Cont: President Trump: Part 3

[Border Reiver]

So it doesn't have to be illegal. There could indeed be moral considerations that would absolve the person of their disobedience.

No, morality has very little to do with it. It is explained along the lines of: "Shoot this prisoner."

"Fire the missiles at their target on order of the CinC". Is not there. As the CinC has the authority to order such an action, it is not on its face unlawful.

 

[jimbob]

Like not drawing your sword in a house of worship.

Well played, sir

 

[newyorkguy]

The President has the authority to order a nuclear attack. The so-called 'football,' the container with the attack codes, has reportedly been modified in recent years to present the Commander-in-Chief with a "menu of options." My sense is, once that order goes out it is too late. Way too late. Once there was some thought that something might go very wrong. In 1974 when Richard Nixon was facing impeachment, drinking heavily and having trouble sleeping.

James Schlesinger, secretary of defense at that time, No. 2 in the nuclear chain of command, was reported to be so concerned about Nixon's behavior that he sent word down the chain of command that if anyone received any "unusual orders" from the president they should double-check with him before carrying them out. Link

Note the writer, Ron Rosenbaum, author of How the End Begins, uses the qualifier, "reported to be." I don't think James Schlesinger ever verified whether that story was true or not. Could a military officer decide not to obey the order? How could they know there was something amiss, how could they decide? Look what happened to an Air Force major, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, who merely asked the question during missile training. That if he received an order to launch, how could he be sure the President hadn't become mentally ill?

Hering needed a lawyer because as soon as he asked the question he was yanked out of missile training class, and after two years of appeals, eventually had to leave the Air Force...

 

[CapelDodger]

What did I do to deserve all this?

Dave's not here, man. So it's you.

 

[SezMe]

In practical terms, he has to call someone. This someone sits way up in the chain of command in the Pentagon. In fact, the way I understand the US military works, there are TWO someones that both must agree to continue. They act as a shield, and this is a function that the military and those two people take extremely serious. I'm not even sure that he's easily able to replace them. (Yes, technically he's the commander-and-chief, but he still has to direct his commands through the military high echelons. From what I see, the high military is quite far from blindly following Trump like Nunes.)

Thanks, but that honestly gives me little comfort.

And my larger point is that we're even having this discussion is, of itself, otherworldly.

 

[CapelDodger]

The President has the authority to order a nuclear attack. The so-called 'football,' the container with the attack codes, has reportedly been modified in recent years to present the Commander-in-Chief with a "menu of options."

For his last meal?

There are too many people, with too much to lose, between the President and a nuclear launch for it to happen. And I'm talking yachts and trophy brides and military careers, not trivia. I take comfort from that.

 

[newyorkguy]

...There are too many people, with too much to lose, between the President and a nuclear launch for it to happen...

What do you base that on because that doesn't sound like what I've seen. Once ordered there's just one senior officer in the Pentagon war room (in Arlington Virginia) who can stop the attack from being carried out. That officer receives the coded order directly from the president's 'football.' That officer then authenticates it has come from the president. The officer does that by replying with a challenge code, a brief phonetic sequence. The president then consults the "biscuit," the laminated card the president or a military aide carry at all times, and replies. Again, it's a brief phonetic code. If the president gives the correct reply the order to deploy is flashed to units all over the world. At that point it's almost certainly too late.

This is from Bloomberg News:

About five minutes may elapse from the president’s decision until intercontinental ballistic missiles blast out of their silos, and about fifteen minutes until submarine missiles shoot out of their tubes. Link

To serve as a real world deterrent it has to be done quickly. If it is a retaliatory strike that means the attacking missiles are already airborne and approaching targets in the U.S. There's not going to be any debate or questioning, that's supposed to come prior to the president ordering a strike. Thus if a president was to take the action on his own...

Goodbye everybody, it's been real!

 

[TragicMonkey]

For his last meal?

There are too many people, with too much to lose, between the President and a nuclear launch for it to happen. And I'm talking yachts and trophy brides and military careers, not trivia. I take comfort from that.

I like to think that since the president is always surrounded by armed people, one of them might act to prevent them from doing something too horrible. More Roman emperors were taken out by their own guards than by their enemies.

 

[newyorkguy]

Some of you appear to take this about as seriously as president Trump does.

This was in the Washington Post last month.

It’s unlikely that an Army officer posing for a photograph with a patron at President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago golf resort while apparently carrying the “nuclear football” broke any Defense Department regulations, but doing so has put the Pentagon in an awkward situation, defense officials said. The image was one of several posted [to Facebook] over the weekend by Richard DeAgazio, a retired investor [see below]. Link

 

[Bob001]

......

This is from Bloomberg News:

To serve as a real world deterrent it has to be done quickly. If it is a retaliatory strike that means the attacking missiles are already airborne and approaching targets in the U.S. There's not going to be any debate or questioning, that's supposed to come prior to the president ordering a strike. Thus if a president was to take the action on his own...

Goodbye everybody, it's been real!

