Pete Hegseth lashes out at 'kill them all' report on boat strikes

Modern U.S. doctrine echoes this. NWP 1‑14M, the Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, makes clear that commanders have an obligation to rescue persons in peril at sea when it can be done without undue danger to the rescuing forces. Peacetime or wartime, combat or non-combat, this is not optional, it is recognized law and customary practice.
So your contention is the Commanders of the Navy vessel, pilots and everyone onboard are complicit in wanton and wilful murder and violating the Law of Naval Operations?

They are jeopardizing their military careers, freedom and potentially their lives to support Trump?
 
1764617507575.webp




 
So your contention is the Commanders of the Navy vessel, pilots and everyone onboard are complicit in wanton and wilful murder and violating the Law of Naval Operations?
They are jeopardizing their military careers, freedom and potentially their lives to support Trump?
Orr.... he's misapplied the principles and doctrines he presents.
 
Drug dealers selling poison that results in a slow destruction of a person's life and eventually death, while we're supposed to show humanity and mercy on the drug smugglers. Gee, sounds just like another screwed up leftist thinking process with misplaced priorities.
 
So your contention is the Commanders of the Navy vessel, pilots and everyone onboard are complicit in wanton and wilful murder and violating the Law of Naval Operations?

They are jeopardizing their military careers, freedom and potentially their lives to support Trump?
Yup
 
1:55 of the video at your link the reporter asks> To be clear.....Admiral Bradley gave the order to make that second strike?

Answer: Yes.

Not Pete.
pknopp lies and in the same post provides a video that proves pknopp is lying.

Imagine how much the Trump-deranged media lies when they don't show any video.
 
1:55 of the video at your link the reporter asks> To be clear.....Admiral Bradley gave the order to make that second strike?

Answer: Yes.

Not Pete.
So Pete throws the Admiral under the bus?

These troops better watch their asses
 
1:55 of the video at your link the reporter asks> To be clear.....Admiral Bradley gave the order to make that second strike?
Answer: Yes.
Not Pete.
Probably in accordance with the objectives laid out in the 2nd para, below:
-Stop drugs
-Destroy boats
-Kill terrorists

These are the objectives handed down by the SECEF; subordinates issue their orders based on these objectives.

  • The boat was hit.
  • The relevant individuals evaluated the boat as not destroyed
  • The boat was hit again

Apparently this took about 30 seconds.

It was illegal to ht the boat the 2nd time because there were survivors from the 1st strike?
Abject nonsense.



1764618587612.webp
 
Words like "during the engagement"?
""While the target is still engaged"?
Find me that passage.
You are the one making that claim. It's your job to cite it.

It's funny. You add words that aren't in the text and I have to disprove it? Not how it works.

I gave the relevant passages. Your turn
 
15th post
A shipwreck is the wreckage of a ship that is located either beached on land or sunken to the bottom of a body of water. It results from the event of shipwrecking, which may be intentional or unintentional

Not a shipwreck.

Responsibility to rescue comes -after- the engagement, not during
This engagement was not over.
Ah so in order to find a legal definition you go not to how it's defined in the Geneva conventions but rather to Wikipedia? Got it.

You are genuinely pathetic. Sorry but that's the only way to describe it.
 
1:55 of the video at your link the reporter asks> To be clear.....Admiral Bradley gave the order to make that second strike?

Answer: Yes.

Not Pete.
And Trump’s press flack states that Hesgeth gave the order for the second strike.

Is that Trump throwing his SecDef under the bus … who promptly threw the Admiral under the bus?

Looks like
 
Back
Top Bottom