A top U.S. Navy admiral informed Congress that Pete Hegseth did not issue a “kill-them-all” command in the recent Caribbean boat strike — a diplomatic attempt to clarify the chain of command after a controversial follow-up attack killed survivors of the first strike.
During a closed congressional briefing, Frank M. Bradley, the commander who carried out the operation, told lawmakers he was never instructed to show no mercy. Instead, he said the written orders focused strictly on destroying the vessel believed to be used for drug trafficking. According to briefing attendees, the admiral emphasized he received no verbal directive to target any survivors.
The original strike occurred on September 2, when U.S. forces targeted a boat allegedly transporting narcotics. A second strike followed after the boat was disabled, killing two men reportedly attempting to cling to the wreckage. That second blow has ignited intense scrutiny from lawmakers and legal experts, many of whom warned the action may violate international law protections for shipwrecked or incapacitated individuals.
The incident has triggered calls from Congress for full transparency, including release of all video evidence and the legal justification for the operation. Meanwhile, some supporters — including the admiral — argue the strike was lawful, describing it as a legitimate drug-interdiction mission carried out under the framework for targeting narco-traffickers.
As congressional inquiry enters its next phase, the debate mirrors a broader struggle over how U.S. military force should be used in covert maritime operations — and where lines should be drawn when lives, international law, and national security intersect.