this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
720 points (99.2% liked)

News

33354 readers
2484 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Pete Hegseth is under increasing fire for a double-tap strike, first reported by The Intercept in early September, in which the U.S. military killed two survivors of the Trump administration’s initial boat strike in the Caribbean on September 2.

The Washington Post recently reported that Hegseth personally ordered the follow-up attack, giving a spoken order “to kill everybody.” Multiple military legal experts, lawmakers, and now confidential sources within the government who spoke with The Intercept say Hegseth’s actions could result in the entire chain of command being investigated for a war crime or outright murder.

“Those directly involved in the strike could be charged with murder under the UCMJ or federal law,” said Todd Huntley, a former Staff Judge Advocate who served as a legal adviser on Joint Special Operations task forces conducting drone strikes in Afghanistan and elsewhere, using shorthand for the Uniform Code of Military Justice. “This is about as clear of a case being patently illegal that subordinates would probably not be able to successfully use a following-orders defense.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 6 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Just like the Jan 6 hearings, they will drag it out for political points, but have no intention to seek actual charges, institutional change, military reform or anything.

It will just be: "Look at all the evil shit they did! Don't you wish something could be done! Oh well. Also Maduro bad m'kay, drugs bad m'kay, Hamas bad m'kay, we love troops m'kay. Hearing adjourned!"

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

That would require the administration's own people to bring those charges.

And I can already tell you the words you're going to hear if this makes it to court. "Unlawful Combatant", a designation we created so we could ignore the rules of war while fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Trump declared the Venezuelan drug cartels to be terrorists. Now they're treating them like we treated the Taliban in Afghanistan.

These guys are literally just waiting for the next outrageous thing to push this one out of the news cycle.

And yeah, we've been doing airstrikes like this for 20 years.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

Those asshats will manage to walk. The ICC should step in so they can only travel between the USA and fucking Russia.

[–] apftwb@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Does being convicted of a war crime or murder make you ineligible to be Secretary of Defense?

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Exactly the same amount as being a 34 time convicted felon makes you ineligible to be president

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 6 points 5 hours ago

Prince Joffrey

[–] yeather@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

50/50 they pardon everyone or Trump uses this opportunity to forcefully retire more generals and get Hegseth out.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

The war crimes don't get pardons and have no statute of limitations.

[–] yeather@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I meant they offer the other generals a sweetheart deal of early retirement in exchange for testimony against Hegseth. IIRC some of the people involved with the torture prison in Iraq got to retire for their testimony.

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 10 points 6 hours ago

"held liable" means some bad press in 'radical left' media at this point, right?

[–] elfin8er@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

I could bite my finger off too. Doesn't mean shit.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 20 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Could be, but won't. At least, not under this regime.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Head of the U.S. Military’s Southern Command Is Stepping Down, Officials Say. Adm. Alvin Holsey is leaving less than a year into his tenure, and as the Pentagon escalates attacks against boats in the Caribbean Sea.

Maybe its ethics. Maybe some folks in the chain of command have the fear of God in them. Maybe there's just better pay in the private sector and now is as good a time as any to cash out. But I suspect stories like this are going to be increasingly common in the run up to the '26 election.

Future President Pete Buttigieg will have a cabinet full of people who drew the line at double-tapping a Venezuelan fisherman. And they'll be spearheading our next Great Ethical War with... idk, Argentina or South Africa or something.

[–] khepri@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

we can hope for some high-profile resignations and maybe an outspoken admiral or something. And remember, it's only Trump's DOJ until it isn't anymore, and I think the statute of limitations on murder is more than 3 years...

[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Not a Trumper soadministration's? Implied but doesn't this fall under the same reasoning as all the indiscriminate drone bombing from the Bush and Obama administrations?

[–] Darkness343@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Uhm, it's secretary of war

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 110 points 12 hours ago (5 children)

This is actually the example they use of an illegal order in the DOD manual.

Page 1117 18.3.2.1 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23892053-dod-law-of-war-manual-june-2015-updated-july-2023/

[–] Cricket@lemmy.zip 12 points 6 hours ago

Holy moly, all that's left to do is to add a picture of Hegseth and of the exploded boat to illustrate this paragraph. SMH.

[–] khepri@lemmy.world 11 points 7 hours ago

This should be top of the thread everywhere this story is mentioned, forever.

[–] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nooo, but trump and all his totally cool and not criminal bros said that the president cannot give an illegal order…

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] neighbourbehaviour@lemmy.world 20 points 12 hours ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

See that’s why they make everyone pull the trigger when they commit murder. Now they’re all complicit, and they have to work for trump and keep him in power. Because if someone with a spine that actually follows the law and constitution gets into office they will face court-martial.

But we all know that they’ll just get raked over the coals by some committee and told to retire, if that, should a dem take office.

[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 67 points 13 hours ago (7 children)

Held liable by whom? The President who absolutely would say he agreed with it? The legislature that will talk a good game but fold before doing anything important? The courts who are owned by the parties? Or the police who want this to be SOP, and wouldn't enforce any orders for arrest?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 24 minutes ago

Nobody thinks it could happen while the US congress is dominated by Republicans, Trump is the president, and the Supreme Court is 6-3 GOP.

