World War Maybe

[Obviousman]

20 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Ok well thank for your post, and we can certainly agree to disagree?

On this particular aspect, no. This isn't a matter of opinion. This is fact and on that point you are wrong. The world doesn't care whether you agree or disagree with reality; reality is.

Sorry!

[TigerBright19]

2 hours ago, Autochthon1990 said:

That was based on faulty intelligence in 2002, just about EVERYBODY thought Saddam had WMDs, and got fooled by Cheney's crock. Also you'll notice there's far more nays on the democratic side...

Yes, but there was a majority of Democrats in the Senate who voted for military action and essentially overruled the House of representatives who (by tradition) always vote against Republican legislation, and vice versa, and attempt to block the President, even when the proposal is a good one e.g.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by TigerBright19

[the13bats]

12 hours ago, Aroundthecorner said:

The media did that, dont hold your breath for the biden saviour

You cant grasp i dont unlike you and too many trump worshippers watch and buy into msm i base my opinions on trump on what i hear the man say.

[spartan max2]

8 hours ago, and then said:

Trump was doing his best to draw down and end the Afghanistan and Iraq sandboxes.  Watch Biden's moves in the next few months.  It won't be the U.S. that initiates a nuclear strike. We have no need to do such a thing.  Putin, Xi, Kim and the Mullahs are the ones to watch.  This party is just getting started.  Won't it be fun? 

Being involved in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't cause world war 3 under Bush senior, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, or Trump. 

So I don't forsee that changing with Biden. 

[the13bats]

1 hour ago, Obviousman said:

On this particular aspect, no. This isn't a matter of opinion. This is fact and on that point you are wrong. The world doesn't care whether you agree or disagree with reality; reality is.

Sorry!

If you knew what "opinion" means then you would know what you believe is your right opinion can ne seen as wrong by the next guy, it doesnt make an opinion wrong simply because some guy doesnt like it or agree with it.

And you speak for yourself not the "world"

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, Obviousman said:

On this particular aspect, no. This isn't a matter of opinion. This is fact and on that point you are wrong. The world doesn't care whether you agree or disagree with reality; reality is.

Sorry!

There is no need to be sorry I take absolutely no offense to your comments and I even respect your opinion.

But let me get this straight,  you are saying their is no fail safe and that without anyone else's approval a single man ( The President ) with launch codes can just decide to launch the Nuclear Aresenal of the the United States of America? 

Now keep in mind that at all Nuclear Launch sites to include our Bommers and our Artillery fired tactical Nuclear Weapons, it requires  two individuals to insert launchs keys that they only have access to. Also keep in mind that for the use of Artillery fired tactical Nuclear Weapons while there are no launch keys.

However there are a Special Weapons NCO and  Officer along with a team of soldier who pickup the tactical Nuclear round and assemble the war head in route to the firing location. But before they are allowed to receive the round they must each provide separate launch authorization, that is verified by the ASP holding the Nuclear Round.

The point I am making is do you really believe that the President alone can send out a Neclear Strike order and with nothing but his launch codes and his hand  print along with voice recognition so that if chose to do so, he can start World War III completely without any other individuals additional authorization that must also be supplied in addition to his, or that would give him access to the Nuclear Football?

thanks

Thanks

Edited November 23, 2020 by Manwon Lender

[+Desertrat56]

9 hours ago, TigerBright19 said:

Americans are only 4.3% of the global population.  Funny how they always end up in wars thousands of miles away.

 

I don't think anyone in the UK can criticize the U.S. for being involved in foreign wars.  You all have been in Afghanistan decades before we were, and Yes, I know the U.S. was in Afghanistan before we were told about it. And that is only one example.  

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, Obviousman said:

You know, what surprises me is that you actually believe that. I don't believe that you are stirring or anything; my impression is that you do actually believe that. However, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why. We are watching the same events unfold but are seeing completely different things.

Why should that surprise you?  Millions of Americans have been looking at the same facts and reaching diametrically opposite conclusions.   Why don't we just observe...

[Obviousman]

2 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

There is no need to be sorry I take absolutely no offense to your comments and I even respect your opinion.

But let me get this straight,  you are saying their is no fail safe and that without anyone else's approval a single man ( The President ) with launch codes can just decide to launch the Nuclear Aresenal of the the United States of America? 

Now keep in mind that at all Nuclear Launch sites to include our Bommers and our Artillery fired tactical Nuclear Weapons, it requires  two individuals to insert launchs keys that they only have access to. Also keep in mind that for the use of Artillery fired tactical Nuclear Weapons while there are no launch keys.

