General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Trump orders a nuclear launch, will the military obey?
What if Trump orders a nuclear attack on Iran or, North Korea or, wherever? Will the Pentagon do it? Will they obey his order?
And if they don't, would that be, not just a constitutional crisis, but a military coup?
I don't know the answers to those questions. Any lawyers here that know the legalities involved?
maveric
(16,445 posts)Or will it be a Greg Stillson moment?
RKP5637
(67,032 posts)the US military more with the US than tRump.
thewhollytoast
(318 posts)He's just a weird orange turd whose little tiny remote, among other things, just won't work. Sad.
Toast
msongs
(67,199 posts)Cyrano
(15,023 posts)Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)hlthe2b
(101,730 posts)It isn't a simple yes and no... Read the full story linked below.
Can US generals say 'no' to Trump if he orders a nuclear strike?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42065714
The claim: US military personnel could resist President Trump if he ordered an illegal nuclear strike.
Reality Check verdict: Although normally nobody is allowed to refuse the president's order, in practice, generals would expect a good explanation for the strike - and would be obliged to say "no" to an illegal order.
--snip--
Retired general told Congress that the military may be able to say "no" to the President, under certain circumstances.
Now, Gen John Hyten, who leads US Strategic Command, has told the Halifax International Security Forum that he would advise against a strike if he considered it was illegal.
But is anyone allowed to say "no" to the president if he orders a nuclear strike?
hlthe2b
(101,730 posts)Ordinarily, nobody is allowed to over-rule the president's decision - it's part of his role as Commander-in-Chief.
In theory, the vice-president could oust the president if a majority of the cabinet agreed that the president was unfit to serve.
In practice, that would be difficult to organise in time to stop the president launching nuclear weapons.
But Peter Feaver, professor of political science at Duke University in North Carolina, says it's not true that President Trump could launch a nuclear strike as easily as he could fire off a tweet.
hlthe2b
(101,730 posts)There is NOT agreement on what constitutes a "illegal" strike.
Some argue that all uses of nuclear weapons would be unlawful.
But even if you dispute that, there may be certain circumstances where it would be illegal to fire nuclear weapons.
Anthony Colangelo, professor of law at the Southern Methodist University in Dallas, argues that certain kinds of nuclear strikes could break international humanitarian law.
International humanitarian law governs how countries must behave when at war. It comes from treaties the US has signed, such as the Geneva Conventions, but also from custom and case law, too.
You might break the law by using nuclear weapons when conventional weapons could achieve the same objective or by using nuclear weapons somewhere where they would kill combatants and civilians indiscriminately.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42065714
FirstLight
(13,352 posts)...and I shudder at the answer...
With so many other positions either cut or empty, I have been seeing this as a slow coup for a while. Now I think about the possibility of him using the military against citizens as well. I wonder how many of our actual soldiers and national guardsmen/women are ok with following orders that could endanger their own people?
RKP5637
(67,032 posts)wacko. These, are the most dangerous times I've ever felt in the US.
FirstLight
(13,352 posts)I remember thinking that, since I live in a relatively rural area and Federal Policies rarely affect me directly, that maybe, just maybe I could get through this relatively unscathed. Yeah, not so much now.
Usually the way I feel politics or policy directly is through economic shifts in my direct life. Now I swear I feel like the world is a direct threat, and that my OWN govt will go around and gather liberals, gays, journalists, even FBI and CIA, etc on a whim. They came for the illegals, next come the muslims, etc.
Outside right now as I write this a summer thunderstorm is rolling in, ominous rumbles from beyond...
Cyrano
(15,023 posts)I believe that millions of Americans, who never felt threatened in their lives, feel threatened by our current government, led by an unstable man.
Seems to me that this is a president who is as likely to order nukes launched at California as anywhere else.
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,904 posts)It may not be without question. His military advisers may attempt to persuade or reason with him, but ultimately they would follow his order. There is no Constitutional restriction or any Federal statute that restricts the Presidents launch authority, so it would not be an illegal order.
[link:https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-nuclear-weapon-launch/|]
RKP5637
(67,032 posts)Gidney N Cloyd
(19,781 posts)And that question may not be as off topic as it first sounds.
Sugar Smack
(18,748 posts)I think he's trying to set up the "civil unrest" scenario, with the help of his rabid dogs on the right. Would the military do it?
ck4829
(34,977 posts)Get people out of the military. We need to deny Trump, the alt-right, and the evangelicals fodder for their genocidal end-times poll-raising fantasies anyway.
TheRealNorth
(9,435 posts)We need our people is positions of power in the military.
honest.abe
(8,556 posts)I doubt one of the options will be nuclear unless Iran attacks us first.
jalan48
(13,798 posts)take over until a saner person was made President.
Response to Cyrano (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed