Joining us now, independent Senator Angus King of Maine. He's a member of both the Armed Services and Intelligence Committee. So, I'll start with uh the same question I've asked everyone so far this morning.The account we have so far as described in the Atlantic especially, but showing that there is 40 minutes between the first strike and the second and that these were unarmed two men uh with no radios. as far as the latest reporting shows, um seeming to give a um wave to the US flying above surrender. Um i ...

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]

Allegations and Denials - A Washington Post report alleges Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the killing of everyone on board a suspected drug boat, including those clinging to wreckage [1] - Hegseth denies the report, and President Trump expresses his belief in Hegseth's denial [2] Congressional Concerns and Investigations - Some members of Congress express concern that the alleged actions could be a war crime and are calling for bipartisan investigations [2][4] - Lawmakers are concerned about the legality of the strikes and the legal justifications provided by the administration [6] Potential Legal and Ethical Violations - Concerns raised about a potential "double tap" strike, which could violate the Geneva Convention [7] - Striking against someone wounded and clinging to debris is considered a war crime under the Geneva Convention, the laws of land warfare, and the UN charter [12] - The situation raises concerns about senior civilian leaders potentially urging actions that violate the law of armed conflict [9] Impact on Service Members - The situation places service members in a difficult position, caught between their legal obligations, moral conscience, and the pressure of civilian authority [10] Evidence and Testimony - Film of both the original and secondary strikes should exist [8] - Key individuals who could testify include Secretary Hegseth, members of the Special Operations Command involved, and Admiral Holy [9]