Pope Leo XIV greets the crowd as he leaves after presiding over a mass at San Pancrazio cathedral at Albano Laziale on July 20, 2025 in Albano Laziale, Italy. (Photo by Ernesto Ruscio/Getty Images)
“This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war.”
Pope Leo XIV used his Palm Sunday sermon to take what appears to be a shot at US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
In his sermon, excerpts of which he published on social media, the pope emphasized Christian teachings against violence while criticizing anyone who would invoke Jesus Christ to justify a war.
“This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” Pope Leo said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.”
The pope also encouraged followers to “raise our prayers to the Prince of Peace so that he may support people wounded by war and open concrete paths of reconciliation and peace.”
While speaking at the Pentagon last week, Hegseth directly invoked Jesus when discussing the Trump administration’s unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran.
Specifically, Hegseth offered up a prayer in which he asked God to give US soldiers “wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy,” adding that “we ask these things with bold confidence in the mighty and powerful name of Jesus Christ.”
Mother Jones contributing writer Alex Nguyen described the pope’s sermon as a “rebuke” of Hegseth, whom he noted “has been open about his support for a Christian crusade” in the Middle East.
Pope Leo is not the only Catholic leader speaking against using Christian faith to justify wars of aggression. Two weeks ago, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, said “the abuse and manipulation of God’s name to justify this and any other war is the gravest sin we can commit at this time.”
“War is first and foremost political and has very material interests, like most wars,” Cardinal Pizzaballa added.
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it’s fun to kill everyone …Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth arrives at Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware on March 7, 2026. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
“The Pentagon’s law of war manual states unequivocally that such statements are war crimes,” said a legal scholar who previously worked in the Pentagon’s office of general counsel.
Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth’s statement last week that “no quarter” will be given to “our enemies” in Iran—a declaration, in military parlance, that surrendering combatants will be executed rather than taken prisoner—constituted a clear violation of international law and a war crime.
The International Committee of the Red Cross explains that “the prohibition on declaring that no quarter will be given is a longstanding rule of customary international law already recognized in the Lieber Code, the Brussels Declaration, and the Oxford Manual and codified in the Hague Regulations.” The Hague Convention of 1907, to which the US is a party, says it is “especially forbidden” to “declare that no quarter will be given.”
During a press conference on Friday, Hegseth said that US forces attacking Iran “will keep pushing, keep advancing; no quarter, no mercy for our enemies.”
Hegseth’s statement sparked alarm among legal experts and members of Congress, particularly in the context of the Pentagon chief’s ongoing efforts to loosen legal oversight of American forces and roll back rules aimed at protecting civilians.
“’No quarter’ isn’t some wannabe tough guy line—it means something,” said Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a retired US Navy officer. “An order to give no quarter would mean to take no prisoners and kill them instead. That would violate the law of armed conflict. It would be an illegal order. It would also put American service members at greater risk. Pete Hegseth should know better than to throw around terms like this.”
Oona Hathaway, a legal scholar and former special counsel to the Pentagon’s general counsel, wrote in response to Hegseth’s remarks that “declaring that no quarter will be given unequivocally violates international humanitarian law.”
“Indeed, ordering that no quarter will be given, threatening an adversary therewith, or conducting hostilities on this basis is prohibited and constitutes a war crime,” Hathaway added.
Daniel Maurer, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and judge advocate—a profession that Hegseth has treated with contempt—wrote a “hypothetical legal memorandum” advising the Pentagon chief to “publicly retract” his “no quarter” statement, warning that it “may expose you to criminal liability under 18 USC 2441(c)(2), and expose any subordinate servicemembers who carry it out to prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice as well as 18 USC 2441(c)(2).”
Maurer continued:
Given that “no quarter” is a clear violation of the Hague Convention IV and, as a consequence, U.S. federal law, we recommend the following immediate actions:
a. Publicly retract the comments and disavow any intention to induce, inspire, counsel, encourage, incite, order, threaten, tolerate, or give “no quarter” to Iranian combatants.
b. Communicate through the chain-of-command conducting Operation Epic Fury that “no quarter” is a war crime that will be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice or 18 USC § 2441.
