白宫承认防长下令二次打击运毒船 国会启动调查

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. military's second strike on survivors of a drug trafficking boat raises serious legal and ethical concerns, prompting bipartisan calls for investigation in Congress [1][5]. Group 1: Military Actions - On September 2, the U.S. military conducted a second attack on a drug trafficking boat in the Caribbean, resulting in the deaths of survivors who were clinging to the burning vessel, bringing the total death toll to 11 [4]. - The U.S. Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, reportedly ordered the second strike, stating a desire to "leave no one alive," which has sparked significant public outrage and legal scrutiny [1][4]. - The White House confirmed that the attack was authorized under the premise of self-defense and was conducted in international waters, claiming it was in accordance with the laws of armed conflict [2]. Group 2: Congressional Response - Bipartisan members of Congress have expressed concerns that the second strike on survivors may constitute a violation of international law, with some suggesting it could amount to a war crime [5]. - Senator Tim Kaine indicated plans to propose a resolution requiring congressional approval for any military action in Venezuela, emphasizing the need for legal oversight [5]. - Congressional leaders are demanding the release of unedited video footage of the attack to clarify the circumstances and hold accountable those involved [5]. Group 3: Broader Context - Since early September, the U.S. military has reportedly sunk over 20 boats under the guise of anti-drug operations, resulting in more than 80 deaths, yet no evidence has been provided to substantiate claims of drug trafficking [7]. - The Venezuelan government has accused the U.S. of using anti-drug operations as a pretext for military aggression aimed at regime change, leading to calls for investigations into the actions of the U.S. military [7].