TO add another point. As we so often know humans aren't automata and not even in the military are people expected to blindly follow orders. The defense "I was just following orders" wasn't a valid legal defense for the perpetrators of the Holocaust. When we're talking nuclear war we're talking Holocaust on the scale of a thousand. Trump might be crazy but I don't think he is suicidal or nihlistic. He might want to remake the world in his own image but not see it burn. Talk of Trump being so unstable as to launch a nuclear strike from an angry tweet is pure hyperbole.
Maybe launching is hyperbole but I wouldn't put it past him to casually threaten to use nuclear weapons. Even that is freaking terrifying.
50 Former Republican National Security figured from the past disagree with you and wrote this letter: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/national-security-gop-donald-trump.html?_r=0 Given that this country has come very close to nuclear war a few times - things can escalate very quickly out of control. It's not that he is looking for a nuclear war, it's that he is reckless and as you say will use it as a threat. Just using it as a threat could cause escalation if someone calls his bluff or worse counter-threats. Trump is not suicidal but he is willing to draw lines in the sand and take hard aggressive positions. What if he decides to use a nuke against ISIS? Do you think there is no chance he would do that? Especially since he doesn't seem to distinguish between friend and foe very well.
Actually I understand this issue very well You're the one trying to convalute this. Post 9/11 the Bush administration got us into 2 wars, that Obama then tried to pull us out of. Simple as that. No need to get into geopolitics and middle eastern history.
Both candidates offered some very offense ways of dealing with the situation they got themselves into. But let's emphasis the word BOTH. Let's get some equal exposure here. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YXQRJQVOiZE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/10...-call-the-mother-of-a-benghazi-victim-a-liar/
"Pure hyperbole?" Really? Let me use your own example about "I was just following orders" not being a valid legal defense "for the perpetrators of the Holocaust." Whether it was a "legal defense" or not is immaterial. Why? The Holocaust happened.
Let's crank up the false equivalency machine. Racist attacks on grieving military parents are the same because BENGHAZI. Hey it still works. Woo that felt good What is that smell though? It's like a dog took a **** in a barrel of camembert.
A. The video did play a role in the attack as the one person captured said it played a role and the intelligence assessment done afterwards said it played a role. B. There was no way a rescue attempt could have been conducted Why do people have such a hard time with this.
I agree Trump is reckless and a nuclear escalation is always possible once they are putting it on the table. What I'm talking about is him launching nukes out of a fit of pique. I don't think the former national security officials are talking about that. I don't see that happen and further think it's unlikely those who actually have to execute the order follow it.
Yes it did happen and it also happened that the only time in US history that there was concern that a President might use nukes due to personal reasons that the secretary of defense and state stepped in to stop that possibility. Anyway my point is that even though there is a chain of command and an officer refusing an order from a President to engage nukes for less than dire reasons is technically breaking the law I doubt they get court martialed for it. There is more than enough to criticize Trump about than that he might launch nukes because he was offended by a tweet.
I agree that's certainly possible and as in my response to Sweet Lou once nukes are put on the table there is the possibility of things escalating beyond control. My point is that the speculating that Trump could suddenly launch nukes (push the button) out of fit of anger over something trivial is overblown. I don't think even he would and I don't think the chain of command would follow such an order. What I think is a more likely scenario is that Trump threatens a country like Pakistan with nukes and puts the US nuclear arsenal on alert and even engage in provocatives moves like nuclear armed B-52 flyovers. Pakistan responds by putting their nukes on alert and the situation becomes so dangerous that a mistake / misinterpretation leads to the use of nukes.
I am not talking about him going nuclear because of a tweet, I am talking about him using nukes period for any reason. These are not weapons that should ever be used or even threatened to be used. EVERYONE knows we have THOUSANDS of them. They are always there in the back of minds of anyone we deal with who is our enemy. We are the only country to have ever used them too. There are tactical nukes that are capable of being used against specific reinforced targets such as a bunker. Do you think that anyone in a right-wing chan of command to the loyal soldiers would openly oppose an order to use a tactical nuke against ISIS? Or Iran? Or Assad?
Bottom line is do you agree that Trump would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being?
There is no need to speculate what Trump will do. We know that he's more unstable than any modern day President candidate with the power to destroy civilization. The whole nuke discussion wouldn't happen without a Trump candidate. So again, thx to him for bringing up a discussion that should really be happening in the public. This is where your thought is not wise. The system is designed so that order will be obey, and quickly. Let's take an expert opinion on this matter: http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/06/polit...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer And I would point out that the mutiny would have to happen within 15 minutes of the order. It's not going to happen is the only wise bet.
Yes I agree that he would be dangerous but I don't believe he would launch nukes just for lolz as has been stated in this thread. I also agree that it would be mutiny to countermand a President's order to launch nukes but will again point to the history that we've been in this situation before where there was a President that acted erratically to the point that there was a fear that he might engage the nuclear arsenal. In that instance people did take steps to prevent that. I've yet to hear any response to that historical fact. My own view might be more optimistic than many of you but I believe that there are enough rational people in the military and who would be serving in a Trump Admin. to prevent something like that happening. The bigger danger to me is that things gradually escalate into a situation where a misinterpretation or other mistake leads to use of nukes. The scenario of Trump in a fit of rage or insanity suddenly launching nukes I think is very very unlikely.