But, if the Democrats win big enough in the 2026 midterm elections to overcome all the dirty tricks that the Nazis are going to use to try to stay in power, then maybe in 2027 there's a chance they could start holding Trump to account. But, Trump would still have executive authority and unless he were impeached and this time they actually had the votes to remove him from office, they still couldn't get his Justice Department to investigate his War Department. Even if they did impeach him and remove him from office, he's just be replaced by Vance who is part of this whole signal chat.

So, at a minimum it would probably be 2029 before anything could happen, and would require that the Democrats got a congressional majority in 2026, and held or improved it in 2028 while also taking the presidency. And even then, the Supreme Court would still be 9-3 GOP unless some of the GOP members quit or died. So, it would probably require something radical like expanding the court to get any attempted convictions of higher-up GOP members past that court.

And, that's even assuming that the democrats grew a backbone. If they did, they couldn't do anything to Trump because the Supreme Court already decided the president is immune from anything up to, and including ordering Delta Force to kill the Democratic presidential hopeful. They could maybe go after Hegseth and down, but realistically would they? How many times have the Democrats had a chance to nail Trump, and instead decided that in the interest of national unity to let his crimes slide.

Then there's the International Criminal Court. They might risk indicting Hegseth or even Trump for war crimes. However, the US passed the Hague Invasion Act, effectively saying that if any American were ever put on trial for war crimes, the US would invade The Hague. That might deter them from even trying. Under Trump, they've already made life hell for a prosecutor who was going after someone who was merely a US ally. If a Democratic president were in office and a Democratic congress were in charge, they probably wouldn't actually invade, but they still might just ignore any ICC ruling. The US has made it abundantly clear that they're the world's only superpower and that international law doesn't actually apply to the US. And if anybody disagrees, they're welcome to take on the US military.

[–] RipLemmDotEE@lemmy.today 14 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

UCMJ is its own system enforced by the military with its own courts. Hegeseth will probably avoid any repercussions, but holding the chain of command responsible for state sponsored murder will send a clear message about obeying illegal orders.

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 13 points 10 hours ago

And not doing so sends a different, no less clear, message...

[–] UnspecificGravity 19 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

I guess some of these people expect to still be around in a couple years when there is a new administration that might feel like it's a good idea to prosecute people for crimes they committed for trump.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Aint a chance in hell anyone will face charges if the succeeding president is Kamala or Hug-a-Nazi Newsom. It would have to be progressive Democrat in office.

I mean in months after Jan 6 Trump's head was on the chopping block, public support was gone and yet there was zero interest in Biden or his justice dept to go after him and the democrats didn't even press him on it.

[–] UnspecificGravity 1 points 27 minutes ago

I am hopeful that we might get a progressive. That's why the DNC didn't want a real primary, it's what the people want.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

Pardons all around -orange turd

[–] falseWhite@lemmy.world 154 points 16 hours ago (24 children)

100% nothing will happen, or they will just get pardoned. USA is done. Kaput. All hail Nazi USA.

[–] WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

It’s fucking comical how many Americans seem to think that the collapse of their entire legal system is just a blip and there’s a “normal” to go back to.

It’s a bit like going to see a magician- if you catch a glimpse of how the trick is done, the spell is broken. There’s no going back. Everyone is now fully aware that accountability only exists because of shared suspension of disbelief that it might not. A new administration doesn’t fix this. Your constitution and legislation has been fully exposed as lacking enforcement measures. There isn’t any coming back from that, regardless of who’s in the big chair.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 1 points 12 minutes ago* (last edited 44 seconds ago)

It's already been collapsed for years though. Normal people don't even get trials anymore. We get outrageously high bail amounts and plea-bargains (forced confessions, that's what they are) so we will spend 2 years in prison instead of 5 awaiting trial.

Want to prove your innocence even if it means spending years in pretrial jail? Guess what? They'll end up dismissing the charges a week before your trial starts because they don't think they'll get a conviction. You're not officially acquitted so the prosecutor's success rate stays high AND you still were imprisoned for years so it's a win-win for them.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] pleasejustdie@lemmy.world 13 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

I worked at Fort Lewis in the RCF (Regional Correctional Facility, aka prison) and we had an Army soldier who got 3 years for 1st degree murder because he mercy killed a combatant after they got covered in white phosphorous. Literally everyone was like "how the fuck do you only get 3 years for first degree murder?" and then when they read his court documents were like "what the fuck, you got screwed and obviously everyone knew it..." They legally determined that at the moment they were no longer fighting back they became non-combatants and to kill a non-combatant instead of rendering aid is murder. Since the judge and jury agreed that it did violate the law, but hoped that if they were ever in that combatant's shoes, they would want someone to do to them what this soldier did, so yeah, guilty, but sentenced to the bare minimum allowed.

I know for 100% fact there is precedent already. But that is rules for thee, not for them, so I highly doubt we'll see anything happen. I'm sure they'll claim they need immunity because they were operating under special rules of engagement or some bullshit, and it will take years and lots of lawyers and in the end it'll drag on until its forgotten about and gets quietly dismissed somewhere.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

Including the commander in chief

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 28 points 14 hours ago

Must not could

load more comments
view more: next ›