There have been 10 known U.S. strikes on boats off the coast of North America, killing nearly four dozen people, and one Reuters reporter noted that the "Pentagon has released little evidence of what the vessels were allegedly carrying and why they couldn’t simply be interdicted."

Now, some Republicans are growing angry.

The New York Times reported on Friday that some Republicans, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), have expressed concerns. However, more Republicans are also starting to question what is unfolding in the waters off the coast of the Americas.

"We have oversight responsibilities, and we expect to get our questions answered," Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) said in a statement this week.

“This is a legitimate discussion between the two branches of government that we should always be having,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC).

He hopes to have talks on congressional authorization of the use of force.

“I think we’ve got to be very careful when you’re talking about ordering a kinetic strike," he told the Times.

While they all might take issue with the indiscriminate dropping of bombs on boats, all three leaders voted against a recent measure calling for a halt to the boat strikes.

A family in Trinidad and Tobago alleges that one of the strikes from the U.S. didn't hit drug runners that Trump swears are being targeted, but they think their relative, who was moving back home, was on one of the alleged "drug" boats.

A reporter earlier in October from the Times cited the young man's mother saying that after the bombing, she hadn't heard from him. The family says he was a fisherman. Not a drug runner.

There are Republicans who may support the efforts, but they want to know more about the legal justification.

Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) said, “We’re always hungry for more” information from Trump.

Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH) said he's certain the administration had a valid rationale, but “as new facts develop, I may or may not have more questions.”

Sen.Todd Young (R-IN) is among those "concerned" about the strikes, but he, too, voted against the measure to stop them.

His fears surround the legality of the strikes and the “trajectory of military operations without congressional approval.”

“While the Constitution grants Article II authorities to the executive branch to defend against imminent threats, Congress alone is entrusted with decisions of war and peace,” he said in a social media post.

Trump has called this a war on the United States, which would mean he must request approval from Congress to officially go to war.

The Times noted, "Mr. Trump has made it clear that he plans to expand the military campaign to airstrikes on countries that harbor cartel operations, including Venezuela. And despite repeatedly calling the operation a war, he said he would not seek congressional approval."

Thus far, the only Republicans willing to oppose the strikes have been Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Rand Paul (R-KY).

Read the report here.