War Crimes and Rules of Engagement: A Deep Dive with Johnson & McGovern

This week’s Intelligence Community Roundtable on Judging Freedom, hosted by Judge Andrew Napolitano, featured a robust discussion with Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern. They tackled serious allegations surrounding the Secretary of Defense and the legality of military actions, questioning established protocols and the very definition of war crimes. The conversation also touched upon international relations, particularly concerning Russia and Europe.

Key Takeaways

• The actions of the Secretary of Defense are being scrutinized, with accusations of war crimes being leveled.
• There’s a significant debate about the legality and constitutionality of certain military programs and strikes.
• Rules of engagement (ROE) are a critical legal framework, and their disregard is a major concern.
• Special operations units and intelligence agencies may operate with less oversight, raising questions about accountability.
• International tensions, especially between Russia and Europe, are high, with potential for conflict.

The Secretary of Defense and Allegations of War Crimes

The discussion kicked off with a strong statement from Larry Johnson, who characterized the Secretary of Defense as a war criminal. He argued that the killing of survivors, while horrific, shouldn’t distract from the larger issue of an unconstitutional and criminal program. Ray McGovern agreed, pointing out that the first strike was an illegal act of war. He questioned whether Congress has the backbone to hold individuals accountable.

Admiral Bradley was also a focal point. Johnson suggested he should have been arrested and taken to military prison. He raised the question of whether military personnel are taught to disregard or disobey superiors when ordered to kill non-combatants. McGovern clarified his own background, noting his work with the CIA and US military special operations forces, rather than direct military service.

The Standard for Lethal Force

McGovern used the example of George H.W. Bush during World War II. If he had been killed while floating in the water after being shot down, it would have been considered a war crime. He emphasized that lethal force should only be used when there’s a clear threat, like someone shooting back. He contrasted this with the case of the boats, where no shots were fired back. He also cited Coast Guard reports showing successful interdictions without the need for lethal force.

The Foundation of Current Policies

Larry Johnson pointed to the actions of George W. Bush’s administration, specifically getting permission from the DOJ to torture people. He argued that this set a precedent, where labeling individuals as "terrorists" became an excuse to kill them, even without an immediate threat to life or serious bodily harm. This, he stated, is a problem that extends beyond specific individuals and goes up the chain of command.

How Do These Killings Happen?

A key question raised was how these lethal decisions are made and by whom. McGovern explained that Admiral Bradley was working with SEAL Team Six, part of SOCOM, which operates in parallel structures, sometimes with less regard for the law and closely with the CIA. He noted the recent resignation of the head of SOUTHCOM on principle, suggesting this admiral might have been a principled individual standing up for the rule of law.

Larry Johnson provided a detailed look into the operations center at SOCOM headquarters. He described how commanders like Bradley would be in a secure video teleconference, communicating with the commander of JSOC and receiving real-time visual feeds from drones or aircraft. This allows for immediate observation and execution of strikes, with recordings capturing the events, including people floating in the water afterward.

Congressional Oversight and Access

McGovern highlighted that Congress is often not cleared for the information systems used by SOCOM and SEAL Team Six. He questioned whether the President is cleared for these communications and suggested that if not, he should be briefed to take formal responsibility for actions like those of Secretary Hegseth.

Congressman Jim Himes’ reaction to a briefing was also discussed. He described seeing troubling videos of individuals in distress, with a destroyed vessel, being killed by the US military. He specifically mentioned the DoD manual’s prohibition against attacking shipwrecked sailors, calling the act "attacking shipwrecked sailors."

Rules of Engagement Under Fire

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s past statements were played, where he advocated for unleashing "overwhelming and punishing violence" and "untying the hands of our war fighters" by discarding "stupid rules of engagement." Larry Johnson confirmed that ROE are indeed the law of the land in the military, outlining what is permissible. He contrasted the situation with Afghanistan, where civilians were sometimes surrounded by US military personnel.

McGovern argued that the Secretary of Defense’s statements provide the "broader context" for why rules of engagement might be disregarded. He questioned whether special operations units, like SEAL Team Six, operate under different rules, potentially with more flexibility due to CIA authorization.

The Pat Tillman Case and Accountability

The discussion revisited the death of Pat Tillman, a former NFL player killed by friendly fire. Johnson suggested it wasn’t an accident and that there was a cover-up by high-ranking officials to avoid accountability. This case was used to illustrate a pattern where special operations personnel might be less accountable, especially when Congress fails to investigate thoroughly.

International Tensions: Russia and Europe

The conversation shifted to a statement by President Putin, who warned that Russia was ready for war if Europe initiated it, stating it would be "over very quickly" and "This isn’t Ukraine." McGovern interpreted this as Putin "brandishing the stick," while also engaging in "carrot" diplomacy with figures like Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner. Putin’s comments suggested a readiness for conflict but also a desire for negotiation, with discussions about a potential summit.

Larry Johnson elaborated on Russia’s military buildup, including advanced missile systems and a significant increase in ground forces. He suggested that Russia is planning for the worst-case scenario of NATO attacking and retaliating. He also drew a comparison between civilian casualties in Ukraine over eight years and those in Gaza over two years, stating Israelis have killed more in Gaza by a factor of four.

Ray McGovern believed Europeans might attempt another "false flag" operation but doubted its success. He emphasized the importance of Putin’s dual approach of showing strength while also pursuing diplomatic channels. The possibility of formal negotiations was linked to the presence of figures like Sergey Lavrov and Marco Rubio at future summits.