US Military Strikes on Drug Boats: Legal or Lethal?

The US military has been striking boats suspected of drug trafficking, resulting in 83 deaths. Recent reports suggest that a second strike was ordered on a damaged boat with survivors, sparking debates about the legality of these actions. A "double-tap" strike involves a second attack after the first. This method has been criticized in the past, including during the Obama administration's drone strikes. The White House denies any wrongdoing, stating that the strikes were in self-defense and followed international law. Legal experts have raised concerns. Killing survivors who are no longer a threat could be a war crime or murder. However, some argue that the US is not in an official conflict with drug cartels, making the strikes extrajudicial killings. The intent behind the second strike is crucial. If it was to eliminate survivors, it would be illegal. If it was to sink the boat, it might be justified. Congress is investigating, but accountability seems unlikely. The US military is trained not to harm noncombatants or prisoners. Yet, the situation is complex. Understanding the exact orders and communications is essential to determine the legality of the strikes. Historically, targeting disabled enemies is prohibited. The current laws of war and Geneva Convention forbid such actions. Criticism of the strikes comes from various legal experts and lawmakers. Some Republicans defend the strikes, questioning why the legality is being debated. However, there is no public evidence that the boats were carrying drugs or that those killed were given a fair trial.