this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
74 points (94.0% liked)
news
743 readers
527 users here now
A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.
Rules:
- Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
- Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
- Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
- Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
- No link shorteners
- No entire article in the post body
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's generous of you. The only reason why I don't believe that is because the administration hasn't said that is the reason. If the administration had said that they would have likely actually built up some moral support from Congress and the international community.
But he didn't do that.
I think the easier explanation is that Hegseth wants a war for his ego so that he can feel like a big man. (Trump didn't actually care and will sign off on anything at this point.)
Considering other members of NATO are getting involved militarily and supporting the strike on Iran. It seems much more likely they know something the public doesn’t know.
It seems extremely unlikely that Hegseth can just start a war for his ego. And that wouldn’t explain the involvement of the rest of NATO.
I think it's 100% likely that Hegseth is absolutely the kind of person that would start a war for his ego and retweets.
But again, if cutting off Iran's support for Russia was the goal, why not just say that?
Yeah, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hegseth is that type of person but I don’t think he has the power to cause this alone.
Intelligence agencies often don’t share what they know with the public. One of many reasons for doing that is it would expose the spies and methods of gathering intel.