U.S. Military's Boat Strikes Planning Takes On New Significance
Source: New York Times
U.S. Military's Boat Strikes Planning Takes On New Significance
The details could raise questions about who was responsible for a follow-up strike on Sept. 2 -- the commander who ordered it or the defense secretary.
President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, seated at a table in the Cabinet Room.
On orders from President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the U.S. military has attacked 21 boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing 83 people. Doug Mills/The New York Times
By Helene Cooper, Julian E. Barnes, Charlie Savage and Eric Schmitt
The reporters have been covering the U.S. military's operations in the Caribbean.
Dec. 3, 2025
Leer en espaol
Before the Trump administration began attacking people suspected of smuggling drugs at sea, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth approved contingency plans for what to do if an initial strike left survivors, according to multiple U.S. officials.
The military would attempt to rescue survivors who appeared to be helpless, shipwrecked and out of what the administration considered a fight. But it would try again to kill them if they took what the United States deemed to be a hostile action, like communicating with suspected cartel members, the officials said.
After the smoke cleared from a first strike on Sept. 2, there were two survivors, and one of them radioed for help, the U.S. officials said. Adm. Frank M. Bradley, who commanded the operation, ordered a follow-up strike and both were killed.
The military's contingency plans have taken on new significance as Admiral Bradley and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are set to go to Capitol Hill on Thursday to answer questions about the attack amid an uproar over the killing of the survivors. ... The men plan to present a vigorous defense, officials said, of what they will assert was a lawful follow-up strike on the survivors. That moment is just a small part of Mr. Trump's legally disputed campaign of killing people suspected of smuggling drugs at sea as if they were combatants in a war, but it is now the focus of intense congressional scrutiny.
{snip}
Dave Philipps contributed reporting.
Helene Cooper is a Pentagon correspondent for The Times. She was previously an editor, diplomatic correspondent and White House correspondent.
https://www.nytimes.com/by/helene-cooper
Julian E. Barnes covers the U.S. intelligence agencies and international security matters for The Times. He has written about security issues for more than two decades.
https://www.nytimes.com/by/julian-e-barnes
Charlie Savage writes about national security and legal policy for The Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/by/charlie-savage
Eric Schmitt is a national security correspondent for The Times. He has reported on U.S. military affairs and counterterrorism for more than three decades.
https://www.nytimes.com/by/eric-schmitt
A version of this article appears in print on Dec. 4, 2025, Section A, Page 10 of the New York edition with the headline: Focus May Turn to Plans for Survivors in U.S. Boat Strikes. Order Reprints Today's Paper Subscribe
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/03/us/politics/trump-boat-strikes-survivors.html
Hat tip, Ryan Goodman
The USG has a new explanation on why they (now admittedly) intentionally killed 2 shipwrecked men. It does not pass the laws-of-war smell test
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T02:25:08.582Z
Worse for Hegseth, NYT: "Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth approved contingency plans for what to do if an initial strike left survivors."
1/🧵
2/ The Hegseth-approved contingency plan:
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T02:26:11.281Z
The U.S. military could try to kill shipwrecked survivors if "they took what the United States deemed to be a hostile action, like communicating with suspected cartel members."
3/ First it's absurd on its face that communicating to be RESCUED is a hostile act.
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T02:27:01.438Z
That's the definition of being shipwrecked and helpless.
The whole point of a legal prohibition on killing people who are shipwrecked is that they must be rescued or left to be rescued instead.
4/ What about explanation that calling to be rescued might also allow cartel to retrieve some cocaine?
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T02:29:54.430Z
It's legally ludicrous to claim (as Hegseth et al would need to argue) that such conduct equals a failure to "cease all active combat activity."
Navy/Marines/Coast Guard Commander's Handbook:
5/ Let Hegseth (or Admiral Bradley or General Caine) try to defend the idea that retrieving the cocaine is active combat activity. They can't.
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T02:30:22.430Z
They're digging themselves in worse.
This keeps going.
= new reply since forum marked as read
