Footage seen by US senators shows two unarmed, shirtless men struggling to stay afloat before they were killed, sources say
Two men who survived a US airstrike on a suspected drug smuggling boat in the Caribbean clung to the wreckage for an hour before they were killed in a second attack, according a video of the episode shown to senators in Washington.
The men were shirtless, unarmed and carried no visible radio or other communications equipment. They also appeared to have no idea what had just hit them, or that the US military was weighing whether to finish them off, two sources familiar with the recording told Reuters.
The pair desperately tried to turn a severed section of the hull upright before they died. “The video follows them for about an hour as they tried to flip the boat back over. They couldn’t do it,” one source said.
The video of the attack on 2 September was seen by senators behind closed doors on Thursday amid growing concern that the US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, and other officials who ordered the attack may have committed a war crime.
39 Comments
MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world · 54 pts · 249d
Murder.
Rhaedas@fedia.io · 7 pts · 249d
11 counts of it.
Maeve@kbin.earth · 4 pts · 248d
This time.
evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world · 45 pts · 249d
Even articles condemning this attack refer to it as a "double-tap" strike, which is really misleading because that insinuates quick succession. An attack followed by a separate attack an hour later is not a double-tap
gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 249d
Huh, I hadn't thought of that implication but I see what you mean. I guess it's always been kind of misleading though, because it's not about the delay between strikes, it's about shooting a target that's already been neutralized to try to kill survivors.
Seems like the specific phrase might have orginated from a 2003 order the army gave to troops in Iraq (arc), which would explain the minimizing language (while we're on the subject - blowing someone up with a missile isn't exactly a "tap," either), but then groups like Amnesty International ran with it to talk about how the Bush and Obama and Trump administrations would all drone strike targets a second time to kill medical responders.
geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 248d
Not killing just survivors, a double tap is about killing the people who try to rescue the wounded. It is using the wounded as a trap to lure out anyone willing to help them and kill them too.
BigPotato@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 248d
EDIT: There's a source for this - I am incorrect. Potentially a homonym situation.
Original: I would like a source on that.
To be crass, you double tap an enemy who is wounded as you're advancing past them so you don't need to waste time or resources securing or treating them.
If you're far enough away that they're wounded and their buddy is rushing over, well, they should've done the first rule of care under fire - return fire. Not my fault if they forgot to call time out. That's not a double tap.
Aqarius@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 248d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_tap_strike
You seem to be confusing a war crime with a paintball match.
BigPotato@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 248d
Well, you have a source and I'm clearly in the wrong here. I have heard double tap used in infantry tactics, unfortunately not for paintball though I have played. Shooting an already out player is a no-no in paintball too. But, potentially the usage in infantry tactics was a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters on the legality of the, even from that snippet, much more reprehensible 'double tap strike.'
I'll keep this information in mind, specifically in this case.
evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 248d
Yeah, as far as I know, the real origin of the term is for shooting targets (or people), so you are literally double tapping the trigger. That way, if the first round doesn't hit (or doesn't kill), the second will.
The uncertainty piece is key, though. If they fired a missile and werent sure if it hit by the time they launched the second, they could accurately call that a double-tap. That's what hegseth seems to be trying to push, especially with his reference to "fog of war".
The moment you know the first shot destroyed the target, it ceases to be a double-tap.
I just don't like how they are trying to absolve themselves through language they know will be misinterpreted, and then the media just parrots it with no issue.
P.s., to be clear, whether it is a double tap doesn't change much to me because the first missile was already a war crime.
blackbearjesus27@lemmy.world · 40 pts · 249d
So based on the news over the last few days, the folks in charge;
America is a rogue state and has been for decades.
EDIT: never mind, I’m actually wrong. The survivors didn’t have any ability to call back. They watched two men struggle for almost an hour desperately trying to flip their boat back over TO SURVIVE and decided to murder them. Fucking string them all up
Zaktor@sopuli.xyz · 6 pts · 248d
They didn't even have the ability to make a SOS. That was part of the admirals original flimsy justification and a senator asked him directly if there was any evidence they had access to a radio and he said no.
blackbearjesus27@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 248d
Yeah I clarified my comment after that came out.
eatCasserole@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 249d
Have they even presented any evidence whatsoever that there were drugs on these boats?
The media keeps saying "suspected drug boats", which makes it sound like they actually kind of care who they're murdering, but I'm not convinced that's the case. Maybe "imagined drug boats" would be more apt.