Hegseth’s declaration of “no quarter” conflicts with US President Donald Trump’s statement late last month announcing the illegal war on Iran, which is now in its third week with no end in sight.
Urging Iranian soldiers to lay down their arms, Trump pledged, “We’ll give you immunity.”
Ryan Goodman, founding co-editor-in-chief of the digital law and policy journal Just Security, told Axios that Hegseth is “putting the American military on a track to lawlessness in which we will lose more and more allies.” Goodman noted that in the wake of the Second World War, the US prosecuted senior German military officials for refusing quarter to enemy soldiers.
“The best thing Secretary Hegseth can do for the country and for the US military is to say he misspoke and to retract the statement,” said Goodman, who previously worked in the Defense Department’s office of general counsel. “The Pentagon’s law of war manual states unequivocally that such statements are war crimes.”
Donald Trump calls for help from NATO allies in securing the Straight of Hormuz despite saying only 9 days ago that they don’t need people to join wars after they’ve already won.Climate science denier Donald Trump confirms that he knows nothing about democracy and that more liquid gold is being secured according to his policy of global privateering.Donald Trump explains why he established his Bored of Peace
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during the inaugural Americas Counter Cartel Conference at the US Southern Command Headquarters on March 5, 2026 in Doral, Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
“If the United States is at war, then Pete Hegseth is a war criminal. If the United States is not at war, then Pete Hegseth is a murderer.”
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday was condemned for his boasts on Wednesday about sinking an Iranian military ship after allegations emerged that it was “defenseless” at the time it was torpedoed in international waters by a US submarine.
Military.comreported Thursday that the Iranian ship had been departing from a biennial multinational naval training exercise that it had been invited to participate in by the Indian government.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has so far remained silent on the US attack on the ship, but other politicians in India delivering sharp condemnations.
According to the Times of India, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi tore into Modi for not speaking up after the US torpedoed a boat that his government had invited into its waters.
“The conflict has reached our backyard, with an Iranian warship sunk in the Indian Ocean,” Gandhi said. “Yet the PM has said nothing. At a moment like this, we need a steady hand at the wheel. Instead, India has a compromised PM who has surrendered our strategic autonomy.”
In a social media post, former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal said there was no way that the Iranian ship could have been perceived as any kind of military threat.
“I am told that as per protocol for this exercise ships cannot carry any ammunition,” he wrote. “It was defenseless… The attack by the US submarine was premeditated as the US was aware of the Iranian ship’s presence in the exercise to which the US navy was invited but withdrew from participation at the last minute, presumably with this operation in mind.”
Drop Site News reporter Ryan Grim noted that, in addition to striking what appears to have been a defenseless boat, the US also didn’t help rescue any of the shipwrecked men who were aboard the vessel.
“The Sri Lanka Navy was left to pull the dead bodies from the water,” Grim commented. “I am hard pressed to think of any other nation throughout history that would do something so cowardly and despicable. We are genuinely in a league of our own, and American media—mostly shrugging off the bombing of a girls school and acting as if carpet bombing Tehran is a normal military tactic—is deeply complicit.”
Author Bruno Maçães also pointed to the decision to leave the shipwrecked crew at sea as an act of historic depravity.
“Really quite extraordinary that the US bombed an Iranian ship and then left the surviving sailors to drown,” Maçães wrote. “There are many many accounts of the Nazis or Imperial Japan saving survivors at sea. I see we have now dropped below that level.”
Mohamad Safa, executive director of PVA Patriotic Vision, an international multilateral organization with special consultative status at the United Nations Economic and Social Council, said that the US attack on the Iranian ship constituted either a war crime or straight-up murder.
“What Pete Hegseth ordered the military to do violates international law,” he wrote. “The Iranian ship was near Sri Lanka, in international waters outside the combat zone and on a training exercise. Under the Geneva Conventions, you are obligated to rescue the crew of a ship that you sink during war. Abandoned any survivors and leaving them to drown is illegal and a war crime.”
