Active Now

Slartibartfast
Randy D
Discussion » Questions » Politics » It DISTURBS me to read that people think there are SAFEGUARDS in place to STOP Trump from launching nukes IF he happens to FEEL like it?

It DISTURBS me to read that people think there are SAFEGUARDS in place to STOP Trump from launching nukes IF he happens to FEEL like it?

Hello:

You DO know that President Trump can start WW III SIMPLY because he wants to..  There's NOTHING in his way..  There are NO safeguards, whatsoever..  NOBODY has the power to STOP him - not a general - not a VP - not congress - not ANYBODY..  He can, ON HIS OWN, nuke Mexico City if, for example, they decide to NOT pay for the wall.. 

You DO know this, right???  Doncha think you SHOULD???

excon

Posted - October 30, 2016

Responses


  • 6988
    Billionaires are not that stupid. He worked too hard to blow up everything he owns. Besides, he likes Russian/ Eastern European women. 
      October 30, 2016 9:03 AM MDT
    2

  • 3907
    Hello bh:

    It's NOT his intelligence I'm questioning..  It's his temperament..  A president needs THICK skin.  Trump ain't got that..

    excon
      October 30, 2016 9:10 AM MDT
    2

  • 6988
    I think at age 70, he would be mild mannered enough to have an inner wisdom or understanding of the power of nukes. He may sound a bit 'hawkish', but that may just be a display to his followers that he can be a tough guy towards North Korea or Iran. This post was edited by B.H.Wilson at October 31, 2016 12:38 PM MDT
      October 31, 2016 12:37 PM MDT
    0

  • 5808
    yeah, that's scary.
      October 30, 2016 9:20 AM MDT
    0

  • IDK.   I hear ya' but doubt even he would use the nukes.   At this point in military technology and capabilities we have conventional arms that can cause just as much destruction of life and leaves the area safe for resource development and profiting.  I think his greed and opportunist side would keep him from deploying them.   He could just as easily lay waste to a population and then go in on a profit motive by not using them.
    The bigger and more likely threat would be his quickness to use the threat of using them on another nation and causing them to retaliate to the threat.  Example:  He talks big about them to an unstable enemy nation Like the DPRK and that influences them to use theirs on us or our allies.  JMHO.
      October 30, 2016 9:37 AM MDT
    0

  • 1615
    With the qualifications required to be President next to none it is inconceivable that one person has the power to make a decision that could destroy our world as we know it.
     
      October 30, 2016 1:40 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    HaHaHaHaHa,

    Been reading Hil-LIAR-y's e-mails on the Wikileaks WEB site again; seeing HER plans if we're so unfortunate as to have her win the election?

    You're another of those real comedians foisting false ideas as fact. (Or you've gotten into some PCP-laced "smoke", yet again.)

    But for those who might not know any better and actually might take the ranting seriously . . .

    The United States has what is called The National Command Authority. That Authority MUST issue the orders for a nuclear strike. And while the President (or his or her legal proxy in the event he or she is incapacitated) is at the top of that pyramid and must initiate the order it also must be endorsed by the Secretary of Defense or his or her legal proxy BEFORE officially being passed on down the chain to the Joint Chiefs and base commanders. And while it's possible that the President could fire his DoE on the spot for not executing an UNWARRANTED nuclear launch order the next one in line at that level would have to green light the aggression. And by that point the top heads of the US government would have been notified (protocol irrespective of the President' wishes) and the Cabinet could declare the President incompetent thereby nullifying the order.

    It's more likely that some disgruntled Air Force tech with a handful of clip leads could bypass all of the safeties and arm and  initiate the launch of a single ICBM. But in all likelihood we could take that out of the sky (some of that SDI technology that we actually have) before it reached its target.

    A much more likely scenario is that if Hil-LIAR-y is elected she will keep up the policies of the Obama administration and keep whizzing in Russia's corn flakes (started with that "Overcharge" button and has escalated to Russia placing nuclear weapons along their western border again and having their fighter jets play "chicken" with ours and do uncomfortably close fly-bys of our navel vessels). THAT'S the kind of posturing that can cause a world war to start.

    Another much more likely possibility is that some third world country that has nukes [Pakistan and North Korea right now and soon Iran thanks to Obama (the North Koreans have nukes now thanks to Bill Clinton's machinations when he was the President), And that's only three, there are more. (Or that may be given nukes from "someone" that wants to stir the pot), With actors like that on the world stage, actors that don't care about "Mutually Assured Destruction", we've never been closer to a act of nuclear aggression (and yes, I remember the Cuban Missile Crisis). Happy Jihad! And Trump will have nothing to do with starting it.
      October 30, 2016 4:28 PM MDT
    0

  • 3907

    Hello Red:


    I dunno HOW you get it so wrong, but you manage, don't you? 

    Presumably, the only time the president will have to fire the nukes, is when missiles are ALREADY in the air AIMED at us..  He has about 9 minutes to shoot or not.. And, IN those 9 minutes, you're telling me he has to find the Secretary of Defense, and then ask his generals for permission???


    DUDE!!! 

    There ain't nothing else I can say about that..

    excon
      October 31, 2016 1:24 PM MDT
    0

  • 691
    It disturbs me more that crazy hillary may win and actually start a war. That is more frightening to me than the claim that somehow trump is insane and wishes to nuke some place. I would feel better with trump nuking mexico than hillary nuking russia since at least mexico will not nuke back and destroy the world.
      October 31, 2016 7:37 AM MDT
    0