The Pentagon has quietly removed decades of classified military planning documents from an internal system widely accessed by U.S. personnel a move that follows a Washington Post report revealing that several senior commanders formally objected to the sustainability of the prolonged war against Iran .
Three individuals familiar with the matter told the Post that files linked to the Secretary of Defense Orders Book (SDOB) were scrubbed from an internal portal operating on the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet). This classified network is commonly used by Defense Department officials and military personnel .
The sources, who requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the system, noted that it remains unclear whether the documents are still accessible through other channels or have been transferred to more restricted networks. SIPRNet is designated for “secret” level material, while top-secret data resides on systems with even tighter access controls .
‘Mission Security and Operational Integrity’
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell declined to elaborate on the access change but did not deny its occurrence. Using the Trump administration’s preferred nomenclature for the department, Parnell stated: “As we have previously stated, the Department of War does not publicly discuss internal operational deliberative processes, including the management, handling, or access protocols for the Secretary of War Orders Book (SWOB)” .
He emphasized that “the success of our servicemembers is Secretary Hegseth’s top priority,” adding that decisions regarding operational processes are managed through “appropriate security channels to ensure mission security and operational integrity” .
Commanders Warn of Growing Strain
The SDOB provides senior leadership with critical data on the positioning and availability of U.S. forces—including warships, units, and weapons systems. It also functions as a formal mechanism for commanders to register reservations about orders while continuing to implement them, through a process known as “non-concurring” .
The document came under intense scrutiny after the Post reported Sunday that several top generals and admirals had warned Hegseth that sustaining extensive military operations against Iran could no longer be managed without imposing severe costs elsewhere .
According to sources familiar with the August 14 edition of the SDOB, those registering formal “non-concurs” included Gen. Alexus Grynkewich (U.S. European Command), Gen. Francis Donovan (Southern Command), Adm. Samuel Paparo (Pacific Command), and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle .
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach and acting Army Chief of Staff Gen. Christopher LaNeve reportedly supported the decision to prolong some unit deployments but warned that doing so carried significant risks .
‘Inaccurate’ Yet Unspecified
Following the Post’s initial report, Parnell had asserted that troop decisions were based on the president’s strategic priorities and military advice. He subsequently dismissed the published information as largely “inaccurate” without identifying specific errors .
“Non-concurs are standard,” Parnell told the Post. “The Secretary sees them constantly. That’s how you run a real military. We are in great shape around the world” .
Mounting Costs and Strategic Concerns
The disclosure comes as concerns mount inside the U.S. government over the financial and material costs of the Iran war, now in its seventh month—far exceeding President Trump’s initial projection of a campaign lasting weeks .
Officials have warned that Washington is expending vast quantities of key munitions, including Patriot interceptors and Tomahawk cruise missiles, while extended deployments strain personnel and equipment. The U.S. Navy faces additional demands maintaining the maritime blockade imposed on Iran.
The warnings cited suggest senior commanders fear that committing forces and resources to the Iran theater could reduce Washington’s ability to sustain military operations or respond to developments elsewhere .
Implications for Military Planning
Removing the SDOB from SIPRNet could significantly narrow the number of personnel able to consult the documents. A former defense official who routinely reviewed the records warned that moving them to a more restricted system would “dramatically reduce the number of people who have direct access to it”.
The former official cautioned that the move could complicate time-sensitive military coordination, as commanders frequently consult the documents when managing deployments and redirecting assets across commands—making such logistical work “certainly more difficult”.
The action follows a broader Trump administration campaign to prevent unauthorized disclosures, which has included polygraph examinations for personnel, subpoenas targeting journalists, and in one case, the search of a Post journalist’s home and seizure of electronic devices.
Source: Agencies (edited by Al-Manar)