Why an alleged boat strike under Hegseth could be a war crime

Allegations of War Crimes - Allegations of a potential war crime are under investigation, stemming from a second strike on a ship already disabled, potentially violating the Geneva Conventions and US law [2][5] - Bipartisan outrage and vows for investigations on Capitol Hill highlight the seriousness of the allegations, with concerns raised about potential illegality and war crimes [2] - The legality of the initial strikes is questioned, with concerns about the evidence, legal basis, and ethical justification for carrying them out [3][6] Geneva Convention Implications - Article 3 of the Geneva Convention prohibits attacking someone "out of combat," which includes injured soldiers or ships already hit, as they no longer pose a threat [4] - A second strike on a disabled ship carrying 11 people, as reported by the Washington Post, could constitute a war crime under the Geneva Conventions and US law if confirmed [5] Administration's Stance - The administration asserts the legality of the strikes, particularly those targeting alleged narco-traffickers posing an imminent threat [6] - There are conflicting accounts regarding the second strike, with Pete denying ordering the death of the individuals involved [1][2]