From everything I've read, the presumption of the system is that an authenticated order from the President is lawful and must be executed. During Watergate there was a little bit of a scandal when it was discovered that the DefSec quietly passed the word to the senior military that any "unusual" order from the White House should be confirmed with him. But that's not the routine procedure.

There is no doubt that the world has come within minutes, literally, of nuclear war.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/world-war-three-by-mistake

 

[Bob001]

I like to think that since the president is always surrounded by armed people, one of them might act to prevent them from doing something too horrible. More Roman emperors were taken out by their own guards than by their enemies.

You can't assume that at all. People around Trump like Bannon and Kushner might be able to intervene, but the SS would presume that the President is acting lawfully in response to an immediate proven threat and would probably hustle him into the bunker.

 

[TragicMonkey]

You can't assume that at all. People around Trump like Bannon and Kushner might be able to intervene, but the SS would presume that the President is acting lawfully in response to an immediate proven threat and would probably hustle him into the bunker.

Neither can you assume you know the minds of every Secret Service person. If a president were to go King Aerys it's not impossible one of them might not turn Jaime Lannister.

 

[Bob001]

Neither can you assume you know the minds of every Secret Service person. If a president were to go King Aerys it's not impossible one of them might not turn Jaime Lannister.

The SS doesn't stand behind the big desk in the Oval Office. If the President ordered the "bagman" to open the box and provide the codes, unless someone ran from the room screaming there's no reason to think the SS would even know. And they certainly would have no way to know whether the U.S. really was under imminent attack. I can imagine somebody calling his boss, and the boss working up to the SecDef or the VP. But that's as far as it would go.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The SS doesn't stand behind the big desk in the Oval Office. If the President ordered the "bagman" to open the box and provide the codes, unless someone ran from the room screaming there's no reason to think the SS would even know. And they certainly would have no way to know whether the U.S. really was under imminent attack. I can imagine somebody calling his boss, and the boss working up to the SecDef or the VP. But that's as far as it would go.

And on the other hand, if a nude Trump runs screaming into the hallway, slathered in his own feces, gibbering "we gotta nuke Italy! The pope is working with the lizard people!" and dives for the Big Red Button, I'm confident a patriotic security person would put him in a headlock.

 

[Belz...]

So racial bias is not racism? And sexual bias is not sexism clearly as well. Being biased against women does not make one a sexist anymore than being biased against blacks make

All bias is not racism or sexism, correct.

No there isn't the vast majority of it is just bais.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

When does it become real racism and not just racial bias?

I already told you this: it has to be conscious. In fact you've been arguing against me on this. How could you possible now forget?

Well, I'm not sure I entirely agree with this point.

On the one hand, I don't think that I'm racist. I don't think you are either.

But on the other hand, I exhibit some signs of racism when it comes to certain tests. I have no explicit beliefs that, say, black people are inferior to white people, but if these tests are accurate, then I have an implicit bias.

Which is a shame, obviously.I don't know how to fix it, but it's a problem.

I didn't say it wasn't a problem. But let's call things what they are. If Turtle is right, everybody is a racist, and the term loses all possible meaning.

 

[Belz...]

No, morality has very little to do with it. It is explained along the lines of: "Shoot this prisoner."

"Fire the missiles at their target on order of the CinC". Is not there. As the CinC has the authority to order such an action, it is not on its face unlawful.

You talked about "shocking the conscience". How is that not a matter of morality?

 

[Stacko]

I find it really, really odd. Possibly because I'm not in the US.

it seems to go something like this:

- Dave (cos we've moved on from Steve) says something that reveals him to be a mssive racist, what do you do?

- I call Dave a racist

- What are you insulting Dave for?



I wonder, does it work like this too:

- Dave (cos we've moved on from Steve) says something that reveals him to be a mssive sexist, what do you do?

- I call Dave a sexist

- What are you insulting Dave for?

Hey! Dave's not racist or sexist; he's just not politically correct. How dare you notice how transparent that code is!

 

[CapelDodger]

I like to think that since the president is always surrounded by armed people, one of them might act to prevent them from doing something too horrible.

There's always a pivot-pont when you're the guy with the gun.

More Roman emperors were taken out by their own guards than by their enemies.

When you look into it you'll find it was generally about who outbid who in those cases, and the whole thing was arranged. In this case it's a lot more personal and immediate : your family is out there, and Trump is going to trigger Armageddon the moment he's safely embunkered. That's what he's saying anyway, and on this one occasion you've no good reason to disbelieve him. Trump really would destroy the world in a fit of pique because it would mean nothing to him, and the guys who get near Trump with guns know that. Pathological psychopathy is on their curriculum.

 

[trustbutverify]

For his last meal?

There are too many people, with too much to lose, between the President and a nuclear launch for it to happen. And I'm talking yachts and trophy brides and military careers, not trivia. I take comfort from that.

Even so, it's still an indicator of epic scale buffoonery. That degree of blistering incompetence makes a horrific event more likely.

 

[Stacko]

This is a perfect example of the Trump WH is mired in its own incompetence.

Trump: "We can't make mistakes... go ahead, Ken."
"I'm Chuck."​

He just doesn't give a ****.