipartisan members of Congress are demanding answers and promising oversight into the operations. The controversy stems from reports that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed officials to kill survivors, leading to accusations of war crimes and calls for greater transparency. While some Republicans are defending the administration, others, including Senate leaders, are expressing concerns and calling for an investigation to determine whether ethical, moral, or legal codes were violated. Democrats are strongly condemning Hegseth’s actions, with some calling for his resignation or firing due to the severity of the alleged violations of the laws of war.
Read More
Republicans have largely remained silent regarding Hegseth’s actions, which have resulted in numerous casualties. However, GOP-led committees in both the House and Senate are now focusing their attention on the Pentagon, requesting a thorough investigation into the September boat strikes. Chairmen of the Armed Services committees are demanding access to audio and video recordings of the incident, with the intention of uncovering the facts. Senator Tillis is specifically seeking clarity on whether Hegseth ordered a subsequent strike, which resulted in the death of survivors.
Read More
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended a follow-up strike on a suspected drug-carrying boat in the Caribbean Sea, citing the “fog of war” and claiming he didn’t see any survivors. The initial strike, part of a counterdrug campaign in the region, has prompted investigations following reports of a verbal order to “kill everybody” on the boat. President Trump distanced himself from the second strike, stating he “didn’t know anything” about it, while the Pentagon’s own manual indicates that striking survivors is illegal. Navy Vice Adm. Frank Bradley is expected to brief lawmakers on the matter, while the administration maintains he acted within his authority.
Read More
House Democrat eyes articles of impeachment against Hegseth, and the prospect is causing quite a stir, wouldn’t you say? It’s a move that’s bound to ignite a firestorm of debate, even if the eventual outcome seems predictable. The core of this discussion centers on the idea of holding individuals accountable, specifically concerning alleged war crimes and other serious offenses.
The motivation behind such a push, at least from this perspective, appears to be about forcing Republicans to publicly declare their stance. The idea is to put them on the record: are they okay with the conduct in question? It’s a strategy aimed at exposing what’s perceived as the GOP’s true colors, their values, and their priorities.… Continue reading
In his book, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth describes instructing troops to ignore legal advice regarding the rules of engagement in Iraq, emphasizing a need to destroy threats without restrictions. He also criticized constraints placed on soldiers and expressed admiration for commanders who encouraged aggressive actions. This stance, along with his role in pardoning or supporting soldiers accused of war crimes, has drawn scrutiny, particularly in light of an incident where he allegedly ordered the killing of all survivors in a Caribbean drug boat incident. Experts like David Crane have criticized Hegseth’s views, emphasizing the importance of following the rules of engagement and the negative impact of such actions on military professionalism.
Read More
The article criticizes the current Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, highlighting his perceived disrespect for the military and lack of qualifications for the role. It accuses Hegseth of potentially ordering a “no quarter” order, a war crime, and mocks the severity of the accusations with juvenile social media posts. Despite his incompetence, Hegseth’s position allows him to make decisions that put lives at risk. The author argues that Hegseth is unfit for his position and should be removed, as his actions demonstrate contempt for the military and a lack of understanding of his responsibilities.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood
Hegseth Must Go: Calls for Prosecution and Removal Mount
The article criticizes the current Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, highlighting his perceived disrespect for the military and lack of qualifications for the role. It accuses Hegseth of potentially ordering a “no quarter” order, a war crime, and mocks the severity of the accusations with juvenile social media posts. Despite his incompetence, Hegseth’s position allows him to make decisions that put lives at risk. The author argues that Hegseth is unfit for his position and should be removed, as his actions demonstrate contempt for the military and a lack of understanding of his responsibilities.
Read More