Admiral testified Pete Hegseth did not give ‘kill them all’ order, US lawmakers say

A US Navy admiral said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not give the order to “kill them all” during the controversial second US military strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean, several lawmakers said.

The confirmations from Democratic and Republican lawmakers came after watching footage of the Sept. 2 double-strike incident and hearing from Admiral Frank Bradley in closed hearings.

The briefing to members of the House of Representatives and later the Senate came as questions continued about the legality of the use of military force against suspected drug boats.

The White House said Admiral Bradley was responsible for the strikes and that he acted within the law.

On Thursday evening, the US military posted on the X website that it had killed four people in another boat attack in the eastern Pacific Ocean, in the direction of Hegseth.

Before news of the latest strike, lawmakers reacted to the testimony, with Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, saying Admiral Bradley had his respect and “should have the respect of all of us.”

He added: “But what I saw in that room was one of the most disturbing things I have seen during my time in public service.”

“Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were in no condition to continue their mission in any way,” Himes said.

After the briefing, Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, issued a joint statement with Himes calling for the video to be made public.

“The briefing left us with more questions than answers, and Congress must continue to investigate this matter and conduct oversight,” they said.

Republican Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Admiral Bradley and Hegseth “did exactly what we expected them to do.”

“I saw two survivors trying to overturn a boat loaded with drugs that was headed to the United States so they could stay in the fight,” Cotton said.

Republican House Rep. Rick Crawford also defended the strikes and said there was “no doubt in my mind” they were conducted in a professional manner.

Democratic Senator Jack Reed said in a statement that he was “disturbed” by what he saw, adding that his party would continue to investigate the incident.

The revelation that two raids took place when the first two survivors left raised new questions about the legitimacy of the administration’s ongoing deadly campaign against the boats, because of what the rules of conflict say about targeting wounded fighters.

US President Donald Trump said he had “no problem” releasing a video of the second strike. Footage of the first strike has already been published.

During the incident, two survivors of the first strike tried to climb back into the boat before the ship collided a second time, US media including CBS reported. A source said the pair were apparently trying to salvage the drugs.

Admiral Bradley was also expected to tell top US lawmakers on Thursday that the survivors were a legitimate target because their boat was still believed to contain drugs, according to a US official who spoke to the Reuters news agency.

The September 2 incident was the first in a series of ongoing US attacks against ships that have left more than 80 dead in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific.

While US officials have insisted that the September 2 attack was lawful, the full picture is still emerging of what happened that day.

The Washington Post was the first newspaper to report last week that two people had survived the first strike, and that Hegseth had ordered a second attack to kill them.

At the time, Hegseth immediately condemned the report as “fabricated, inflammatory and insulting,” while Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the “entire narrative is false.”

The White House later confirmed the existence of a second strike. Press Secretary Carolyn Leavitt said this week that the order came not from Hegseth but from Admiral Bradley, who acted “well within his authority and the law.”

Hegseth said Tuesday he watched the initial strike as it happened before moving on to other meetings. He said he “personally saw no survivors” and attributed this to smoldering debris and the “fog of war.”

Later that day, the Defense Secretary recalled being informed that Admiral Bradley had decided to “sink the boat and eliminate the threat,” a move he considered justified.

The issue has alarmed Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike, many of whom have already criticized the military campaign in general.

In addition to deadly strikes on suspected drug smuggling boats, the United States has expanded its military presence in the Caribbean.

Venezuela itself has repeatedly condemned the strikes, accusing the White House of stoking tensions in the region with the aim of overthrowing the government.

Trump claimed that the strikes led to a significant reduction in drug smuggling via sea routes, without providing evidence.

Likewise, no public evidence has been presented that the individuals targeted in each case were drug traffickers.

Several experts who spoke to the BBC raised serious doubts that a second strike on survivors on 2 September could be considered legal under international law.

The former Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court had previously told the BBC that the US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats They will be treated under international law as crimes against humanity.

“These are criminals, not soldiers. The criminals are civilians,” he said.

The survivors may have been subject to the protection afforded to shipwrecked sailors, or to that afforded to troops who had become unable to continue fighting.

The Trump administration has portrayed its operations in the Caribbean as a non-international armed conflict with alleged drug traffickers.

The rules of engagement in such armed conflicts – as stipulated in the Geneva Conventions – prohibit the targeting of wounded participants, saying that such participants should instead be arrested and cared for.

Admiral Bradley has not yet made any public comment on the matter.

One of dozens of people killed in ongoing US raids is believed to be Alejandro Carranza, a Colombian, who was last seen on September 14.

BBC Mundo has confirmed that Carranza’s family has now filed a complaint with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) in Washington.