After a classified briefing before lawmakers, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley was “very clear” that he never received any order to “give no quarter” or “kill them all” before the Sept. 2, 2025, operation that sank a suspected drug-smuggling boat in Caribbean waters. The strike was part of a new campaign targeting vessels tied to alleged cartel activity — a domain traditionally handled through law enforcement
According to other senators exiting the briefing, the order given to Bradley was “written down in great detail,” but did not include language to “kill everyone” aboard.
Some lawmakers, even those skeptical of the attack, confirmed no explicit “kill all” directive was presented by Bradley during the classified session.
But not everyone walked out reassured.
Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters that what he witnessed during the classified briefing was among the “most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.” He was specifically referring to footage of the follow-up strikes on the floundering wreckage. “Two individuals in obvious distress, unable to move, their vessel destroyed — and they were killed by the United States,” he added.
Legal experts maintain that even if there was no explicit kill all order at the top, the second strike on survivors could still violate the laws of war, especially if the survivors posed no imminent threat, because attacking shipwrecked or incapacitated individuals is prohibited.
The Pentagon’s Law of War Manual states plainly: “Persons rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by wounds, sickness, or shipwreck… are hors de combat.”
In other words, once a fighter is down and unable to continue, the law forbids intentionally killing them.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
READ NEXT: Pentagon Faces New Constitutional Rights Complaint
Permanent Washington just wants Hegseth removed. He is a threat to their power and longtime corruption.
Was the boat still afloat Mr. Hines? If it was the drugs aboard could have been Transferred to another Cartel Boat and delivered to our country. Even if it was floundering, if it was still on the Surface of the water, a second strike was warranted. The whole Idea is to sink these Drug Boats, and they should be hit as many times as is necessary to put them under, and to the bottom of the Sea. Too bad human beings had to be killed, but if they were not trying to bring Drugs into our country that have killed thousands of American young people. They would still be alive, would they not? Okay Mr. Hines just who do you care about more? Drug Runners or American children? Oh sorry, I forgot, you are a Democrat aren’t you, so the answer must be Drug Runners, just the same as your Party cares more for Illegal Aliens here in our country than you do about American Citizens.
These individuals were deemed legitimate targets for attack because of their cargo, its purpose and their mission to deliver it. They certainly deserved a second strike. The target is destroyed. The message is sent .
the mission commander, whoever it may have been, made a good decision.
Those kinds word are not used by upper commands of goverment, nor the military, and only are associate with liberal media or individuals who are intent to verbally causing destruction of trust and the law in order to gain political position for the sake of readership, or liberal socialist positions to cover up their own slimy personalities and goals.
Then why do terrorists that get blown out of their vehicles on land get picked off?