U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2017, 09:49 AM
 
17,916 posts, read 9,849,196 times
Reputation: 17400

Advertisements

Top general says he'd push back against 'illegal' nuclear strike order


Top general says he'd push back against 'illegal' nuclear strike order - CNNPolitics


Anyone with military experience would know that this headline must be much less volatile than it sounds. And apparently there are some top civilians who haven't attended the required briefings.


All the difference is in that word "illegal," and what it might mean in any given circumstance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2017, 10:57 AM
 
12,657 posts, read 12,085,149 times
Reputation: 17300
I posted about this on another thread, but yea, people never in the military have a thin grasp of the concepts of orders, lawful and unlawful, and the duties of the military in regards to these orders. This is a non, very non issue that the media hyped up because Trump is in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 11:01 AM
 
9,347 posts, read 15,799,798 times
Reputation: 17142
^Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 11:23 AM
 
972 posts, read 428,415 times
Reputation: 2466
Media just hates trump and at every possible opportunity they twist and distort things to control the narrative to make it appear like everyone else thinks as they do.

They are trying to link the general to the "resist" crowd that they are so proud of.

It's completely taken out of context.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 02:39 PM
 
6,082 posts, read 2,500,737 times
Reputation: 3877
So if he really refused to launch is there a sort of very very quick change of command and someone that can step up when he is let go?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 02:48 PM
 
4,759 posts, read 1,873,849 times
Reputation: 4823
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
So if he really refused to launch is there a sort of very very quick change of command and someone that can step up when he is let go?
Lincoln had to find generals capable of making war and went through more than a few befoire getting the right ones. Stalin had Zhukov who was prone to screwing up everything he touched. It's said nowadays the only reason Operation Saturn at Stalingrad succeeded in 1942 was because he was planning operation Mars in the Rhezhev salient. America had "Blood and guts" Patton. His guts and our blood according to the soldiers.

You just need the right man for the job. There's plenty of fanatics in uniform out there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 02:54 PM
 
6,082 posts, read 2,500,737 times
Reputation: 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrat335 View Post
Lincoln had to find generals capable of making war and went through more than a few befoire getting the right ones. Stalin had Zhukov who was prone to screwing up everything he touched. It's said nowadays the only reason Operation Saturn at Stalingrad succeeded in 1942 was because he was planning operation Mars in the Rhezhev salient. America had "Blood and guts" Patton. His guts and our blood according to the soldiers.

You just need the right man for the job. There's plenty of fanatics in uniform out there.
The problem is now days you don't have months or years to go search the ranks for someone, it will all be over in a day at the most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 03:21 PM
 
8,768 posts, read 10,351,106 times
Reputation: 13823
No Commander in Chief since the end of the Vietnam War has had their competency questioned regarding the ordering of use of nuclear weapons, until now. This was actually an off shoot of the CIA's questioning if they are required by law to disclose sensitive top secret information to the current Chief Executive if they have reason to question the competency of that person to safeguard the information. And that was probably an offshoot of the DOD wanting to know what to do if certain members of the administration's security clearance was in question. This is really the only time so many questions over the competency of an entire administration was called into question.

This is not however, the first time a senior official's ability to access or have control of certain items were questioned. The closest it came before was under Reagan when the DOD and CIA raised issues over mental incapacity after a speech. Just like today, it was a short lived media event until some new controversy occurred.

However, those of us who served know full well that the President (Commander in Chief) does not have the sole and only authority to launch nuclear weapon. Under the US Constitution, he has the sole authority to order use of nuclear weapons but the actual order to use those nuclear weapons must also be authorized by the Secretary of Defense under the Two-Man Policy. Still, how to deploy those weapons falls within the command structure of those controlling the weapons.

I'm sure the media is making a big deal of it, but that's their job, so let them do what they are paid to do. After all, didn't we serve to defend the Constitution regardless of our own political affiliation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 03:53 PM
 
5,761 posts, read 3,043,495 times
Reputation: 15097
I read the new article a couple days ago. Much ado about nothing. Normal expectations that I was taught over 35 years ago in SAC & NORAD. False implication in the headline for the gullible public is all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 05:08 PM
 
6,082 posts, read 2,500,737 times
Reputation: 3877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabrrita View Post
No Commander in Chief since the end of the Vietnam War has had their competency questioned regarding the ordering of use of nuclear weapons, until now. This was actually an off shoot of the CIA's questioning if they are required by law to disclose sensitive top secret information to the current Chief Executive if they have reason to question the competency of that person to safeguard the information. And that was probably an offshoot of the DOD wanting to know what to do if certain members of the administration's security clearance was in question. This is really the only time so many questions over the competency of an entire administration was called into question.

This is not however, the first time a senior official's ability to access or have control of certain items were questioned. The closest it came before was under Reagan when the DOD and CIA raised issues over mental incapacity after a speech. Just like today, it was a short lived media event until some new controversy occurred.

However, those of us who served know full well that the President (Commander in Chief) does not have the sole and only authority to launch nuclear weapon. Under the US Constitution, he has the sole authority to order use of nuclear weapons but the actual order to use those nuclear weapons must also be authorized by the Secretary of Defense under the Two-Man Policy. Still, how to deploy those weapons falls within the command structure of those controlling the weapons.

I'm sure the media is making a big deal of it, but that's their job, so let them do what they are paid to do. After all, didn't we serve to defend the Constitution regardless of our own political affiliation?
I would imagine is retaliatory strike would could be unilateral?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top