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Donald Trump explains why he established his Bored of PeaceOrcas discuss rotting brain. Front Orca says “Wish someone would lock him up”.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks during a press conference on US military action in Iran at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, on March 2, 2026. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)
The defense secretary suggested that “the US went to war because Iran has ballistic missiles and drones it has used as a deterrent or to respond to US/Israeli attacks,” said journalist Jeremy Scahill.
In the Trump administration’s first public remarks to reporters on the strikes the US and Israel launched in Iran over the weekend, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blamed the Middle Eastern country for the attacks that have killed at least 555 people there as well as at least four US soldiers—and suggested Iran posed an imminent threat because of its defensive military capabilities.
Hegseth said the strikes that began early Saturday morning and included deadly attacks on children attending school were “retribution” for Iran’s “savage, one-sided war against America” that has played out for “47 long years” as the country has waged proxy attacks on the US.
“We didn’t start this war, but under President Trump we’re finishing it,” said Hegseth.
Despite the fact that hours before President Donald Trump announced the US and Israeli attacks, the Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi reported that diplomatic talks he was mediating were making significant progress toward a peace deal, Hegseth asserted that Iran had a “conventional gun to our head” and suggested the US had no choice but to wage war.
Pentagon officials said in a congressional briefing Sunday that Iran had not been planning to strike any US military targets in the region unless it was attacked first, according toCNN.
The defense secretary also claimed Monday that Iran was “not negotiating” and said it was “stalling” in the talks with the aim of rebuilding missile stockpiles.“
“To be clear,” said journalist Jeremy Scahill of Drop Site News, “he is claiming the US went to war because Iran has ballistic missiles and drones it has used as a deterrent or to respond to US/Israeli attacks.”
Iran has weapons that exist to defend itself that are conventional, just normal military capability. By this logic, any country with a military has a gun to America's head. He's admitting the US considers any defensive capability in anyone else's hands unacceptable.
Drop Site noted that Hegseth made no mention of “the 1953 US-backed coup in Iran,” US support for autocratic rule there from 1953-79, “or that the US and Israel launched the February 28 strikes.”
On the UK talk radio show “Leading Britain’s Conversation,” British journalist Jon Sopel said Hegseth was making “the exact argument that [former President] George W. Bush made in 2003 with the weapons of mass destruction and ‘They could be launched in 45 minutes.’”
Promises to end the US government’s penchant for embarking on endless regime change wars, added Sopel, were part of “what propelled Donald Trump to the presidency, and yet Donald Trump and [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu have launched these strikes against Iran.”
‘“America didn’t start this.” Well, yes, you did.’ @jonsopel unpacks the US narrative shift on the war in Iran, a familiar playbook from Iraq in 2003. pic.twitter.com/uGhn5zP4G9
The defense secretary attempted to contrast the operation in Iran—dubbed Operation Epic Fury by the US military—to protracted wars like those the US has waged in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The conflict will not be an “endless war,” Hegseth said.
He claimed at one point in the briefing that the clear-cut objective of the attacks is to “destroy the missile threats, destroy the navy, no nukes” and scoffed at a reporter’s question about Trump’s Sunday statement in which he said he expected the conflict to be resolved in “four weeks or less.”
“President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it may or not take. Four weeks, two weeks, six weeks. It could move up, it could move back,” said Hegseth.
Hegseth spoke alongside Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, who appeared to temper expectations of a quick resolution to the war started by the US and Israel.
“To be clear… this is not a single overnight operation,” Caine said. “The military objectives [US Central Command] and the Joint Force have been tasked with will take some time to achieve, and in some cases will be difficult and gritty work.”
Caine added that the military objective is “to protect and defend ourselves, and together with our regional partners, prevent Iran from the ability to project power outside of its borders.”
Law professor Jennifer Taub denounced Hegseth’s remarks as “utter nonsense” and condemned his claim that the US and Israel are hitting military targets “surgically.”
“Shameless,” she said. “We or Israel bombed a girl’s school on Saturday when school was in session, killing 175.”
