U. S. Military Actions in Venezuela Waters Spark Debate

The U. S. military's recent actions in the Caribbean have sparked a heated debate among lawmakers and experts. The focus is on a September strike that killed two survivors clinging to a damaged boat. Officials like Hegseth and Rubio defended the campaign, calling it a success in stopping drugs from reaching the U. S. However, many lawmakers are questioning the broader goals, especially regarding Venezuela. The strike that killed the two survivors has raised serious concerns. Lawmakers want to see the video footage of the incident, arguing that the public should know what happened. Hegseth has not yet decided whether to release the footage. Some Republicans support the campaign, while others, like Sen. Rand Paul, criticize it, saying it goes against American values.The rationale behind the strike has shifted over time. Initially, the Pentagon dismissed criticisms, but details have since emerged that contradict their claims. Adm. Frank Bradley, who ordered the second strike, admitted that the survivors were unlikely to overturn the boat. They were waving and had not called for backup. Experts argue that the strike may have violated the laws of war. The Pentagon's own manual states that firing on shipwrecked people is illegal. The debate continues as lawmakers try to understand the intelligence behind the actions and whether the laws of war were followed.