The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
US nuclear forces commander says he'd refuse an "illegal" trump nuke order
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:41 AM Author: Impertinent Diverse Philosopher-king Stage Cites the "law of war". I wasn't aware the "law of war" trumped the US constitution.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a10ac27e4b045cf4371d3ba
Hyten, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Command who oversees America’s nuclear arsenal, spoke at a forum titled “Nukes: The Fire and the Fury,” as recorded in a video on the event’s Facebook page. He didn’t define what exactly would constitute an illegal launch order. But Hyten said he has been trained for the past 36 years in the law of armed conflict, and mentioned the consideration of such elements as proportional response and unnecessary suffering that would be caused by such a conflagration.
In the event Trump suggests an illegal strike, Hyten described a scenario in which he would present Trump with legal choices. |
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:48 AM Author: pink multi-colored mother Lmfao its like dr strangelove. Luckily if we were ever in a srs position like this i dont think trump would fuck around. This guy would be bye bye quick.
Why they fuck does this guy feel need to speak publically about this ? Amazing how psychologically weak ppl are even in positions of great power and resppnsibility. |
 |
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:50 AM Author: marvelous avocado elastic band I'm sure he means preemptive strike. Anyway who is Trump going to replace him with? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34722652) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:53 AM Author: pink multi-colored mother Wonder what chain of actions required to get a nuke off are? Imagine a sweating kushner pouring over a manuel trying to figure out who to calm and shit lol.
|
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:59 AM Author: marvelous avocado elastic band Yeah everyone involved will want massive top cover and will not be pleased to learn orders are coming from some flunkie.
Another thing that occurs to me is that the general getting fired for disobedience is going to become a national hero overnight. |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:52 AM Author: Wonderful wild doctorate TBH I would hope he would not follow an "illegal" order from anyone. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34722655) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 10:06 AM Author: electric vengeful property travel guidebook I think that's the bigger takeaway. It wasn't so much that his speech was "anti-Trump". It was moreso a reminder that all Service Members have an obligation to do "what's right" and simply saying they were "Following Orders" won't work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34722679) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:31 PM Author: adventurous alcoholic reading party cr what a pointless "article" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723296) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:52 AM Author: Aromatic school water buffalo (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34722656) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 9:55 AM Author: marvelous avocado elastic band First strike. There's debate over when presidents can order them. I think there's a CRS report but I'm too lazy to find it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34722662) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 10:05 AM Author: electric vengeful property travel guidebook ITT: non-militarymos
No Soldier/Service Member is to EVER follow an illegal order.
That's "First Day Army Shit". You have an obligation to REFUSE an order that is illegal, immoral, or unethical.
"In United States v. Keenan, the accused was found guilty of murder after he obeyed an order to shoot and kill an elderly Vietnamese citizen. The Court of Military Appeals held that "the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal". |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:23 PM Author: Buck-toothed sadistic spot so what's illegal about declaring war on a country and nuking it? If you suddenly decide killing is immoral in the middle of a war and refuse to do your duty you will be court martialled.
You also learn not to listen to barracks lawyers |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:39 PM Author: histrionic pit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723319) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:41 PM Author: razzle legend chapel OP here. I'm an O3. The point is that the nuke commander said that he would consider things like "proportionality" in determining whether an order is illegal. That's BS. If we are hit by a dirty bomb in NY, the president is within his rights to nuke the capital of the country responsible. The general can't sit around and navel-gaze about some just war theory he talked about at command and staff school. The president also has the authority to launch a preemptive strike when he deems it necessary. The only limits are those imposed by congress or the constitution. But under the war powers act the president has the lawful authority to nuke anybody, anytime. So until congress repeals that act, and the authorization of military force from 2001, the nuke commander can't refuse his order. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723326) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:46 PM Author: stirring market marketing idea cr bang on. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723344) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:49 PM Author: Buck-toothed sadistic spot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723362) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:42 PM Author: Excitant cruel-hearted crackhouse I think that part of it is just that people seem to feel the need to reiterate this policy under Trump (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723331) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:24 PM Author: boyish lodge french chef i'd love video of a general and trump scuffling over the nuclear codes. who would win? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723257) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:34 PM Author: maroon keepsake machete Military commanders are required to follow the constitution too. If their president gives them a blatantly unconstitutional order, its their duty not to obey it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723307) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:43 PM Author: razzle legend chapel What are the constitutional limits on the president's war powers, as authorized by congress in the AUMF and war powers act? Do we need to read the penumbras? Better keep justice Kennedy on speed dial. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723335) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:37 PM Author: histrionic pit thought nuke needs to be authorized by POTUS + secretary of DoD anyway (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723315) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:39 PM Author: maroon keepsake machete assuming that happens, this guy is saying he wouldn't follow the order if its illegal. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723320) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:40 PM Author: histrionic pit pretty sure trump could just relieve him of his post if this happened (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723322) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:41 PM Author: racy drab lay windowlicker libs are pathetic (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34723327) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 3:59 PM Author: razzle legend chapel (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3802378&forum_id=2#34724385) |