Nuclear Launch Order May Be Disobeyed

[AFTT47]

I think most of you have probably heard of this.

As much as I despise the circus clown who currently occupies the oval office, this kind of talk disturbs me. The whole point of the President having the sole authority to let the nuclear missiles fly is that you can't afford to get into a partisan debate when the shit hits the fan. Action needs to be taken NOW! You can't be in a horizontal position with your pants down when the enemy is raining down nuclear destruction on you. You MUST respond. The enemy must know that you WILL respond. That knowledge keeps them from  starting shit in the first place.

If I was one of the U.S. Air Force officers sitting in the bunkers with my hands on the buttons which would launch the missiles, I would definitely prefer that my ultimate commander would be someone other than a jackass I have no respect for. Even in that case though, I would have to follow orders unless those orders were very clearly unethical. It has to be that way. You MUST be willing to destroy the enemy and they must be confident that you will. That is how you deter them in the first place.

Ironically, this is an argument for hawks to never vote for a clown like Trump. He is a danger to national security because he has so little confidence in those he commands. Even if he gives the order, the utter lack of respect and lack of confidence in him will probably result in mass disobedience of his orders.

Regardless of political ideology, a President MUST command a certain level of respect in order to be an effective leader. Trump only commands respect from FUCKING  IDIOTS.

Far from being a strongman who his idiot supporters hope him to be, Trump is a weak man who invites attack on us. Our enemies know he is jackass. They will manipulate him accordingly.

[Succubus]

So effectively the US is defenceless while this fuckpig is in power. Surely this is grounds enough to impeach the bastard?

[Brian37]

I think most of you have probably heard of this.

As much as I despise the circus clown who currently occupies the oval office, this kind of talk disturbs me. The whole point of the President having the sole authority to let the nuclear missiles fly is that you can't afford to get into a partisan debate when the shit hits the fan. Action needs to be taken NOW! You can't be in a horizontal position with your pants down when the enemy is raining down nuclear destruction on you. You MUST respond. The enemy must know that you WILL respond. That knowledge keeps them from  starting shit in the first place.

If I was one of the U.S. Air Force officers sitting in the bunkers with my hands on the buttons which would launch the missiles, I would definitely prefer that my ultimate commander would be someone other than a jackass I have no respect for. Even in that case though, I would have to follow orders unless those orders were very clearly unethical. It has to be that way. You MUST be willing to destroy the enemy and they must be confident that you will. That is how you deter them in the first place.

Ironically, this is an argument for hawks to never vote for a clown like Trump. He is a danger to national security because he has so little confidence in those he commands. Even if he gives the order, the utter lack of respect and lack of confidence in him will probably result in mass disobedience of his orders.

Regardless of political ideology, a President MUST command a certain level of respect in order to be an effective leader. Trump only commands respect from FUCKING  IDIOTS.

Far from being a strongman who his idiot supporters hope him to be, Trump is a weak man who invites attack on us. Our enemies know  he is jackass. They will manipulate him accordingly.

Are you kidding me? IT IS PRECISELY because that inept fuck has control that someone needs to have a check on him.

FYI it does not matter who fires the first nuke, friend or foe, that will hurt EVERYONE, friend and foe. Nobody wins in a global nuclear war. REAGAN AND JFK new this. 

I think it is a bit naive to assume if we fire ours first, or in response, that there will be a planet left over for us or them to control.

Nuclear war is a no win situation. It is mutual destruction.

[brewer]

Looks like the general(s) was referring to "first" strike nuclear option in a non nuclear situation.  Not nuclear retaliatory.

Wouldn't you want that from the military no matter who the president is?  I'm sure they have a contingency plan for almost all scenarios and have reviewed them for legality.

[Brian37]

Looks like the general(s) was referring to "first" strike nuclear option in a non nuclear situation.  Not nuclear retaliatory.

Wouldn't you want that from the military no matter who the president is?  I'm sure they have a contingency plan for almost all scenarios and have reviewed them for legality.

I don't care which party holds that office. No, I don't want our President without checks on that, REGARDLESS. 

I want thoughtful leaders who know the dangers and don't have itchy trigger fingers. Again, JFK knew this with the Russians, so did Reagan. 45 however, is a childish brat who does things out of spite. 

So yea, I would want our military challenging ANY president on this issue. I think far too many humans think it is as simple as shoot and beat, and that is not the case with nukes. Once the nukes start flying on all sides, all 7 billion of us will be affected.

