Admiral Confirms No “Kill Them All” Order in Controversial Counter-Narcotics Strikes

Admiral Mitch Bradley has confirmed to lawmakers that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth did not order the killing of all survivors in counter-narcotics operations, contradicting earlier reports from The Washington Post that had sparked significant controversy.

During congressional briefings, Bradley addressed allegations that Hegseth had issued a “kill them all” directive that was interpreted as an order to eliminate remaining survivors following initial strikes.

“The Admiral confirmed that there had not been a kill them all order and that there was not an order to grant no quarter,” Representative Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, told reporters following the briefing.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, echoed this clarification, stating, “Admiral Bradley was very clear that he was given no such order, not to give no quarter or to kill them all.”

The controversy centers on a September 2 counter-narcotics operation that involved two strikes—an initial attack followed by a second strike that killed two survivors. This “double tap” approach has divided lawmakers along partisan lines, with differing interpretations of the video footage shown during the briefings.

Democratic lawmakers expressed serious concerns about what they viewed. “What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service,” Himes said. “You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion with a destroyed vessel, who were killed by the United States.”

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, called for transparency, saying, “The Department of Defense has no choice but to release the complete, unedited footage of the September 2nd strike.”

Republicans offered a markedly different assessment. Senator Cotton asserted that the video showed the survivors “trying to flip their boat back over and continue their mission,” suggesting they remained combatants rather than helpless individuals.

Representative Rick Crawford, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, criticized Democrats for being “troubled” by the footage, suggesting political motivations behind their reactions: “I am deeply concerned by the public statements made by others that seek to ignore the realities of targeting terrorists to score political points.”

At the heart of this controversy is the Pentagon’s Law of War manual, which explicitly prohibits attacking persons rendered “helpless” due to “wounds, sickness or shipwreck” as “dishonorable and inhumane.” Shipwrecked individuals are protected under these protocols unless they resume hostile actions or regain capacity to pose an immediate threat.

Pentagon officials have defended the second strike by suggesting the survivors may have been in a position to call for backup, which Bradley reportedly viewed as a continuing threat.

The operation is part of a broader counter-narcotics campaign that has produced varying outcomes. In an October 16 strike that killed two people, two survivors were captured and returned to Colombia and Mexico. In four strikes on October 27 that resulted in 14 fatalities, one survivor was left for retrieval by the Mexican coast guard.

Secretary Hegseth has stated that while he viewed the initial September 2 strike in real time, he was not present for the second strike and had no involvement in the decision to conduct it. Nevertheless, he has publicly expressed support for Admiral Bradley’s decision-making.

Admiral Bradley has spent an intensive day on Capitol Hill, providing separate briefings to top lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee, Senate Intelligence Committee, House and Senate Armed Services Committees, and key members of defense appropriations subcommittees as the administration works to address concerns about the legality and ethics of these counter-narcotics operations.