On Tuesday, Pete Hegseth, United States Secretary of Defense, speaking at an administration cabinet meeting. He vigorously justified the second military strike, which occurred on September 2. That particular strike, which was in support of counter drug operations, drew a huge amount of controversy because of the implications and unfortunate consequences of that strike. As Hegseth explained, the purpose of the second strike was to “sink the boat and neutralize the threat.” In light of increasing criticism, he wanted to justify the operation.
Yet, during the meeting, Hegseth claimed credit for doing just that. He mentioned that the Pentagon had received internal legal approval for the action, indicating that it was conducted within established legal frameworks. This declaration answered many of the legal and ethical concerns surrounding this attack. It had come on the heels of the too-early, too-tragic deaths of survivors on-board the drug vessel.
Hegseth’s comments, which should raise every eyebrow in the country, come after a week of debate about the goal of the military action. Previously, he had been candid about the necessity of such strikes, stating, “Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.” The comment highlighted the administration’s conviction that military action against drug traffickers is essential. They see these initiatives as an important component of the overall fight against terrorism and a means by which to protect national security.
The second strike, which came just a day or two after initial engagement on the same vessel, has sparked outrage from all types of critics. Advocates and others who criticize the law emphasize the resulting tragic loss of life. For adopting this policy, they are paying the price in casualties and smuggling. In spite of this, advocates for the operation contend that it was a needed move to dismantle predatory criminal networks that pose threats to U.S. security.
Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the Trump administration, reinforced Hegseth’s defense by stating, “Adm. Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed, and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.” This message was intended to reinforce public confidence in military leadership and operational decisions made during this episode.
To introduce a bit of levity to all this earnest policy debate, Hegseth just shared this hilarious parody book cover on X. The cover hilariously featured Franklin the Turtle blasting drug boats from a military helicopter under the title “Franklin Targets Narco Terrorists.” While intended as satire, the post attracted mixed reactions, illustrating the ongoing tension surrounding Hegseth’s public persona and his comments regarding military actions.
Hegseth has attempted to backpedal, but he hasn’t produced specifics to explain exactly what this second strike would entail. Consequently, there are still many questions left to address. Legal experts familiar with the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo related to Hegseth’s actions have expressed concern about the implications of such military strikes without comprehensive transparency.