47 losing military & public in 'war crime' debacle: Ari on video evidence vs Trump official's claims

Alleged War Crime & Investigation - The report suggests a potential war crime committed by the US military under the Trump administration, involving the killing of shipwreck survivors from a prior attack [3][5][6] - Bipartisan pressure from lawmakers has led to the release of some information, video, and testimony regarding the incident [2][8] - The Trump administration is withholding the video of the second strike, raising questions about transparency and accountability [8][15][17] - Discrepancies exist between official explanations and video evidence, particularly regarding whether the survivors were signaling for rescue or posed a threat [7][11][12] Legal & Ethical Concerns - Legal analysts dispute the justification for the follow-up strike, questioning whether the US is at war with drug traffickers and whether the survivors posed an imminent threat [22][23] - The report highlights the importance of adhering to the Geneva Conventions and treating enemy combatants and survivors humanely [4][5] - A military lawyer argues that the legal justification for the strike relies on a series of questionable premises [22][23] Political & Public Relations - The Trump administration's handling of the situation is drawing criticism and comparisons to other instances of alleged secrecy and cover-ups [13][18][21] - The report suggests that the administration may be attempting to control the narrative and manage public relations by selectively releasing information [16][19][20] - The incident raises broader questions about the use of wartime powers in non-war situations and the oversight of lethal military actions [16][22] Casualties and Impact - Over 20 strikes have been carried out, resulting in an estimated 86 deaths [25] - The report emphasizes the human cost of these strikes and the potential for them to be considered war crimes [3][25]