However there are a Special Weapons NCO and  Officer along with a team of soldier who pickup the tactical Nuclear round and assemble the war head in route to the firing location. But before they are allowed to receive the round they must each provide separate launch authorization, that is verified by the ASP holding the Nuclear Round.

The point I am making is do you really believe that the President alone can send out a Neclear Strike order and with nothing but his launch codes and his hand  print along with voice recognition so that if chose to do so, he can start World War III completely without any other individuals additional authorization that must also be supplied in addition to his, or that would give him access to the Nuclear Football?

thanks

Thanks

The 'two man rule' applies to all others EXCEPT the President. This is to prevent an UNAUTHORISED launch. If the President give a launch order, his identity must be confirmed but from that point on it is an authorised launch.

Would the personnel at the White House go along with a launch order? Maybe yes, maybe no.... however there is no procedural impediment to him starting WWIII on a whim.

[+Desertrat56]

2 hours ago, Autochthon1990 said:

There is one thing you should be aware of: Soldiers are drilled from day one in this country to violate illegal orders. If the President sends a nuke order to take out Finland for making fun of Ivanka's purse design, they have legal standing to say 'lol **** no'.

Yep, I remember that being drilled in to us when I was in the army and we were given a lot of scenarios.

 

[Obviousman]

But what is an illegal order? How do you know if it is illegal order? Some are blatantly obvious but others..... you can easily find yourself on a charge.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Trelane said:

These comments are based on what exactly? In the security threat briefings I've attended, there has been absolutely no talk of any sort of conflict. Sad that you are excited(?) that war could break out.

Oh yeah, for sure, I want the world to burn.   That was a bit of sarcasm.  Let me type s l o w e r... Trump worked overtime to get our troops out of the ME and refused on a couple of occasions to strike Iran.  I think that for non-mentally challenged people, the conclusion is that he DOESN'T want war.  Let's just watch Joe and see what the magic 8 ball tells him to do.  His presidency is going to be a first in our history.  Decision by committee.  I just hope we don't face a real nuclear threat under that situation.  But hey, if we become toast, big whoop.  All those rules are going up in a bonfire while the natives are screaming about the BOM 

[+Desertrat56]

2 minutes ago, Obviousman said:

But what is an illegal order? How do you know if it is illegal order? Some are blatantly obvious but others..... you can easily find yourself on a charge.

If you are in the U.S. military you are expected to know what laws apply.  

[Grim Reaper 6]

6 minutes ago, Obviousman said:

The 'two man rule' applies to all others EXCEPT the President. This is to prevent an UNAUTHORISED launch. If the President give a launch order, his identity must be confirmed but from that point on it is an authorised launch.

Would the personnel at the White House go along with a launch order? Maybe yes, maybe no.... however there is no procedural impediment to him starting WWIII on a whim.

Ok thanks very much for the chat, and again I respect you and your thoughts based upon what you could find online to support them, and I totally agree with you based upon the information you have found concerning this subject. 

But this is food for thought, and I will say no more, if you are correct, lets say our President had a mental break and was in a fugue state,  then according your information theoretically he could retriever the Nuclear Foot ball and commence the launch of our entire Nuclear arsenal against a preceived enemy without anything to stop him, does that sound logical or even possible.

Take Care, and have a great day or night depending upon where you are located, and again thanks for the Chat!

[the13bats]

1 hour ago, godnodog said:

Agreed, I dont think Trump is evil (I mean satanic level), I think he´s a individual that has overall only self interests in mind, I do not think he would cause ww3 on purposem though with Iran it was pretty wild move.

Naw trump isnt $atan he isnt that smart but he is a self centered self serving megalomaniac who is completely controlled by a very huge very fragile ego hes proven countless times just how psychotic, irrationally incompatant his thinking is, if he can cause mass destruction on his way out like shoot things with his code i fear he just might try it out of arroganance driven desparation and its just as scary his worshippers would rather see the world in ruin than admit trump lost and not be buttsore losers about it.

[Autochthon1990]

9 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

I'm going to brush this off the same way I brushed all the comments off in 2016 that said Trump would cause WW3.

People really just always assume their opponent is the devil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammon

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, Obviousman said:

You know, what surprises me is that you actually believe that. I don't believe that you are stirring or anything; my impression is that you do actually believe that. However, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why. We are watching the same events unfold but are seeing completely different things.

