On September 2, 2025, a U.S. missile strike shattered the stillness of the Caribbean Sea, targeting a vessel suspected of ferrying narcotics. What followed, according to a series of explosive reports by The Washington Post, has set off a political firestorm in Washington, D.C., and ignited a fierce debate over the legality and morality of America’s war on drugs at sea.
Allegations have surfaced that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a chilling directive: there were to be no survivors. After the initial strike left two men clinging to the wreckage, a Special Operations commander, acting on Hegseth’s alleged spoken order to “kill everybody,” authorized a second strike, killing the survivors in the water. The incident was the first in a series of more than twenty such strikes since September, as reported by The Washington Post and corroborated by officials with direct knowledge of the operations. Over the past three months, these attacks have claimed the lives of more than 80 people, all suspected of being involved in drug trafficking.
The news sent shockwaves through Congress. On November 29, 2025, Senators Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Jack Reed, the committee’s senior Democrat, issued a rare bipartisan statement. “The Committee is aware of recent news reports and the Department of Defense’s initial response — regarding alleged follow-on strikes on suspected narcotics vessels in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility,” they declared. “The Committee has directed inquiries to the Department, and we will be conducting vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances.” (The Washington Post)
Not to be outdone, the House Armed Services Committee announced its own investigation the following day. Representatives Mike Rogers, a Republican from Alabama, and Adam Smith, a Democrat from Washington, pledged, “We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question.” (NBC News)
The Pentagon, for its part, has pushed back hard against the allegations. Chief spokesperson Sean Parnell told The Washington Post that “this entire narrative is completely false.” Secretary Hegseth, meanwhile, took to social media to denounce what he called “more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.” In his words: “As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be ‘lethal, kinetic strikes.’ The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people. Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.”
Hegseth further insisted, “Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command.” (Mississippi Free Press)
Yet questions about the legality of the strikes are mounting. According to NBC News, a top military lawyer raised concerns as early as November 19, 2025, warning that the targeted killings could amount to extrajudicial executions—a warning that was reportedly overruled by senior administration officials. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel has reportedly issued a classified memo stating that U.S. military personnel engaged in lethal action in Latin America would not be exposed to future prosecution. The Trump administration has justified the campaign by arguing that the United States is engaged in a “non-international armed conflict” with traffickers.
But legal experts and former military attorneys are not convinced. In a public assessment distributed to news organizations, a group of former military attorneys wrote, “Regardless of whether the U.S. is in an armed conflict, conducting law enforcement or other military operations, the targeting of defenseless people is prohibited. Under the circumstances the Post reported, not only does international law prohibit targeting these survivors, but it also requires the attacking force to protect, rescue, and, if applicable, treat them as prisoners of war. Violations of these obligations are war crimes, murder, or both. There are no other options.” (Spokesman-Review)
The Joint Special Operations Command, according to briefing materials seen by The Washington Post, initially justified the so-called “double-tap” strike by claiming it was necessary to sink the boat and avoid a navigation hazard. Lawmakers were given a similar explanation in closed-door briefings. But as Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and former Marine, pointed out, “The idea that wreckage from one small boat in a vast ocean is a hazard to marine traffic is patently absurd, and killing survivors is blatantly illegal. Mark my words: It may take some time, but Americans will be prosecuted for this, either as a war crime or outright murder.”
Frustration is growing on Capitol Hill over the Pentagon’s lack of transparency. Senators Wicker and Reed have twice written to the Pentagon requesting the orders, recordings, and legal rationale related to the strikes. As of late November, the Defense Department had not provided the requested materials, surpassing the time required by law. Lawmakers have complained that closed-door briefings often lack the presence of legal experts who could explain the administration’s justification for the deadly campaign.
The controversy comes as President Donald Trump has ramped up pressure on Venezuela and signaled a willingness to expand military operations in the region. On November 30, 2025, Trump declared Venezuela’s airspace “closed” and, in a public statement, dismissed the need for congressional approval to target drug traffickers, saying, “I think we’re just gonna kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. We’re going to kill them. They’re going to be, like, dead.”
Meanwhile, the human toll continues to rise. Since September 2, 2025, at least 82 people have been killed in nearly two dozen U.S. strikes on alleged drug-running vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. The administration maintains that every individual killed was affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization, but critics argue that the lack of due process and the targeting of survivors raise fundamental questions about America’s adherence to the rule of law.
As both the Senate and House Armed Services Committees press forward with their bipartisan investigations, the stakes could not be higher. The outcome will not only determine the fate of those responsible for the strikes but may also shape the future of U.S. military operations abroad and the nation’s standing under international law. For now, lawmakers and the public alike are left waiting for answers—and for accountability.
