Defense Chief's Shaky Defense: What Really Happened?

A top defense official recently stumbled through a defense of a controversial military action. He blamed the "fog of war" for a second missile strike that killed two survivors of an initial attack. These men were clinging to a boat in international waters. The official, Pete Hegseth, claimed he didn't see survivors but insisted the boat was on fire and obscured by smoke. The first strike hit the boat off the coast of Venezuela. Two men survived and were left in the water. Under U. S. and international law, these men should have been treated as either prisoners of war or criminal suspects. However, a second strike was launched, killing them. Hegseth later admitted he didn't watch the entire operation but praised the decision to sink the boat. The commander of the operation, Admiral Mitch Bradley, is now facing potential legal consequences. The term "fog of war" is unlikely to be a valid defense for killing survivors of a military action. This incident has raised serious questions about the legality and ethics of the strikes. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has openly stated his intentions to attack boats involved in drug trafficking. He also mentioned targeting cocaine production in Colombia. These statements have added to the controversy surrounding the missile strikes. The situation highlights the need for clear guidelines and accountability in military operations.