[Anomalocaris]

I think most of you have probably heard of this.

As much as I despise the circus clown who currently occupies the oval office, this kind of talk disturbs me. The whole point of the President having the sole authority to let the nuclear missiles fly is that you can't afford to get into a partisan debate when the shit hits the fan. Action needs to be taken NOW! You can't be in a horizontal position with your pants down when the enemy is raining down nuclear destruction on you. You MUST respond. The enemy must know that you WILL respond. That knowledge keeps them from  starting shit in the first place.

If I was one of the U.S. Air Force officers sitting in the bunkers with my hands on the buttons which would launch the missiles, I would definitely prefer that my ultimate commander would be someone other than a jackass I have no respect for. Even in that case though, I would have to follow orders unless those orders were very clearly unethical. It has to be that way. You MUST be willing to destroy the enemy and they must be confident that you will. That is how you deter them in the first place.

Ironically, this is an argument for hawks to never vote for a clown like Trump. He is a danger to national security because he has so little confidence in those he commands. Even if he gives the order, the utter lack of respect and lack of confidence in him will probably result in mass disobedience of his orders.

Regardless of political ideology, a President MUST command a certain level of respect in order to be an effective leader. Trump only commands respect from FUCKING  IDIOTS.

Far from being a strongman who his idiot supporters hope him to be, Trump is a weak man who invites attack on us. Our enemies know  he is jackass. They will manipulate him accordingly.

Your concern does not disturb me at all for 2 reasons:

1. The former Soviet combined strategic and tactical power that could conceivably demolish most of the American nuclear arsenal with a preemptive strike such that waiting for that strike to land can reduce the power of American retaliation to a level acceptable to the Soviets is no more. There is no force on earth today that even come close to having the ability to preempt any American second strike or seriously diminish the power of the second strike. So in no case does america have any true need to assure confidence in its capability to rapidly react by launching on warning. America will assuredly retain the capacity to aanihilate the attacker with a second strike from its SSBN force even if it waits for any conceivable first strike from any enemy’s to land first. So Reacting rapidly to lunch before the first strike lands will not prevent the first strike from,landing and will make zero difference to the outcome.

2. In practice the general’s grandstanding statement means nothing.   What exactly is an illegal order?

Launch nuclear weapons against a blue state that voted against trump?

If trump say launch against North Korea after Kim called the US the land of sodomized orange monkey that will be wiped off the earth, is that legal or not?

I have perfect confidence if trump orders a unprovoked nuclear strike against a foreign state without the ability to nuke us back in retaliation, the military will uphold legality by defining illegality so narrowly that no careers need to be risked for the mere lives of foreigners who had it coming anyway.

On the other hand If any president ordered a unprovoked nuclear strike on Russia or China I think the military would have shot that president between the eyes anyway because the extended families of the officer Corp might be incinerated in the aftermath.

[Seraphina]

I'm not convinced that the US military would reject an order by Trump to launch missiles at the latest despot to insult the size of his junk which is very concerning to me. High level officers have spent decades executing and giving commands and all of a sudden they're going to say no? The military isn't by any means a homogeneous group of Trump/ Republican supporters but they're trained to follow orders by their commanders no matter who is giving the order.

-Teresa

[vorlon13]

I've mentioned this before, during Nixon's Watergate Scandal, the secretary of defense requested the Joint Chiefs report to him if they received any 'unusual orders' from Tricky Dicky.

So there is precedent (IANMTU) for the upper echelons of the US government being aware 'unlawful' orders could emanate from the Oval Office and that there being some thought into dealing with that possibility.


As for an 'intramural' use of nukes, I note that at one time the US government was aware at least one other nuclear power had contingency plans for that sort of thing.


[shudder]

[Homeless Nutter]

OMG, there may be a small chance, that US and its muppet in charge will not be able to blow up the world, when push comes to shove? How am I going to sleep tonight?

Yeah, I seriously don't give a flying f*ck if any of US nukes even work anymore. I don't believe actual deployment of nuclear arsenal would be useful in pretty much any way. They're supposed to be a deterrent and that's it. Of course, if the orange coprophage does try to use it and gets publicly denied by the military - the deterrent factor may be severely compromised.

[Aoi Magi]

See, I still have hope in humanity, and so I believe the only way Trump gets to launch a nuke is if it's a nuclear retaliatory strike or if some dumbass takes him on a tour of the base and he goes "ooh what does this button do".