Three sensitive messages from Yemen’s strike signal chat unpacked and explained

He published the debate of high US safety officials about US air attacks in Yemen in full by Atlantic Magazine.

The group chat on the signal app was wrongly involved in the Atlantic editor -in -chief Jeffrey Goldberg.

After keeping some chat passage in an earlier article, he decided on Wednesday post almost the entire exchange After senior officials insisted that there were no classified data in the group.

These statements “stated that we believe that people should see texts to make their own conclusions,” Goldberg wrote.

Messages, however, need some necessary. Here are three of them with some analyzes.

These messages give details about the US Army plan for Yemen’s strikes – described as a “package”, a military term related to a set of aircraft, weapons and devices to collect intelligence data that will participate in surgery.

“The idea that was not classified at the time was unthinkable,” said Glenn Gerstell, a former main adviser to the National Security Agency (NSA), he told the BBC.

He added that this may be declared afterwards, but any immediate military action that includes American troops would be classified at the time it was divided.

Hegsetth messages record at what time the F-18 fighter jets should be launched, as well as when the strikes will happen and in which time frame “attacks based on the trigger” could happen.

In this context, the “trigger” refers to the set of parameters that need to be recognized before the weapon is set. It could be a visual reference point, such as a mobile phone lighting.

This information is considered very sensitive.

Philip Ingram, a former military intelligence officer from the British army, told the BBC that similar information “firmly belongs to the bracket of what would be classified by the above secret.”

“You can practically imagine where the aircraft will come from,” he added.

In the midst of chat revelation, the White House and other American officials claimed that this information did not represent the “war plan”.

In the post on X, Hegsetth said, “Atlantic has published so -called” war plans “, and these” plans “include: without name. No goals. No locations. No units. No routes. No source. No methods.”

In this part of the group chat, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz provides an update of strike – which is called in a military language by assessing damage to the fight, or BDA.

Waltz notes that the targeted building collapsed and that the US army had previously had a positive identification of the goal – Houthi “rocket guy” – entering the building, which was believed to be his girlfriend’s residence.

In his message, Waltz congratulates Pete – referring to Hegsetth, as well as the IC, an abbreviation for the “Intelligence Community” and Kurill, a reference to Michael Kurill, a US army general who monitors the central command, a regional command with responsibility in the Middle East and parts of Central and South Asia.

Messages do not reveal that target accommodation or movements have been found.

A military expert who contacted the BBC – but who wanted to rename the nameless – suggested that a combination of air platforms, technological options for monitoring or human intelligence on the ground could be used or a combination of different sources.

At least 53 people were killed in the initial wave of US air attacks on Houthho goals in Yemen, which hit more than 30 goals, including training training, Drona infrastructure, as well as places for manufacturing and storage of weapons and commanding and control centers, including in which the Pentagon said several fundamental Aericas were housed.

It is unclear to which of Waltz’s goals in the group chat.

Another potentially sensitive message comes from Joe Kent, a former Special Operation Soldier and Failed Congress candidate who appointed Trump as director of the National Center for Contraimination.

In his message, Kent refers to Israel, who performed his own strikes.

The Israeli army has repeatedly hit Houthi goals in Yemen since the beginning of the war in Gaza, in retaliation for the attacks of rockets and drones on Israeli goals carried out in support of Hamas.

The latest attacks took place on the 19th and 26th of December last year.

According to Kent, the Israeli government would seek to “supplement” the supplies of weapons used in further attacks, although it believes it is a “smaller factor”.

A slightly more sensitive message is followed by CIA director John Ratcliffe, who notes that now “mobilizes property” to help strike, but that the delay “would not” negatively affect “the Agency’s work in Yemen.

“An additional time would be used to identify better starting points to cover Houthi leadership,” he wrote.

In this context, assets could relate to CIA spies on the field in Yemen or technological agents such as drone flights.

Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Assistant Minister of Defense and former paramilitary service officer, said Ratcliffe’s message was very sensitive.

“Basically, we don’t want to share where the CIA is focused,” he added.

On Wednesday, Ratcliffe said at the house hearing that he did not transmit classified information.

(With additional reporting from Nomia Iqbal and Ruth Comerford)