A new Signal group chat has formed among high-profile former military and public officials. We’re not talking about a United States attack on Yemen. The exchange, however, foreshadows the decision that has all but been made by the US commander-in-chief to move ahead with the strike. Within the group, members are weighing the risks and benefits associated with the military action, including concerns over possible leaks and geopolitical repercussions.
As the chat reveals, there’s a major danger: The plan might still leak. If so, it would leave the United States looking weak and uncertain. Even more frightening, Israel would be allowed to act preemptively. In addition, because the Gaza ceasefire may fall apart, this can effect when and how this operation occurs. The coalition is working on developing a communications plan to help message their attack’s purpose.
Participants in this Texas strategy group propose to double down on the alleged failures of US Pres. In particular, they cite his failure to manage U.S. relations with Yemen’s Houthi armed group as an egregious example. Member Pete Hegseth emphasizes the importance of "100%" opsec. He thinks it’s very important to maintain this high standard, given that the operation is sure to run into delays.
The integrity of the group's discussions was compromised due to a journalist's presence within the chat. This breach resulted in additional problems and more issues regarding the security of personal information.
Michael Waltz, another participant in the conversation, outlined immediate risks associated with delaying the attack:
"Waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus. 2 immediate risks on waiting: 1) this leaks, and we look indecisive; 2) Israel takes an action first – or Gaza ceasefire falls apart – and we don’t get to start this on our own terms."
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio added great value to the conversation with his opening statement. His comments were dominated by praise for the upcoming operation. On the flip side, the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles offered the group “kudos” for their success.
First, we see a mention of potential economic benefits from the attack. JD Vance expressed reservations about the timing and its alignment with current US messaging on Europe, suggesting a delay might be prudent.
"I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate-to-severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc."
The Atlantic covered the conversation. They didn’t issue a “TEAM UPDATE” because doing so would endanger US servicemen and US military operations and assets in the Middle East.