The Official "Damned Trump" Thread: Phase II

[Deesse23]

The President is the head of the military.  Under military rules, he is the King, full stop.  He can order a nuclear strike, the military to take over an Ally.  Nothing is forbidden as long as it happens off U.S. soil.  There is no restraint on this power, except for direct and immediate action by Congress - and that will never happen.

Trump is King as far as the military goes.  Better get used to it.

Actually, that’s not the case. AFAIK, military personnel are not required to follow illegal orders, even from the President. In fact, they have a duty to disobey unlawful orders.

Boru

I am shocked, but not surprised at all, that this has to be told to some people.
On the other side it explains why the US version of democracy is in danger: too few to support it, and apparently too few to understand it. How is someone like this supposed to support a system he does not even understand.

On the plus side, the way you always can claim to just have followed orders after poop has hit the fan.

Welcome to the 1930s re enactments.

[Deesse23]

The President is the head of the military.  Under military rules, he is the King, full stop.  He can order a nuclear strike, the military to take over an Ally.  Nothing is forbidden as long as it happens off U.S. soil.  There is no restraint on this power, except for direct and immediate action by Congress - and that will never happen.

Trump is King as far as the military goes.  Better get used to it.

Actually, that’s not the case. AFAIK, military personnel are not required to follow illegal orders, even from the President. In fact, they have a duty to disobey unlawful orders.

Boru

On a side note: when I was in the German army in the late 80s, one of the first things we were told was exactly this: we do not have to follow unlawful orders.

Looks like we learned our lesson, and the US. Is about to.....

[Thumpalumpacus]

Actually, that’s not the case. AFAIK, military personnel are not required to follow illegal orders, even from the President. In fact, they have a duty to disobey unlawful orders.

Boru

I am shocked, but not surprised at all, that this has to be told to some people.
On the other side it explains why the US version of democracy is in danger: too few to support it, and apparently too few to understand it. How is someone like this supposed to support a system he does not even understand.

On the plus side, the way you always can claim to just have followed orders after poop has hit the fan.

Welcome to the 1930s re enactments.

The Nuremburg defense has been used in the US military previously -- or at least attempted.

[Alan V]

According to the Wall Street Journal, government spending is up under Trump, not down:

[video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYRwTtVBbSU ]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

According to the Wall Street Journal, government spending is up under Trump, not down:

[video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYRwTtVBbSU ]

'I know what the hell I'm doing!' - Donald J. Trump (cue raucous laughter)

Boru

[Deesse23]

According to the Wall Street Journal, government spending is up under Trump, not down:

[video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYRwTtVBbSU ]

'I know what the hell I'm doing!' - Donald J. Trump (cue raucous laughter)

Boru

You arent the king if you have to shout "I am the king!".

[HappySkeptic]

Actually, that’s not the case. AFAIK, military personnel are not required to follow illegal orders, even from the President. In fact, they have a duty to disobey unlawful orders.

Boru

I am shocked, but not surprised at all, that this has to be told to some people.
On the other side it explains why the US version of democracy is in danger: too few to support it, and apparently too few to understand it. How is someone like this supposed to support a system he does not even understand.

On the plus side, the way you always can claim to just have followed orders after poop has hit the fan.

Welcome to the 1930s re enactments.

Explain to me how ANY direct order from the President to the commanders, if the operations are off U.S. soil are illegal under U.S. law?  What law does the President have to abide by?  International treaties?  The President has the power to decide which treaties to obey and which not to obey.  The U.S. considers its Constitution supreme, and that it supersedes all international law.

The Congress has essentially given the President unchecked military power.  Theoretically the Congress should approve of a war, but that hasn't happened in my lifetime.  They rubber-stamp military action after the fact, but the President has 90 days to whatever he likes.  Plus, the President can defy Congress and say "Just try to impeach me - you won't".

There is no such thing as an illegal military order by the President if the activity happens outside of U.S. soil.  Prove me wrong, and don't cite international law.  That has no effect in the U.S.

When it is 100% legal for the President to order a nuclear strike, how can anything less than that be illegal?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I am shocked, but not surprised at all, that this has to be told to some people.
On the other side it explains why the US version of democracy is in danger: too few to support it, and apparently too few to understand it. How is someone like this supposed to support a system he does not even understand.

On the plus side, the way you always can claim to just have followed orders after poop has hit the fan.

Welcome to the 1930s re enactments.

Explain to me how ANY direct order from the President to the commanders, if the operations are off U.S. soil are illegal under U.S. law?  What law does the President have to abide by?  International treaties?  The President has the power to decide which treaties to obey and which not to obey.  The U.S. considers its Constitution supreme, and that it supersedes all international law.

The Congress has essentially given the President unchecked military power.  Theoretically the Congress should approve of a war, but that hasn't happened in my lifetime.  They rubber-stamp military action after the fact, but the President has 90 days to whatever he likes.  Plus, the President can defy Congress and say "Just try to impeach me - you won't".

There is no such thing as an illegal military order by the President if the activity happens outside of U.S. soil.  Prove me wrong, and don't cite international law.  That has no effect in the U.S.

When it is 100% legal for the President to order a nuclear strike, how can anything less than that be illegal?

Say there’s a unit stationed in Germany. Trump signs an order that the commander is to personally shoot every left-handed non-com for being left-handed. The commander has the duty to refuse the order, since murder is always illegal.

For the record, Article VI of the US Constitution includes treaties as ‘the supreme law of the land’. The President does not have the authority to disregard treaties.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

Keeps pushing the notion Trumps a king he's not 

[Angrboda]

Harvard just told Trump to go fuck himself.