US Military Admits to Second Strike on Survivors of Boat Attack in Caribbean, Defying Critics Who Call it a 'Double-Tap'
The Pentagon has officially confirmed that the US military conducted a second strike on survivors of a boat attack in the Caribbean last month, sparking widespread outrage and defying critics who have labeled it as a "double-tap" - an attack designed to kill rescuers or first responders.
Admiral Frank Bradley, the head of Special Operations Command, was accused of ordering the follow-up strike by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. However, in response to questions about the attack, Hegseth distanced himself from the killing of survivors, saying that he had not personally seen them and that the Pentagon's actions were "called the fog of war".
But experts on the laws of war say that quibbling over technical definitions misses the point - the US military has engaged in a series of attacks that amount to summary executions, violating international humanitarian law.
Since September, the US military has carried out 21 known attacks, destroying 22 boats and killing at least 83 civilians. Many of these attacks were on suspected smugglers who had already been arrested by law enforcement, raising questions about whether the military was intentionally targeting innocent people.
The Pentagon's Law of War Manual states that "persons who have been incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck are in a helpless state, and it would be dishonorable and inhumane to make them the object of attack".
Sarah Harrison, an expert on human rights and international law, said that the double-tap label is often used to describe attacks that deliberately target people who are trying to rescue others. "Quibbling over the semantics of 'double-tap' doesn't change the reality that the strike was a summary execution of men clinging to the remains of a boat," she said.
The Pentagon has defended its actions, saying that they were necessary to prevent further attacks and protect national security. But critics argue that this is just a thinly veiled excuse for violating international law and disregarding human life.
As the Pentagon continues to defend its actions, experts warn that the US military's tactics in the Caribbean are part of a larger pattern of disregard for human rights and international law. The US government's response to the situation has been marked by a lack of transparency and accountability, with officials downplaying the severity of the attacks and deflecting criticism.
The Intercept has long reported on the human cost of US military actions, but this latest development highlights the need for greater scrutiny and oversight of the Pentagon's tactics. As one expert put it, "this is not just about a few bad apples - this is about a system that is systematically violating international law and disregarding human life".
The Pentagon has officially confirmed that the US military conducted a second strike on survivors of a boat attack in the Caribbean last month, sparking widespread outrage and defying critics who have labeled it as a "double-tap" - an attack designed to kill rescuers or first responders.
Admiral Frank Bradley, the head of Special Operations Command, was accused of ordering the follow-up strike by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. However, in response to questions about the attack, Hegseth distanced himself from the killing of survivors, saying that he had not personally seen them and that the Pentagon's actions were "called the fog of war".
But experts on the laws of war say that quibbling over technical definitions misses the point - the US military has engaged in a series of attacks that amount to summary executions, violating international humanitarian law.
Since September, the US military has carried out 21 known attacks, destroying 22 boats and killing at least 83 civilians. Many of these attacks were on suspected smugglers who had already been arrested by law enforcement, raising questions about whether the military was intentionally targeting innocent people.
The Pentagon's Law of War Manual states that "persons who have been incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck are in a helpless state, and it would be dishonorable and inhumane to make them the object of attack".
Sarah Harrison, an expert on human rights and international law, said that the double-tap label is often used to describe attacks that deliberately target people who are trying to rescue others. "Quibbling over the semantics of 'double-tap' doesn't change the reality that the strike was a summary execution of men clinging to the remains of a boat," she said.
The Pentagon has defended its actions, saying that they were necessary to prevent further attacks and protect national security. But critics argue that this is just a thinly veiled excuse for violating international law and disregarding human life.
As the Pentagon continues to defend its actions, experts warn that the US military's tactics in the Caribbean are part of a larger pattern of disregard for human rights and international law. The US government's response to the situation has been marked by a lack of transparency and accountability, with officials downplaying the severity of the attacks and deflecting criticism.
The Intercept has long reported on the human cost of US military actions, but this latest development highlights the need for greater scrutiny and oversight of the Pentagon's tactics. As one expert put it, "this is not just about a few bad apples - this is about a system that is systematically violating international law and disregarding human life".
i'm really confused why ppl r just aceptin these attacks on survivors... like what's the diff b/w rescuin people & killin them?? seems like an easy way 2 avoid doin actual police work... 
& ain't that just a cover for violatin human rights laws? 
if they're gonna just shoot survivors, cant they jus go after ppl who r actively fightin or causin trouble? 
. and btw, how many ppl actually know what goes on behind closed doors @ the Pentagon? not saying its ok 2 kill civilians but we gotta consider the bigger picture 
They're like, 'we gotta protect national security' but it sounds more like they just wanna keep killing anyone who gets in the way. And those survivors were just trying to help each other out, you know? It's not exactly rocket science to understand that attacking people who are already hurt is kinda... wrong. 
It sounds like Pentagon officials are trying to cover their own tracks instead of taking responsibility for their actions. Newsflash: just because you're in a situation where things get chaotic, it doesn't mean you can start killing people willy-nilly.
. But to keep doing it and trying to justify it with 'national security' or whatever? That's just not right. We need to be holding the US military accountable for their actions, and we need to see real transparency and accountability. Otherwise, we're just enabling this kind of violence to continue 
.
I'm literally shook by this news. Like, who gives orders to kill survivors of a boat attack? That's straight-up barbaric 
. And now the Pentagon's trying to spin it as some kind of "fog of war" nonsense 
.
. We need to get to the bottom of this and make sure our government is held responsible for these atrocities. The Pentagon's Law of War Manual is clear: you don't kill people who've been hurt or can't defend themselves 
.
. These ppl need to step up their game if they wanna be held accountable for their actions 
. The fact that experts are sayin' this is part of a pattern of disregard for human rights and international law... yeah, that's super reassuring 
. We need to get our priorities straight and stop prioritizin' power over people 
.
This is insane!! Like what is going on here? You got survivors of a boat attack trying to rescue their families and the US military comes in and starts killing them again?! 
That's not 'double-tap' that's just plain brutal! The Pentagon's all like "oh we were protecting national security" but let's be real, it's just an excuse for them to cover their tracks. And what about the law of war manual? They know exactly what they're doing is wrong and are still trying to justify it. 
It's not even that they're killing 'suspects' who've been arrested by the police, these are people who have already surrendered! 
It's not like these are bad guys, they were just trying to get to safety... and now the US military is just sweeping all this under the rug because of some "fog of war" nonsense 
It's not about preventing attacks, it's about disregarding human life altogether. The fact that they're trying to downplay it by saying it was a "double-tap" or whatever technical term they want to use is just ridiculous 
.
Maybe this is a wake-up call for us to learn more about international law and human rights? Let's try to be the change we want to see!
what about these people? they were already hurt, didn't even do anything wrong... how much more messed up does it get?