US Admits Ignorance of Who It's Killing in 'Boat Strikes'
According to The Intercept, the US military has admitted it lacks precise intel on identities during 'unprivileged belligerent' boat strikes. (That's Pentagon-speak for killing people on boats they deem hostile, without the inconvenience of knowing if they’re actual combatants or just particularly unlucky fishermen.) This policy, a direct inheritance from the Obama administration's drone playbook,
legitimizes a 'shoot first, ask questions never' approach. Recall the 2009 Afghanistan rules of engagement that allowed strikes on individuals simply exhibiting 'patterns of behavior' linked to militants, an admission of institutionalized uncertainty. So, the US military can sink vessels, kill crews, and then, with a straight face, claim ignorance of who they just 'neutralized.' One might wonder
how many fishing skiffs or desperate migrants accidentally became 'unprivileged belligerents' in places like the Venezuelan coast. It appears deniability is now a core tenet of military operations, ensuring no awkward questions about collateral damage or, you know, actual war crimes will arise. It's truly efficient: why confirm identity when you can just declare 'threat averted' and move on?