“Back in early September, he declared that the newly renamed Department of War would favor “maximum lethality, not tepid legality.”
The secretary of war clearly meant it, judging from a story in The Washington Post. The paper reports that Hegseth issued verbal orders to the military forces striking suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean and Pacific to “kill everybody.”
When the inaugural strike in this campaign against a boat off the Trinidadian coast left two survivors clinging to the wreckage of the craft, the commander in charge of the operation, in accordance with Hegseth’s spoken directive, ordered a second strike to take them out too.
…
The administration’s officially secret legal justification for these strikes asserts that “narco-terrorists” are using the money earned from trafficking drugs to finance their war against the United States and its allies. Suspected drug smugglers are therefore, it claims, a legitimate counter-terrorism target.
Many international law experts have retorted that the boats themselves pose no imminent threat to Americans, and that the people on board the boats are not combatants but suspected criminals who one would normally expect to be arrested, not executed.
The administration’s position “can justify almost anything the government wants to do to anyone,” wrote Reason’s Matthew Petti back in September.
…
Even if one accepts the dubious idea that these strikes are legal, the second strike described in the Post report would violate the laws of war. More plainly, it would be murder.
An order to kill boat occupants no longer able to fight “would in essence be an order to show no quarter, which would be a war crime,” Todd Huntley, a former military lawyer who advised Special Operations, told the Post.
…
The Trump administration is using the military to target people suspected of breaking criminal laws against drug trafficking. It’s choosing to kill these suspected criminals when they pose to immediate threat to anyone, instead of simply arresting them.”
“Eight days after the September 2 operation that inaugurated President Donald Trump’s lethal military campaign against suspected drug boats, The Intercept reported that people who survived the initial missile strike were “killed shortly after in a follow-up attack.” On Friday, The Washington Post confirmed that account, saying the commander overseeing the operation, based on an oral directive from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to “kill everybody,” ordered a second strike on “two survivors” who “were clinging to the smoldering wreck.”
If that report is accurate, Reason’s Christian Britschgi notes, “the second strike on helpless survivors would add a degree of barbarism to the administration’s anti-drug campaign.” It also would further complicate the arguments that Trump has deployed to justify his unprecedented policy of summarily executing suspected drug smugglers, which so far has involved 21 attacks that killed 83 people in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific. Even if you accept Trump’s dubious claim that the United States is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with “narcoterrorists,” which supposedly means U.S. forces can legally attack vessels believed to be carrying illegal drugs, deliberately killing survivors would be contrary to the law of war.
“Both the giving and the execution of these orders” would “constitute war crimes, murder, or both,” the Former JAGs Working Group, which consists of lawyers who previously served in the military, said on Saturday. “If the U.S. military operation to interdict and destroy suspected narcotrafficking vessels is a ‘non-international armed conflict’ as the Trump Administration suggests, orders to ‘kill everybody,’ which can reasonably be regarded as an order to give ‘no quarter,’ and to ‘double-tap’ a target in order to kill survivors, are clearly illegal under international law. In short, they are war crimes.”
The former military lawyers add that the situation is even graver “if the U.S. military operation is not an armed conflict of any kind.” In that case, they say, “these orders to kill helpless civilians clinging to the wreckage of a vessel our military destroyed would subject everyone from [the secretary of defense] down to the individual who pulled the trigger to prosecution under U.S. law for murder.””
If reports are true, the Secretary of Defense broke the laws of war according to U.S. law by ordering killed, people in the water whose vessels had already been destroyed.
Also, because this war has not been authorized by Congress and criminal suspects are entitled to due process, not killed on suspicion, even those killed on the boat were murdered.
“Attacks include: accusations that a notorious Russian military intelligence hacking group targeted defense, transport and tech firms involved in helping Ukraine; arson attacks on depots containing equipment destined for Ukraine in Poland; Russian ally Belarus weaponizing migrants to destabilize Poland; drones of unknown origin buzzing airports across the continent; and Moscow being accused of undermining the presidential election in Romania.
Poland called a Sunday rail line explosion “sabotage” and on Tuesday blamed two Ukrainians working for Russia.
Globsec, a Prague-based think tank, calculated there were more than 110 acts of sabotage and attempted attacks carried out in Europe between January and July, mainly in Poland and France, by people with links to Russia.”
“the “national security” argument clearly has been foundational to Trump’s trade policies. Higher tariffs will make America’s military more self-sufficient and capable against future threats; that’s the White House’s point of view.
One problem: that’s not how the people actually in charge of America’s national security see it.
“The Defense Department routinely acquires items and materials from foreign sources indispensable to meet defense needs that are not readily available or produced in sufficient quantities within the United States,” wrote John Tanaglia, director of pricing, contracting, and acquisitions for the Pentagon, in a memo dated August 25.
The memo instructs other officials at the Pentagon to provide “duty-free entry certificates” to military purchases that would otherwise be subject to tariffs. Doing so, the memo explains, will “maximize the Department’s budget to meet warfighter needs.”
First and foremost, that’s yet more proof that tariffs are raising costs for American purchasers of foreign goods. And it is true, of course, that Trump’s tariffs are straining budgets everywhere. Being able to ignore those costs must be nice—many, many businesses across the United States surely wish they had the power to simply wave away those costs as easily as the Pentagon apparently can.”
How the pentagon is treating reporters is more like how authoritarian governments treat reporters. Yes, we’ll talk to you and give you access, but only to select people who will eat our shit.
“Lithuania is calling on NATO to help strengthen its air defenses after a drone carrying 2 kilograms of explosives entered the country from Belarus and crashed in a military training area.”
“Russia’s changing attack tactics are forcing Ukraine to adapt by making shorter defense lines and building low-rise strongpoints less visible to drones swarming the skies.
But the revamp is undermined by a chaotic approach to fortifying front lines, with very different approaches being used depending on local commanders. Tougher defense positions are also made much less effective by Ukraine’s chronic shortage of combat troops.
The change in fortification strategy is being driven by Russia dropping large formation attacks supported by armored vehicles in favor of much smaller units backed by drones, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov said last week.
Ukraine is responding by building fortifications for ever smaller units — from battalions of about 500 troops to companies of about 100, and now for platoons of 20 to 50 soldiers.
…
Previously, strong points used extensive trench networks from 2 to 5 kilometers in length. The new system uses smaller strongpoints with trench networks 60 to 70 meters long and equipped with mandatory anti-drone cover. “These are harder to detect and are effective in carrying out tasks of defense, deterrence, and delivering firepower, including against FPV drones,” Umerov said.
Behind that frontline defense, Ukraine is continuing to build two additional lines that include concrete tetrahedrons, also called dragon’s teeth, to hold off armored vehicles, minefields, foxholes, wooden and concrete trenches, anti-drone covers and nets.
“Fortification is not just about concrete and trenches — it is an adaptive engineering system that takes the enemy’s tactics into account and always serves one purpose: protecting our warriors. We monitor the process daily and reinforce the areas where it’s needed most,” Umerov said.
Earlier, fortifications were often built in open terrain to block Russian attacks using large numbers of armored vehicles. Now, they are built around forest belts, which have better camouflage.”
“The EU’s executive told member countries they can repurpose hundreds of billions of euros in Covid-19 relief money to fund defense projects, reflecting a radical shift in priorities since the days of the pandemic.”