“No one was planning war, and that’s all I should say about it,” said Betty Higseth, the United States’s defense minister, standing on a runway in Hawaii. The next day, repeat the statement.

Trump administration Signal set texts I told a different story.

On March 24, editor -in -chief of Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg Detailing how it was accidentally added to a group chat on the signal of implementing the correspondence with the senior Trump administration officials discussing an imminent air strike on the opponents of the United States in Yemen.

In the initial story, Goldberg said that the “war plans” he received in the chat mentioned “accurate information about weapons packages, targets and timing.” Goldberg did not include detailed messages about military strikes due to his concerns about the deployment of sensitive security information.

The National Security Council confirmed Asala Al -Khatil and said that it would review how Goldberg’s number was added to the series.

After discussing the White House and Higseth’s denial that “war plans” were discussed, Atlantic Ocean Publish the full text interconnection index. The messages released on March 26 showed that HegSeth showed information about when the aircraft and drones will launch, when the expected bombs and movement of targets decrease.

When we called the White House to comment, we pointed out a spokesman for the journalist Caroline Levitte on X that there are “no” war plans. “

US to hit Houthi fighters on March 15 as part of the efforts made to the group that attacked the ships in the Red Sea over and over since the beginning of the Israel war on Gaza.

After the second story in the Atlantic Ocean, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz wrote on X, “There are no sites. There are no sources and methods. There are no war plans.” HegSeth has a similar position on X, saying that the messages that were released include names or goals, which means “these are some strange war plans.” Foreign Minister Marco Rubio also said: “There were no war plans there.”

Military experts said the army did not use the term “war plans”. The most in-depth military plans-hundreds or even a thousand pages-and include information about spreading force.

However, most of the experts we spoke to said that civilians will consider widely and right to the types of details included in signal messages to be specific plans.

“Less than giving targeted coordinates, he is as determined as much as he gets.”

What Higseth shared and what experts do from it

In the first article, Goldberg said that Higseth’s messages contain “operational details about the upcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about the targets, the weapons that the United States will publish, and the sequence of the attack.”

In an interview with the MSNBC Jen Psaki host, White House spokesperson during the era of former President Joe Biden, after the story’s publication, Goldberg said the messages contain “the time specified for future attack, and specific targets, including the human targets that mean killing in this attack, arms systems, until weather reports.

The March 26 Follow -up article in the Atlantic Ocean included these messages from Higseth:

• “Time Now (1144et): The weather is favorable. Just confirm with Centcom we go to launch the task.”
• “1215et: F-18S Launch (First Strike Pack)”
• 1345: The strike window begins at the F-18 based on “Tigger” (the target terrorist is its well-known location, so it should be on time-also, the launch of Strike Drones (MQ-9S) “
• “1410: More launch F-18s (second strike package)”
• “1415: hit drones on the target (this is when the first bombs definitely decrease, waiting for the” previous “trigger -based targets”.
• “1536 F-18 2nd Strike Strike- Also, First Tomahawks has been launched.
• “More to follow (for every time schedule)”
• “We are currently cleaning on OPSEC” – that is, operational security. “
• “GodSpeed ​​to fight us.”

Military experts said that the texts do not rise to a complete plan, but they contain definitely specific details.

“The” war plan “often (but not always) refers to a more comprehensive planning document, which can manage hundreds of pages, with details of how the US military intends to follow a specific military target.”

After seeing the messages, Bensahil said, “These are clear operational plans to use military force. I don’t see how the administration can claim that these are not war plans, because they are clear plans for war.”

The Ministry of Defense Directory is known for 2023 operating plan, also known as OPLAN, as a “complete and detailed plan that contains a full description” and “a list of strength and publication”.

“We have Opelins as a war if we have to go to war,” said Tai Seedouuli, a retired Dean of the US Army who served in the US military for more than three decades and a visitor of history visitor at Hamilton College. “We also had Iraq in 1990 and 2003. Those who run to thousands of pages and include amazing details.”

Sidoli said that the text messages did not reach Obilan, but that the “Cliffsnotes” version, with “all the important details of the military operation” and “it is clear that a security breach of the first demand.”

“The newly disclosed texts” reach the details of the operation from the concept of the operation (Konop) or in this case, colloquially, a strike package. “

Seidule said that Higseth has a point that the exchanging text was not a long war plan, but “what he used was all the important details of a joint operation against the enemy’s strength, which is worse.”

“The War Plan”, which “gives Higseth and others technically, is completely outside.” Claire is now an older colleague at the Strategic and Budget Assessment Center, and is a source of independent defensive analysis.

However, Claire said: “Yemen’s chat is 100 percent sensitive information that reveals important details of imminent operations.”

Military experts saw many security problems with administration officials using a signal to connect the plans.

“Every person in the Intel-Defense community knows that Signal provides PGP good protection,” said Robert L Dietz, Professor of General Policy at George Masson University. “It is a great thing for children who are planning a teenage drink. Their parents will stay outside the episode. But there is no dangerous organization in the middle of the world banned by PGP.”