There are very good reasons for that, your comments are coming from a rational state of mind and his comments sadly are based upon a hate filled mind and that simple fact alone will allow two people with the exact same information to have to completely different views of the same subject. 

Take Care my friend.

[the13bats]

15 minutes ago, Obviousman said:

But what is an illegal order? How do you know if it is illegal order? Some are blatantly obvious but others..... you can easily find yourself on a charge.

Im delighted that im not the service man who has to decide is this madman who has been voted out yet is spewing and braying non stop claims of vote fraud with zero proof correct that i should rain nukes on the world and end the human race because hes a sore loser.

[Obviousman]

6 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

If you are in the U.S. military you are expected to know what laws apply.  

Really? Of course you are expected to know the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) but otherwise it is not clear cut. If interested, here is some suggested reading:

http://exclusive.multibriefs.com/content/the-risk-of-obeying-an-unlawful-order/civil-government

https://www.justsecurity.org/55743/law-military-obedience-mattis-military-orders/

(BTW - I have been a serving Officer for 25 years)

[+Desertrat56]

10 minutes ago, Obviousman said:

Really? Of course you are expected to know the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) but otherwise it is not clear cut. If interested, here is some suggested reading:

http://exclusive.multibriefs.com/content/the-risk-of-obeying-an-unlawful-order/civil-government

https://www.justsecurity.org/55743/law-military-obedience-mattis-military-orders/

(BTW - I have been a serving Officer for 25 years)

You have never been in the U.S. military so why are you arguing?  You are supposed to know the laws of your country as well, and I don't understand why you are asking if you were in the military.  Officers are supposed to have more training than enlisted, but then, maybe it's different in Australia.

Edited November 23, 2020 by Desertrat56

[Obviousman]

Just now, Desertrat56 said:

You have never been in the U.S. military so why are you arguing?  Have you been in the military in Australia?  

Yes, the ADF but LOAC applies to all belligerents. The point, however, is that while you are required to disobey a "manifestly illegal" order, there are many other situations where the distinction is not clear. That might not be your fault but you are still responsible for how you react. Your action might be correct, or it might be wrong. As I always tell people, just consider: At the subsequent Board of Inquiry / Court Martial, how is your explanation going to stand up? Granted, in my situation this tends to be more from a flight safety / duty of care perspective but it a lot of what any military persons face is not black and white.

[+Desertrat56]

2 minutes ago, Obviousman said:

Yes, the ADF but LOAC applies to all belligerents. The point, however, is that while you are required to disobey a "manifestly illegal" order, there are many other situations where the distinction is not clear. That might not be your fault but you are still responsible for how you react. Your action might be correct, or it might be wrong. As I always tell people, just consider: At the subsequent Board of Inquiry / Court Martial, how is your explanation going to stand up? Granted, in my situation this tends to be more from a flight safety / duty of care perspective but it a lot of what any military persons face is not black and white.

So why didn't you just say that in the first place? 

[Obviousman]

12 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

So why didn't you just say that in the first place? 

I thought I did.

[TigerBright19]

1 hour ago, Desertrat56 said:

I don't think anyone in the UK can criticize the U.S. for being involved in foreign wars.  You all have been in Afghanistan decades before we were, and Yes, I know the U.S. was in Afghanistan before we were told about it. And that is only one example.  

I think it is the propaganda that is most annoying.  Watching news footage of 9/11 and hearing politicians declaring that freedom and democracy was under attack, when in reality the attacks were carried out as a reaction to allied occupation and intervention in Afghanistan and loyalties to Israel.  I think the Taliban could not care less about US democracy and freedom because stopping it was never their agenda.  Same with the Iraq war.  Was it really about removing Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, or securing the oil fields?  Propaganda is a powerful tool, and it sadly works so well to rally the people to unite under an apparent noble cause.

 

[spartan max2]

1 minute ago, TigerBright19 said:

I think it is the propaganda that is most annoying.  Watching news footage of 9/11 and hearing politicians declaring that freedom and democracy was under attack, when in reality the attacks were carried out as a reaction to allied occupation and intervention in Afghanistan and loyalties to Israel.  I think the Taliban could not care less about US democracy and freedom because stopping it was never their agenda.  Same with the Iraq war.  Was it really about removing Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, or securing the oil fields?  Propaganda is a powerful tool, and it sadly works so well to rally the people to unite under an apparent noble cause.

 

People can say what they want about the war, but Saddam was definitely a POS, so I'm glad he is dead.