Key Takeaways
- Allegations surface of an unlawful US military strike on a suspected drug boat and its survivors on September 2.
- Retired Major General Steven J. Lepper alleges the order for a second strike on survivors was a "textbook unlawful order."
- The Trump administration reacted strongly to a video reminding military personnel of their obligation to refuse unlawful orders.
- Senior military officers bear a greater responsibility to ensure the lawfulness of orders to protect junior troops.
Deep Dive
- A report from The Washington Post alleges the Trump administration's first strike on a suspected drug boat in September was unlawful.
- The report further alleges a second strike specifically targeted survivors clinging to the disabled vessel.
- Retired Air Force Major General Steven J. Lepper expressed profound disappointment and anger, characterizing the allegations as a potential "war crime."
- Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Mark Kelly, released a video featuring six veterans in Congress.
- The video reiterated established military law regarding the obligation to refuse unlawful orders.
- Guest Steven J. Lepper characterized the video as a typical law of armed conflict briefing for service members.
- The Trump administration reacted strongly to the lawmakers' video, contrasting with a previous, similar video that received little attention.
- Public statements from Stephen Miller, President Trump, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth labeled the lawmakers' actions as insurrectionary or seditious.
- The Pentagon reviewed Senator Mark Kelly's comments, with Lepper noting Kelly, as a retired regular officer, remains subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
- Potential legal ramifications for Senator Kelly include charges like conduct unbecoming an officer or sedition, or administrative action such as stripping his rank.
- Recent reporting by The Washington Post investigated specific allegations of unlawful orders related to the September 2nd operation.
- The report detailed a military strike on a boat where a second strike was issued due to fear two individuals clinging to the vessel could be a threat.
- Guest Steven J. Lepper stated this scenario constitutes an illegal order, arguing there was sufficient time to assess the situation and consult legal counsel.
- U.S. military personnel serving in the Caribbean face tension between the presumption of lawful orders and legal assessments suggesting boat strikes could be unlawful or war crimes.
- Guest Steven J. Lepper explains that even if an Office of Legal Counsel deems an operation legal, a second strike on a boat was "clearly unlawful," potentially trapping military members.
- Lepper acknowledges active-duty military members are concerned about being asked to perform actions contrary to their training and for partisan purposes.
- The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) defines "patently unlawful orders" which even those executing them are obligated to resist.
- Culpability for unlawful orders varies by rank, with senior officers like Admiral Bradley bearing higher responsibility than those who execute orders.
- Guest Steven J. Lepper suggests congressional and criminal investigations into potential violations of murder and war crime statutes are necessary.
- Lepper cites the My Lai massacre as an example where soldiers were court-martialed for murder and war crimes after executing unlawful orders.