USA Goes to War Against Iran

A friend just passed this to me.

I’m Brandi Buchman, HuffPost’s legal/justice reporter, and I can say without a shadow of doubt that this week, I reported on one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever heard come out of the Trump administration.

Troops are allegedly being told by military commanders that their mission in Iran is one of biblical proportions. Literally. They’re being told that operations underway now are part of “God’s plan” as foretold in the Book of Revelation — you know, the part where Armageddon kicks off with its rivers of blood, demonic horses and Jesus Christ’s return to earth? That part.

The founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation told me he has received over a hundred complaints from service members situated in dozens of military installations who are terrified about this breakdown in the separation of church and state. It’s "destroying morale and unit cohesion,” one troop claimed, and the words aren’t the worst part.

“It’s the fact that our commander feels as though he is fully supported and justified by the entire (combat unit’s name withheld) chain of command to inflict his Armageddon views of our attack on Iran on those of us beneath him,” they told MRFF.

The infiltration of Christian nationalism into the U.S. military has been steadily growing since President Donald Trump's second term began and Pete Hegseth was made Defense Secretary. And while this news I shared this week was terrifying for the public to hear, imagine how terrifying it must be for these service members.

You and I can talk about these things openly. Troops can’t. Not without major consequences. Insubordination in the military can be felonious. Service members are scared to speak out. That’s why reporting on the complaints that groups like MRFF receive is so critical. A 13-year veteran who recently resigned from service for moral reasons told me this week how the public can support troops wrestling with unconstitutional orders: getting vocal. He said it's important to sustain an open dialogue about how service members won't be ostracized if they choose to speak out — or step out — on the military.

Freak,

I don't know if the message you quoted from the HuffPost reporter is authentic. I suspect it is not. But the issue described in the message was reported on by dozens of news outlets in the last 48 hours.

Shining examples of Christianity.

How 'bout them ten commandments?

Yeah Guardian are reporting on it

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/us-israel-iran-war-christian-rhetoric

the Guardian

US troops were told war on Iran was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’, watchdog alleges

So, this is a holy war?

It's the best kind.

Kill Amalek on Purim

I think their actions have shown a disregard for casualties when it comes to what they perceive as strategic goals, and as well a pattern of soldiers shooting first and asking questions later, but I don’t think throughout the war there had been an equivalent strike on a school with no warning for seemingly no reason. There were strikes near civilian infrastructure when there was intelligence that they were in the vicinity of a Hamas outpost, weapons stash, or some other target of strategic value.

But yes if I thought there was a pattern of them wildly killing civilians for no reason that would raise my credence that it was an intentional act of terror.

They should have just nominated him in an open letter

That's how they sell it to the troops.

Interesting because there are no Jews in Revelations, though, so....

But ya, someone else stated this in here as well... it is primarily about oil control. Controlling the ease of flow / access and the resource itself.

I checked it before posting, and yes, I've heard other reports. Just thought it was an interesting candid take.

I draw a distinction between not caring if you kill civilians and intentionally killing them. Although I guess they could enjoy ignoring the rules and doing whatever they want and getting away with it. But I don't believe anyone is drawing bulleye's around schools.

It’s surreal watching the world edge closer to WWIII. We are still far from that outcome, but the increasing involvement of NATO in the conflict inevitably raises the stakes. As NATO deepens its role, the pressure on Russia and China to respond in some form is going to grow.

Ugh.

Neither Turkey nor the UK (whose sovereign base on Cyprus has come under attack) is moving an Art.5 resolution.

Correct... nobody has yet. That's why I said we're still a long ways off. But we are inching closer by the day right now.

War not good for business. Zero chance China goes to war with the US over Iran. You silly talk.

Halt the nuclear program and stop sponsoring terrorist proxies. Presumably Iran was willing to do that. If they're sincere with that it ends because it will be virtually impossible for the US and Israel to keep engaging.

You're not understanding a very critical geopolitical piece of what's happening. China buys a significant chunk of its oil from Iran. Shifting ~15% of your oil supply to other countries becomes difficult when the US has primary relationships w/ many of the Middle Eastern oil suppliers that China also has. China wouldn't initially directly engage in a war, but they could, and probably would need to start proxy wars to defend their resources. Each step moves closer to a bigger war. That was my only point.

what in the actual F is this **** straight from white house site:

This is on the official white house site

wtf

In a cartoon presidency... yes, that's how America makes official statements now.

This is from Hegseth's press conference. Anyone who was expecting temperate remarks from him was hopelessly optimistic.

there was an antisemitic incident on Capital Hill today

It is also factually wrong. There haven't been many (reported) sinkings of warships by torpedo since WW2, but there have been some. The most famous in the west is probably the Argentinian "General Belgrano" which was sunk during the Falklands war, but the most recent we know of (apart from this one) is the South Korean corvette "Cheonan" , which was sunk in 2010.

Of course, the word "enemy" could be taken to mean sunk by the US specifically. Though I suspect it is just statements made in haste by a bunch of people who don't really know much about what they're doing nor much about the history of naval warfare.

Nitpicking and showing off aside, it is pretty hard to argue that you have not started a war when you are sinking warships, so the incident is important in the debate on war powers and congress vs executive power.

He explicitly said sunk by the US.