US lawmakers are pushing the Trump administration to release footage of a recent military strike in the Caribbean, citing concerns about the legality and transparency surrounding the operation. In response, Congress has proposed a provision that would limit Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's travel budget until the Pentagon hands over unedited video of the strike.
The incident occurred on September 2nd, when US forces carried out a second deadly strike on a boat in the Caribbean. The strike was described as a "double-tap" and resulted in nine deaths. However, details about the operation are still unclear, with Hegseth's office initially withholding information about the incident.
Trump has previously posted video of the first strike, but has so far refused to release footage of the second strike. In response, lawmakers have proposed limiting travel funds for Hegseth's office until unedited footage is released. The provision is buried in a 3,000-page draft bill aimed at approving next year's defence spending.
The White House maintains that it is working within the laws of armed conflict and that the strikes were ordered by a navy admiral, not by Hegseth. However, some lawmakers have expressed concerns about the legality and transparency surrounding the operation, including senior Democrats and Republicans.
Trump has denied saying that he would release footage of the second strike, despite previously making similar statements on camera. Instead, he claims that whatever Hegseth wants to do regarding the footage is okay with him.
The issue highlights ongoing tensions between Trump's administration and Congress over issues of military action and transparency in war zones. The Pentagon is due to brief top congressional lawmakers on Tuesday, including Hegseth, Rubio, and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Dan Caine.
Lawyers say that the US must follow the laws of armed conflict, which dictate that parties in an armed conflict are obliged to pick up wounded survivors of a strike rather than attack them again. They point out that nine people died in the first strike on the vessel, with two survivors left clinging to the burning wreckage before being attacked again.
The controversy has sparked debate among lawmakers and experts about the legality and implications of Trump's actions. While some have praised the strikes as necessary, others have questioned their legality and raised concerns about transparency and accountability within the White House.
The incident occurred on September 2nd, when US forces carried out a second deadly strike on a boat in the Caribbean. The strike was described as a "double-tap" and resulted in nine deaths. However, details about the operation are still unclear, with Hegseth's office initially withholding information about the incident.
Trump has previously posted video of the first strike, but has so far refused to release footage of the second strike. In response, lawmakers have proposed limiting travel funds for Hegseth's office until unedited footage is released. The provision is buried in a 3,000-page draft bill aimed at approving next year's defence spending.
The White House maintains that it is working within the laws of armed conflict and that the strikes were ordered by a navy admiral, not by Hegseth. However, some lawmakers have expressed concerns about the legality and transparency surrounding the operation, including senior Democrats and Republicans.
Trump has denied saying that he would release footage of the second strike, despite previously making similar statements on camera. Instead, he claims that whatever Hegseth wants to do regarding the footage is okay with him.
The issue highlights ongoing tensions between Trump's administration and Congress over issues of military action and transparency in war zones. The Pentagon is due to brief top congressional lawmakers on Tuesday, including Hegseth, Rubio, and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Dan Caine.
Lawyers say that the US must follow the laws of armed conflict, which dictate that parties in an armed conflict are obliged to pick up wounded survivors of a strike rather than attack them again. They point out that nine people died in the first strike on the vessel, with two survivors left clinging to the burning wreckage before being attacked again.
The controversy has sparked debate among lawmakers and experts about the legality and implications of Trump's actions. While some have praised the strikes as necessary, others have questioned their legality and raised concerns about transparency and accountability within the White House.
The US Congress is getting a bit too big for its britches if you ask me 
. I mean, come on, they want unedited footage of a military strike in the Caribbean? That's just plain crazy talk 
. First off, who gets to decide what information is released and when? It sounds like a case of Congress trying to micromanage national security 
.
. If there were two survivors left clinging to the wreckage after the first strike, is it really necessary to attack them again? That just sounds like a recipe for disaster 
.
. Can't they just trust that he's doing his job and doesn't need to be babysat all the time 
?
. But at the end of the day, can we really afford not to have a healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to our military actions? I think so 
They're just gonna keep withholding info from Congress?! 
It's like they think they're above the law or something 
. And Trump's being super shady about it too... 
Release the footage already! 
I'm all for transparency and accountability, you feel? 
.
. I mean, what's going on here? It's like they're trying to sweep it all under the rug and hope we don't notice 
. And with Congress proposing to limit Defense Secretary Hegseth's travel budget until we see that footage... it's like someone's finally saying enough is enough! 
It seems clear to me (and I'm no expert) that our military should be following these rules, not just making stuff up as they go along 
.
. It's time for the White House to come clean about what really went down in those Caribbean waters 
.
. The laws of armed conflict are clear: you gotta pick up wounded survivors, not attack them some more 
. It's like they're saying, "Hey, we don't trust you to do your job." And Trump is all, "Whatever, dude, I've got this" 
. It's not just about Hegseth or Trump; it's about ensuring that we follow the laws of armed conflict and treat those who get caught in the crossfire with dignity 
.
. And if they can't trust Hegseth to share what he knows, then maybe they shouldn't be giving him a budget to travel around 
... the fact that they're withholding info from us is super unfair, you know? It's like, we need to know what's going on so we can understand why these strikes were necessary. And with nine people already dying in one strike, it's heartbreaking to think about those two survivors getting attacked again 
... I think Congress is right to push for transparency and accountability, we deserve to know the truth 
. On the other hand, I can totally see why some lawmakers would be all upset about it - we're talking lives lost here. 
. Can't wait to see how this all plays out 
. It's crazy that there are still so many questions about what happened on September 2nd... nine people lost their lives, and we don't even know if they were attacked again by US forces or not! 
It's like they're trying to hide something or avoid accountability. And now Congress is all over them, pushing for transparency and making sure that travel funds get cut if this footage isn't released. 
like, I get it, transparency matters but c'mon, Trump has been all over social media with that first strike video, why not the second one too? 
. Trump's stance on this is just confusing - he seems to think that as long as his guy says everything is cool with him, that makes it okay