Pentagon Defends Commander's Calls in Back-to-Back "Fog of War" Strikes

Pentagon Defends Commander's Calls in Back-to-Back "Fog of War" Strikes The U.S. Department of Defense is mounting a robust, multi-front defense of its commanders' decisions to launch controversial military strikes in Venezuela and the Caribbean, citing the inherent confusion of combat and rigorous legal review. The public campaign began after U.S. naval forces executed a strike on a target in Venezuelan waters, followed by a second strike on the same vessel. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth defended the decision to fire twice, attributing it to the "fog of war." He stated he saw no survivors after the initial attack but supported the admiral's choice to fire again to "eliminate the threat" [17273]. Separately, a Pentagon spokesperson offered full institutional backing for the senior commander, Admiral Bradley, who authorized the broader operation. "These actions were approved by the best military and civilian lawyers throughout the chain of command," the spokeswoman said, confirming the strikes underwent a strict legal review [17258]. In a related statement addressing ongoing operations, Hegseth also publicly asserted that all U.S. military activities in the Caribbean region are lawful. "Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law," he stated [15064]. The defense comes as Senate Republicans move to shield the legal authority used for the Venezuela operation. They are attempting to block a Democratic effort to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that justified the mission, arguing such a repeal would weaken presidential authority during ongoing threats [50051]. Pentagon Defends Second Strike in "Fog of War" Incident Pentagon Defends Commander's Decision in Venezuela Strikes Pentagon Official Defends Legality of Caribbean Operations Senate Republicans Move to Shield Trump's War Powers