Fresh Air Was The U.S. Attack On A Venezuelan Boat A War Crime?
51 snips
Dec 3, 2025 
Alex Horton, a national security reporter for the Washington Post, dives into the controversial U.S. military strike on a Venezuelan boat accused of carrying narco-terrorists. He discusses the lethal orders given, contrasting maritime protections with land engagement norms. Horton reveals the implications of the strike for U.S. military conduct and explores the legality of attacking shipwrecked survivors. He questions the motivations behind the action and sheds light on the murky world of drug trafficking claims and military strategy.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
SEAL Team 6 Carried Out The Strike
- The September 2 strike was carried out by SEAL Team 6 under a White House-directed anti-drug mission.
- Admiral Frank Bradley authorized a second strike after seeing two survivors in the water to fulfill the intent to kill everyone aboard.
Shipwrecked People Have Strong Protections
- International law strongly protects shipwrecked people who cannot fight back, making re-attacking survivors at sea legally fraught.
- There is nuance if the boat remained seaworthy, but shipwreck protections emerged after World War II and are clear in law-of-war guidance.
A 2007 Iraq Patrol Example
- Alex Horton described a 2007 Iraq patrol where his unit called in an Apache to ensure attackers were neutralized.
- He used this to contrast permissive re-attacks on land with stricter maritime protections.