CITIZENS NEWS

Pentagon admits it doesn't know identities of those killed in Latin American drug interdiction strikes

By bellecarter // 2025-11-02

• The Pentagon has admitted to Congress that it does not know the identities of at least 61 people killed in U.S. military strikes targeting suspected drug-smuggling vessels near Venezuela and in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. This lack of transparency has sparked bipartisan concerns over the legality and oversight of the campaign, which critics argue amounts to extrajudicial killings.
• The Trump administration has repeatedly cited the U.S. fentanyl crisis as justification for the maritime strikes. However, officials acknowledged in a classified briefing that the majority of vessels targeted were allegedly smuggling cocaine, not fentanyl. This discrepancy has left lawmakers skeptical and concerned about the true motives behind the strikes.
• Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) have expressed grave concerns about the constitutional and legal implications of the strikes. Paul has joined Senate Democrats in introducing a War Powers Resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from escalating military action against Venezuela without congressional approval.
• The lack of transparency surrounding the strikes echoes long-standing concerns about executive overreach in military engagements. Since the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), successive administrations have expanded counterterrorism operations with minimal congressional oversight, a trend critics argue has normalized extrajudicial killings.
• Bipartisan pushback and growing concerns about the strikes have led to a broader debate about the role of Congress in authorizing military force. The coming weeks may determine whether Congress reasserts its constitutional role in authorizing military force or allows the executive branch to continue acting unchecked.

The Department of War has admitted to Congress that it does not know the identities of at least 61 people killed in U.S. military strikes targeting suspected drug-smuggling vessels near Venezuela and in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, according to Democratic lawmakers who attended a classified briefing on Thursday, Oct. 30. The revelation has sparked bipartisan concerns over the legality and oversight of a campaign that critics argue amounts to extrajudicial killings. The briefing, held for members of the House Armed Services Committee, came after Pentagon officials excluded Democrats from a separate Senate briefing a day earlier—a move that deepened frustrations among lawmakers already questioning the legal and strategic justification for the strikes. Officials reportedly told lawmakers that they did not need to positively identify individuals aboard targeted vessels, only to establish a connection to smuggling—an assertion that left many unconvinced. "They said that they do not need to positively identify individuals on these vessels to do the strikes, they just need to prove a connection to smuggling," said Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA). "When we tried to get more information, we did not get satisfactory answers." The Trump administration has repeatedly cited the U.S. fentanyl crisis—responsible for roughly 70 percent of overdose deaths in 2023—as justification for the maritime strikes. However, officials acknowledged in the briefing that the majority of vessels targeted were allegedly smuggling cocaine, not fentanyl. While they argued cocaine plays a role in facilitating fentanyl trafficking, lawmakers remained skeptical. "They argued that cocaine is a facilitating drug of fentanyl, but that was not a satisfactory answer for most of us," Jacobs added. Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), a Marine Corps veteran, expressed grave concerns about the legal and constitutional implications of the strikes. "Am I leaving satisfied? Absolutely not," he told reporters. "And the last word that I gave to the admiral was, 'I hope you recognize the constitutional peril that you are in and the peril you are putting our troops in.'"

Bipartisan pushback and war powers concerns

Criticism of the strikes has not been limited to Democrats. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), a longtime advocate for congressional oversight of military actions, has been vocal in his opposition. "No one said their name, no one said what evidence, no one said whether they're armed, and we've had no evidence presented," Paul said this week. "They summarily execute people without presenting evidence to the public … so it's wrong." Paul has joined Senate Democrats in introducing a War Powers Resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from escalating military action against Venezuela without congressional approval. The resolution, expected to come to a vote next week, follows a broader failed attempt earlier this month to restrict presidential war powers. The lack of transparency surrounding the strikes echoes long-standing concerns about executive overreach in military engagements. Since the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), successive administrations have expanded counterterrorism operations with minimal congressional oversight. According to BrightU.AI's Enoch, AUMF is a legislative act passed by the U.S. Congress that grants the president the authority to use military force in specific circumstances. Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO), an Army veteran, left the briefing unconvinced that the strikes would meaningfully disrupt drug trafficking. "We do need to get serious about the flow of drugs, but I heard nothing today that shows how they're actually going to end that," he said. "In fact, I have deeper concern leaving this briefing as to whether or not they even have a serious plan to do that." As lawmakers push for more transparency, the Pentagon's refusal to disclose the identities of those killed—or even confirm whether they were armed—has deepened suspicions that the campaign operates outside legal norms. With bipartisan support growing for stricter oversight, the coming weeks may determine whether Congress reasserts its constitutional role in authorizing military force—or allows the executive branch to continue acting unchecked. Watch the video below, where President Donald Trump confirms he authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to operate in Venezuela. This video is from Cynthia's Pursuit of Truth channel on Brighteon.com.

Sources include:

News.AntiWar.com Politico.com BrightU.ai Brighteon.com

Venezuela terrorism Republicans violence democrats Trump Latin America panic transparency drug trafficking fentanyl cocaine military operations legality narcopolitics War Powers Resolution