Security affair: USA discusses military plans in chat – great outrage!

Security affair: USA discusses military plans in chat – great outrage!

The publication of a chat history that reveals secret attack plans against the Houthi militia in Yemen is causing massive discussion and outrage in the USA. The US Magazine The Atlantic posted screenshots from a Signal chat in which senior government officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, discussed details of upcoming military actions. The discussions took place just hours before the attacks actually took place on March 15.

The government under President Donald Trump vehemently rejected the exchange of secret information. Trump himself told the press that he had no information about the group chat and referred to the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, as “Weird.” The incident has sparked a wave of criticism, particularly from Democrats who are demanding a full investigation.

Vulnerabilities and responsibilities

National Security Advisor Mike Waltz took full responsibility for the security breach that allowed Goldberg to enter the group chat. The Signal app, designed for logistical matters, is not approved for sharing sensitive information between government officials. The use of this platform has sparked much outrage as military information must be kept top secret in order not to endanger national security.

In addition, a spokesman for the National Security Council commented and confirmed the authenticity of the published information. An internal review was announced. However, Hegseth dismissed the seriousness of the incident and called Goldberg "fraudulent and highly discredited" while stating that no secret war plans were discussed in the chat.

Political reactions and outlook

The political reaction was clearly divided: While Democrats criticized massively and pushed for urgent clarification, many Republicans downplayed the incident. The debate over the security situation was fueled by statements from prominent Democrats, including Senator Jack Reed, who called it "dangerous" and a major failure. Senator Chuck Schumer spoke of “amateurish behavior” and called for a comprehensive investigation.

Goldberg, who had initially questioned the authenticity of the original conversation, clarified in his article that the discussions about attack plans did indeed take place. The incidents highlight the challenges of dealing with security-related information at a time when the threat of military conflict is at the forefront. It remains to be seen what consequences and reforms will result from this incident.