So, there were eleven people on this small boat. Why the fuck would you have 11 people on a smuggling boat? No, this is just a random terrorist attack, perpetrated by the notorious terrorist organization know as "the US military".
Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world · 31 pts · 249d
Here's the thing, if there was drugs on the boat, killing them still isn't ok. But no, we don't even "know" if they are telling the truth about the drugs either. We have no idea why they want these people killed. We have to "trust" them... I don't.
r00ty@kbin.life · 1 pts · 249d
You're not the people they're trying to impress though. The people they are trying to impress will eat the lies up.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 249d
Is the boat a submarine? No? Then it's not a drug boat. Narcos have been using subs for years now, some of them autonomous.
apftwb@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 248d
"Alleged drug boat"?
pageflight@lemmy.world · 29 pts · 249d
Who was sitting there videoing them as they tried not to drown for an hour?
A fraction of the atrocities we are supporting through the IDF, but good it's getting reported too.
Blade9732@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 249d
That would be a drone. It was surveying the boat and used for target guidance and battle damage assessment. The weapons fire would be coming from a separate aircraft.
Rhaedas@fedia.io · 3 pts · 249d
But someone assessed they were still a valid target, right? We aren't quite at the fully autonomous attack craft yet, are we? That would be a convenient excuse, blaming the AI/drone because the humans in charge totally wouldn't have done that. Totally. Especially knowing it would be found out by the world.
ultranaut@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 249d
Definitely. There would have been people watching everything in real time and making the decisions about what to do.
Lonelybrick@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 249d
Whether it takes three years or thirty the maga officials responsible for this stuff will be held accountable
the_tab_key@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 249d
I'm not holding my breath.
The_v@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 249d
Just have to look at Henry Kissenger to know what will happen.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/henry-kissinger-war-crimes-cambodia-b2457588.html
grue@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 249d
Fuck off with the hopium. They will suffer precisely zero consequences unless we the People make it happen
MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 248d
We had a chance to do that, remember?
Lonelybrick@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 249d
And we will. The system never does, but the people aren't going to let this go
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 249d
Ha ha ha, good one. You sure know how to make a joke.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 248d
Hey, I'm sorry to break it to you, but...
Irreparable damage will be done and nobody is really going to pay. The most you can expect is a patsy to take the fall, and it will probably be some military officer who wasn't the problem.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 249d
Hey buddy, I got a great deal for you on this bridge for sale.
Chozo@fedia.io · 20 pts · 249d
Hang everyone who signed off on this.
ksigley@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 248d
I usually detest capital punishment, but this is so heinous it might actually be justified.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 248d
I would like to shut that shit down. You are not at war.
Have the "drug runners" struck at any US targets (preferably targets of military significance)? If not, then what I see is one party ruthlessly attacking another party repeatedly. If these were individuals that would be called a serial killer. And for serial killers it's never been a good defense to say "no no, this is legal, look how many people I've liked, I'm clearly at war, and this is legal in war". That's idiotic.
Furthermore, WE ARE NOT AT WAR! If you want a war, get Congress to declare war, we have a fucking process for that!
And finally, if this isn't a war, then it should be more of a policing situation. In no scenario should police fire missiles first and ask questions never. An acceptable way to handle this might be to disable the boat with munitions, and then detain all
fishermannarcos aboard. Bonus, this would allow you to seize all thefishnarcotics in their hold, which would prove you had the moral high ground and aren't just crazy murders. I mean can you imagine that, if you were just murdering people because you could and making sure to send all evidence and survivers to the bottom of the sea... Man, that would be nuts! People would be all like "who put these psychopaths in charge?!"falseWhite@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 249d
nulluser@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 248d
I don't think that the full video has been released to the public (yet). All we have is what we've seen in earlier news which is just the first strike.
x00z@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 249d
Isn't leaving victims clinging to their life like this considered torture?
ultranaut@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 249d
Not legally, but there is a duty of care owed to them as unarmed civilians clinging to a disabled vessel at sea. Killing them could only be justified legally if they posed an imminent threat, which obviously they do not. Letting them suffer for an hour while you decide whether to murder them is fucked up but would never specifically be prosecuted as torture unless the explicit intent to torture them was the reason they were kept alive for that hour.
Zaktor@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 248d
Even enemy combatants are supposed to be rescued at sea once they're no longer a threat. There's no interpretation of these guys that makes what they did justified.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 248d
Hesgeth.
What did he actually do in the military? He got two bronze stars. He guarded detainees at Gitmo. He got shot at once. He helped form an alliance with an Iraqi council member. He taught counterinsurgency. What else? Any actual combat?