The New York Times has recently published a report that challenges the claims made by The Washington Post regarding Secretary of War Pete Hegseth's alleged directive to execute survivors of a September 2nd assault on drug traffickers in the Caribbean.
Critics of the administration have leveraged this alleged order, which would be illegal, to justify recent videos instructing service members that they have the right to refuse certain commands.
The Washington Post's Thursday report suggested that Hegseth had issued a "spoken directive" to "kill everybody," a claim that has added fuel to the controversy surrounding the campaign against suspected drug traffickers. The report stated, "Hegseths order, which has not been previously reported, adds another dimension to the campaign against suspected drug traffickers. Some current and former U.S. officials and law-of-war experts have said that the Pentagons lethal campaign which has killed more than 80 people to date is unlawful and may expose those most directly involved to future prosecution."
According to The Washington Post, a Special Operations commander overseeing the September 2nd attack ordered a second strike in compliance with Hegseth's instructions, as reported by two individuals familiar with the matter.
However, a recent report from The New York Times has cast doubt on this narrative. The report cites several unnamed officials who claim that while Hegseth did order a lethal strike against the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua boat, there was no directive for a follow-up action.
"According to five U.S. officials, who spoke separately and on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter that is under investigation, Mr. Hegseth, ahead of the Sept. 2 attack, ordered a strike that would kill the people on the boat and destroy the vessel and its purported cargo of drugs," the paper reported.
The New York Times report further clarifies that Hegseth's directive did not specify what should happen if the initial missile strike did not fully accomplish its objectives. The officials also stated that his order was not a response to surveillance footage showing that at least two people on the boat survived the first blast.
The report continues, "Admiral [Frank] Bradley ordered the initial missile strike and then several follow-up strikes that killed the initial survivors and sank the disabled boat. As that operation unfolded, they said, Mr. Hegseth did not give any further orders to him."
Two unnamed officials described a meeting before the attack where Hegseth briefed Special Operations Forces commanders on his execute order to engage the boat with lethal force. They stated that Hegseth made no oral directive at the meeting that went beyond the written order.
The New York Times' report was published a day after the White House expressed confidence in Hegseth, with President Donald Trump stating, "Pete said he did not order the death of those two men" who were allegedly clinging to the boat.
Meanwhile, The Washington Post reported on Monday that officials within Congress and the Pentagon have grown increasingly concerned that the Trump administration intends to scapegoat the military officer who directed U.S. forces to kill two survivors of a targeted strike on suspected drug smugglers in Latin America. Lawmakers have begun initial moves to investigate whether the attack constituted a war crime.
In response to this speculation, Hegseth posted in support of the admiral, stating, "Lets make one thing crystal clear: Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support. I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made on the September 2 mission and all others since. America is fortunate to have such men protecting us."
These reports emerge as both houses of Congress investigate the September 2nd strike and the orders given. Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker of Mississippi confirmed there was a second strike after speaking with Hegseth. He stated that they are seeking footage of the incident for further discussion.
Wicker said of a second strike, I dont have that information, but I do think well get that information, and were certainly going to have available to us all of the audio and all of the video. At that point, Ill be able to have a more informed conversation. Were going to conduct oversight, and were going to try to get to the facts.
As reported by Western Journal, the ongoing investigation into the September 2nd strike and the subsequent actions taken by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Admiral Frank Bradley continues to be a topic of intense scrutiny and debate.
The contrasting reports from The New York Times and The Washington Post highlight the complexities and controversies surrounding the issue. As the investigation unfolds, it is clear that the pursuit of truth and accountability remains paramount.
Login