Published on: 2025-09-05

Intelligence Report: Pete Hegseth Says US Can Carry Out Assassinations In Int’l Waters – Crooksandliars.com

1. BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)

The most supported hypothesis is that the statement regarding the US’s authority to conduct assassinations in international waters is primarily rhetorical, aimed at projecting strength against perceived threats, rather than a reflection of actual policy or legal capability. Confidence level: Moderate. Recommended action: Clarify legal positions and reinforce adherence to international law to prevent diplomatic fallout.

2. Competing Hypotheses

1. **Hypothesis A**: The statement reflects a genuine shift in US policy towards a more aggressive stance on international waters, potentially involving targeted killings of drug traffickers.
2. **Hypothesis B**: The statement is rhetorical, intended to deter drug trafficking through intimidation, without a substantive change in policy or legal framework.

Using ACH 2.0, Hypothesis B is better supported. The lack of clear legal justification and historical adherence to international law suggests the statement is more likely rhetorical.

3. Key Assumptions and Red Flags

– **Assumptions**: Hypothesis A assumes a significant policy shift without publicized legal backing. Hypothesis B assumes rhetoric is a tool for deterrence.
– **Red Flags**: Absence of legal documentation supporting a policy shift; potential cognitive bias in interpreting aggressive rhetoric as policy.
– **Inconsistencies**: Contradiction between the statement and established international maritime law.

4. Implications and Strategic Risks

– **Geopolitical Risks**: Potential diplomatic tensions with countries whose vessels might be targeted.
– **Legal Risks**: Violations of international law could lead to sanctions or legal actions against the US.
– **Psychological Impact**: Could embolden adversaries or provoke retaliatory actions.

5. Recommendations and Outlook

• Clarify the US’s legal stance on operations in international waters to allies and the international community.
• Engage in diplomatic discussions to address concerns and reinforce international norms.
• Scenario Projections:
  • Best: Strengthened international cooperation on drug trafficking.
  • Worst: Diplomatic isolation and increased maritime conflicts.
  • Most Likely: Continued rhetorical posturing with limited policy change.

6. Key Individuals and Entities

– Pete Hegseth
– Tren de Aragua cartel
– Trump administration

7. Thematic Tags

national security threats, international law, maritime security, counter-narcotics