MAGA Loyalist Megyn Kelly Defends War Crimes, Says She Wants To See Victims 'Suffer'

A wave of outrage has erupted after veteran conservative commentator Megyn Kelly defended the deadly strikes carried out by the US military against suspected drug-trafficking boats and openly expressed a desire to see survivors suffer in slow, painful deaths.

Her words stress one of the central moral and legal debates facing the United States today in its war on drug trafficking, does the end justify the means, and who decides which means are acceptable?

Kelly's 'Bloody' Rhetoric on Boat Strikes

In a 1 December 2025 episode of her SiriusXM podcast, Kelly addressed the now-infamous strike on a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean; a strike reportedly overseen by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

She said she did not care that alleged drug traffickers were being killed, and claimed she would prefer the killings to be drawn out and brutal.

'So I really do kind of not only want to see them killed in the water ... but I'd really like to see them suffer', Kelly said.

She also added, 'I would like Trump and Hegseth to make it last a long time so they lose a limb and bleed out a little'.

When asked to defend the military's actions, Kelly derided empathy for the victims. She said she found it hard to feel sorry for people she claimed brought 'fentanyl to the United States ... trying to kill my kids and yours'.

Her remarks, calling for slow, violent deaths, have provoked widespread condemnation from human rights advocates, commentators, and some within the wider conservative movement. A former Air Force lawyer told media outlets that such sentiments amount to 'torture fantasies' about random individuals.

Context: The Controversial 2 September Strike

The strike in question occurred on 2 September 2025 in the Caribbean Sea, where US forces targeted a speedboat the administration claimed was operated by a 'narco-terrorist' group trafficking illicit drugs toward the United States. Eleven people aboard reportedly died in the initial strike.

According to a 28 November report in The Washington Post, Hegseth issued a spoken order before the mission, 'kill everybody' on board. The initial strike left two people alive, clinging to wreckage. The plan, the article claims, was to conduct a follow-up strike to ensure no survivors, which was later carried out by forces under the command of Frank M. Bradley, head of US Special Operations Command.

Legal experts have judged the second strike, targeting shipwrecked survivors no longer posing a threat, to be potentially criminal under both domestic US and international law.

Though the White House later confirmed that the second strike occurred, it denied that Hegseth gave a direct order to kill survivors. Instead, it insisted that Bradley acted within his authority.

Hegseth himself has publicly defended the broader campaign, calling the strikes 'lethal, kinetic strikes', and claimed they complied with both US and international law.

Kelly's Defence and Broader Fallout

Kelly framed her comments as part of her support for the administration's hardline stance against narcotics trafficking. She characterised critics of the strikes as overly sentimental and insisted the victims deserved no sympathy.

Her statements have deepened lines of division even within pro-MAGA media circles. Some condemned her as unhinged; others defended her right to express unpopular views.

Meanwhile, in Washington, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called for vigorous oversight. The heads of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees have pledged investigations into the strike and the legality of follow-on orders.

Families of victims have begun filing complaints with international bodies. In at least one case, a family from Colombia has named Hegseth in a complaint to the Inter‑American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), citing extra-judicial killings and seeking reparations.

Kelly's bloodthirsty endorsements of violent military action, including a desire to see survivors bleed out, bring a new dimension of alarm and revulsion. Her remarks serve not only to defend state violence but to relish it.