Along with Hegseth’s claim that Iran was to blame for the strikes launched by the US and Israel, his comment that the US will expedite the operation by not getting bogged down in “stupid rules of engagement” alarmed observers.
Hegseth: No stupid rules of engagement, no nation building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win and we don't waste time or lives. As the president warned, an effort of this scope will include casualties. War is hell and always… pic.twitter.com/7Zpg2UkcrO
“’No stupid rules of engagement’ means no Geneva Conventions or other international humanitarian laws, which the US signed and supported for more than a century,” said journalist Mark Jacob. “Hegseth and Trump are pro-war crimes.”
Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.Donald Trump explains why he established his Bored of PeaceOrcas discuss rotting brain. Front Orca says “Wish someone would lock him up”.
Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley, left, walks to a holding room in the Capitol Visitor Center on December 4, 2025, before briefing members of Congress on boat strikes. (Photo: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)
A military spokesperson refused to comment on what the admiral told Congress beyond confirming that “he did inform them that during the strike he sought advice from his lawyer and then made a decision.”
The journalist who initially revealed that President Donald Trump’s administration killed shipwrecked survivors of its first known boat bombing reported Tuesday that the admiral in charge consulted with a US military lawyer before ordering another strike on the two alleged drug traffickers who were clinging to debris in the Caribbean Sea.
Just days after Trump announced the September 2 bombing on social media, Intercept journalist Nick Turse exposed the follow-up strike that killed survivors, citing US officials. The attack has sparked fresh alarm in recent weeks, since late November reporting from the Washington Post and CNN that Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley ordered the second strike to comply with an alleged spoken directive from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to kill everyone on board, which Hegseth has denied.
After the first strike, “Bradley—then the head of Joint Special Operations Command—sought guidance from his top legal adviser,” according to Turse. He interviewed several sources familiar with the admiral’s recent classified briefing to Congress, former members of the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps, and ex-colleagues of the JSOC staff judge advocate to whom Bradley turned, Col. Cara Hamaguchi.
As Turse reported:
How exactly [Hamaguchi] responded is not known. But Bradley, according to a lawmaker who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified briefing, said that the JSOC staff judge advocate deemed a follow-up strike lawful. In the briefing, Bradley said no one in the room voiced objections before the survivors were killed, according to the lawmaker.
Five people familiar with briefings given by Bradley, including the lawmaker who viewed the video, said that, logically, the survivors must have been waving at the US aircraft flying above them. All interpreted the actions of the men as signaling for help, rescue, or surrender.
Bradley, now the chief of Special Operations Command, declined to comment, the reporter noted. SOCOM also declined to make Hamaguchi available, though the command’s director of public affairs, Col. Allie Weiskopf, said: “We are not going to comment on what Admiral Bradley told lawmakers in a classified hearing. He did inform them that during the strike he sought advice from his lawyer and then made a decision.”
Tuesday’s reporting caught the attention of the former longtime executive director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), Kenneth Roth, who has stressed that not only is it “blatantly illegal to order criminal suspects to be murdered rather than detained,” but “the initial attack was illegal too.”
Did the U.S. military kill two survivors of an attack on a supposed drug-running boat because they tried to surrender by waving only one hand instead of the usual two, since they were clinging to their destroyed boat with the other? https://t.co/JnCmt0oYGL
Various other experts and US lawmakers have similarly condemned the dozens of strikes in the Caribbean and Pacific Ocean since September—which as of Monday have killed at least 105 people, according to the Trump administration—as “war crimes, murder, or both,” as the Former JAGs Working Group put it after the Hegseth reporting last month.
“Extrajudicial executions,” declared public interest lawyer Robert Dunham on social media Wednesday, sharing Turse’s new report and tagging the groups Amnesty International USA, HRW, and Reprieve US, as well as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and independent experts who report to the UN Human Rights Council.
Those experts on Wednesday rebuked Trump’s recent aggression toward Venezuela, including not only the boat strikes but also threats to bomb the South American country and attempts to impose an oil blockade. They said that “the illegal use of force, and threats to use further force at sea and on land, gravely endanger the human right to life and other rights in Venezuela and the region.”
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.
