On Monday, The Atlantic reported that Hegseth and Trump officials used Signal to relay plans for US military strikes in Yemen.

Summary

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth denied allegations that he texted classified war plans to a Signal group chat that mistakenly included The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg.

The National Security Council confirmed the chat’s authenticity but called the inclusion of Goldberg an inadvertent mistake.

Lawmakers from both parties demanded investigations, with former CIA Director Leon Panetta warning of potential espionage violations.

Hegseth dismissed Goldberg as a “deceitful” journalist. Trump denied knowledge of the incident.

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    0·
    26 days ago

    Why is nobody talking about the fact that we are bombing Yemen? Yes, including a random person in a text channel talking classified information is a problem. But, why are we just brushing off the actual chat contents?

    • Revan343@lemmy.ca
      0·
      26 days ago

      Because pointing out that America is bombing Yemen is like pointing out that water is wet.

    • HalfSalesman@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      26 days ago

      I don’t think we’re ignoring that, so much as there is an overwhelming amount of bad shit to talk about stemming from this single incident.

      And to be honest the bigger issue revealed here isn’t the failure to protect classified information or that they’re bombing Yemen (In a vacuum at least) right now but the fact that they are violating the law also by using an app that destroys documentation of their conversations. This has implications not only legally or militaristically but also that they know they want to do shit that would be illegal and evil enough that they don’t even want to use standard classified channels, not just bombing of Yemen but probably more future evil shit.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        0·
        25 days ago

        That doesn’t make it a good thing. Should we just accept that the U.S. military industrial complex is what it is, and shrug it off? Bcz that’s what you’re suggesting.

    • Englishgrinn@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      26 days ago

      There’s a couple reasons -

      1. It wasn’t so much “bombing Yemen” as it was, bombing a terrorist organization within Yemen’s borders. This is something every American administration has done for decades. That makes it poor political fodder, you can’t “one up” the competition with it.
      2. Most Americans would agree that the Houthis, once it is explained to them who they are, need to be bombed. The actual action would be reprehensible to some, but acceptable to most. You can’t put pressure on an admin to change their tactics when they feel they have a plurality of support.
      3. The sad and undeniable fact is that in American politics - American lives are simply more important than foreign ones. That’s not really unique to American culture, it’s not meant as a criticism, it’s just a sad reality. Bombing Yemen is pretty low risk for American lives - but sloppy OPSEC put American lives at huge risk so that’s where the focus is.

      In a perfect world, the fact that America is committing violence in other nations and is not realistically reigned in by International Laws or Treaties would be a point worth getting upset about. But that fact is over 100 years old and has been successfully normalized. The idea of incompetent buffoons operating the Department of Defense like a bunch of frat boys trying to organize a kegger is marginally newer and more impactful on the national psyche.