US Strikes Kill More Civilians as Troops Worry About Liability
In a series of deadly military strikes, the US has killed 57 people in international waters, including civilians. The strikes were authorized by President Trump and carried out by his Pentagon.
Critics have condemned the strikes as "sanctioned murder" and "extrajudicial killings", comparing them to actions taken by China and Iran. Democrats and Republicans alike are speaking out against the president's actions, which they say are a threat to human rights and international law.
The US military claims that the strikes were carried out in response to alleged narcotics trafficking, but many questions remain unanswered. The exact circumstances of the deaths, whether any innocent people were on board, and what evidence was used to justify the strikes are all unknown.
Furthermore, there are concerns about the legality of these operations. Congress has not been informed about the strikes, and some junior officers have reportedly sought written sign-off from military lawyers before participating in the strikes. This has led to worries among troops that they may face legal liabilities for their actions.
To add to the controversy, US military officials involved in the strikes have been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, a move seen as unusual given the usual requirements to shield national security secrets from public view. Lawmakers are also being kept in the dark about key aspects of the mission, fueling concerns that the administration is acting unilaterally.
The situation continues to unfold, with many questions still unanswered.
In a series of deadly military strikes, the US has killed 57 people in international waters, including civilians. The strikes were authorized by President Trump and carried out by his Pentagon.
Critics have condemned the strikes as "sanctioned murder" and "extrajudicial killings", comparing them to actions taken by China and Iran. Democrats and Republicans alike are speaking out against the president's actions, which they say are a threat to human rights and international law.
The US military claims that the strikes were carried out in response to alleged narcotics trafficking, but many questions remain unanswered. The exact circumstances of the deaths, whether any innocent people were on board, and what evidence was used to justify the strikes are all unknown.
Furthermore, there are concerns about the legality of these operations. Congress has not been informed about the strikes, and some junior officers have reportedly sought written sign-off from military lawyers before participating in the strikes. This has led to worries among troops that they may face legal liabilities for their actions.
To add to the controversy, US military officials involved in the strikes have been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, a move seen as unusual given the usual requirements to shield national security secrets from public view. Lawmakers are also being kept in the dark about key aspects of the mission, fueling concerns that the administration is acting unilaterally.
The situation continues to unfold, with many questions still unanswered.
. I mean, what's next? Will we be seeing more Operation Rolling Thunder-style secret ops in international waters?
. Don't get me wrong, I get the need for national security, but come on, transparency is key here!
. Remember when Nixon was in office and we were all wondering what he was really up to? Same vibe, different leader 
. like, doesn't it go against every human rights agreement they signed up to? and what's with the secrecy? isn't that just gonna make more problems in the long run? I mean, I get that national security is important but at some point you gotta be willing to answer for your actions. And btw, have we seen the footage of these "narcotics trafficking" operations they're saying led to the strikes? 
these strikes sound super reckless and unregulated like what's next? we gotta keep an eye on this and make sure our elected officials are doing what's right for the people not just some shadowy admin 
those non-disclosure agreements don't sit well with me either, it's like they're hiding something 
have you seen that video of the drones dropping their payloads randomly? 
that's just insane. we need more transparency and accountability from our gov't on this one 
i cant even believe our president is doing this kinda stuff without congress knowing its like he's above the law or something 
Can't believe we're debating 'sanctioned murder' instead of getting answers 
. killing 57 people including civilians is just not right, no matter what the reason is. it's like they're trying to avoid accountability and push it all under the rug. non-disclosure agreements for military officials who carried out the strikes? that's just shady 
. and congress gets zero notice about this whole thing? come on, that's not how democracy works 
... Like, I get that we need to take a stand against narcotics trafficking and all that, but 57 civilian lives lost? It's just not right 
. I mean, I know we need to keep national security top of mind, but not at the expense of human rights, you know? It feels like there's a huge conflict going on here between what we're supposed to be doing and how we're actually doing it.
honestly who needs a super detailed explanation for every single military operation? can't the Pentagon just do its job and stop worrying about being sued later? 
but seriously though, shouldn't Congress have a say in how the country is being run? it's not like they're asking for world peace or anything 
And now the US military is worried about liability? Like, who isn't in danger when you're dropping bombs? 
And those non-disclosure agreements? Are they trying to cover their tracks or something? 
Who gets to decide who lives and dies in international waters, anyway? It sounds like the Pentagon is playing a super high-stakes game of "shoot first, ask questions later". 
Why do military officials need to sign a secrecy agreement to talk about legitimate operations? It just feels like there's something they're not telling us. 
And the lack of info from Congress is wild... shouldn't our elected reps be in the loop on these kinds of decisions?
We need more transparency and accountability here. Can't we just have some answers? 
