Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox Get our free Inside Washington email Get our free Inside Washington email Email * SIGN UP I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our Privacy notice
U.S. military assets killed four people and destroyed another boat in a fourth strike against alleged drug traffickers, according to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Under Donald Trump’s orders, Hegseth directed “a lethal, kinetic strike on a narco-trafficking vessel affiliated with Designated Terrorist Organizations” off the coast of Venezuela on Friday morning, according to Hegseth.
Hegseth, in a post on X with a video of the destruction, accused the boat of “transporting substantial amounts of narcotics” to the United States “to poison our people.”
“Our intelligence, without a doubt, confirmed that this vessel was trafficking narcotics, the people onboard were narco-terrorists, and they were operating on a known narco-trafficking transit route,” he wrote. “These strikes will continue until the attacks on the American people are over!!!!”
The attack marks the fourth such strike, which have killed more than 20 people within the last month.
open image in gallery A screenshot of a video posted by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shows an alleged drug boat blown up by U.S. forces off the coast of Venezuela October 3 ( Pentagon )
A recent notice from the Pentagon to members of Congress and obtained by The Independent states that the United States is formally engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels that the Trump administration has labeled “unlawful combatants.”
The unclassified notice appears to claim extraordinary wartime powers to justify military strikes against alleged drug traffickers which have drawn legal scrutiny and allegations that the administration and defense officials committed extrajudicial murder.
According to the notice, the administration says that the president has “determined” that cartels are “nonstate armed groups” whose actions “constitute an armed attack against the United States” and are now engaged in a “noninternational armed conflict” — or war with a non-state actor.
The administration cites a statute requiring reports to lawmakers about conflicts involving U.S. military personnel. A White House official told The Independent that the administration is complying with requirements under the National Defense Authorization Act to inform Congress of any attack involving armed forces.
open image in gallery Under Donald Trump’s direction, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered a fourth strike on an alleged drug-carrying boat, killing four on board, after the administration declared the US is engaged in ‘armed conflict’ with cartels ( Getty Images )
Following news of the notice to Congress, White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly told The Independent that the president “acted in line with the law of armed conflict to protect our country from those trying to bring deadly poison to our shores, and he is delivering on his promise to take on the cartels and eliminate these national security threats from murdering more Americans.”
Defense officials have been ordered to “conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict,” the notice says.
“The United States has now reached a critical point where we must use force in self-defense and defense of others against the ongoing attacks by these designated terrorist organizations,” according to the notice.
It remains unclear what evidence the United States has collected to justify the attacks; the White House and defense officials have declined to share additional information about the strikes, citing national security concerns.
Legal experts and former national security officials have disputed the president’s legal authority to launch extrajudicial killings against suspected drug traffickers, raising consequential questions on both the administration’s growing conflict with Venezuela and the president’s anti-immigration agenda.
crossdtherubicon on October 3rd, 2025 at 18:31 UTC »
There is little publicly available supporting evidence to conclude if Maduro is a part of a drug cartel, or if drug smuggling has become institutionalized in Venezuela, or not.
But it is clear that this affects global oil routes and supply, and gives a blanket protection to Guyana's oil supply. We know that control of the oil supply has a direct impact on oil price. And that Trump has been using this as an active method supporting multiple strategies.
Further, we know that Venezuela is aligned to the BRICS cohort and has a dependable supplementary supply of oil to those nations. It had also been speculated that China in particular has taken interest in Venezuela's oil production.
So, is this really about ensuring the sovereignty of Guyana's oil via military intimidation against Venezuela, under the guise of drug patrol? Is this about creating a buffer to China's oil interests in the region?
Its strange that the MSM hasn't seemed to be able to ask these simple questions, amid the scrutiny. As a counterfactual, that leads me to believe they have merit.
sunnyspiders on October 3rd, 2025 at 17:44 UTC »
Can we just admit the US has Venezuela under what is effectively a naval blockade?
The US warmongers want a war, their domestic policies are imploding.
Worth noting this was an entire novel and essentially the scandal in Clear and Present Danger.
Republicans have normalized insanity so long they can’t see it.
ghostposthusky on October 3rd, 2025 at 17:24 UTC »
Funny how you have no right to a fair trial if you’re not an American citizen and not on American soil