Time to Get Rid of the Presidential Power for Nuclear First Strike

[candycorn]

You finally realized Biden was in office?

View attachment 762897

Biden is 1000 times more stable than Trump.

There is no reason to have a nuclear first strike invested in the wishes of one person.

 

[candycorn]

The life of of one US citizen means more to me than any number of foreigners. You seem to have the opposite opinion. You are the kind of person that if you had known about 9/11 beforehand you would have done nothing to stop it because it would have made the Muslims mad.

We can disagree on this. Sure. But your reasoning that we should nuke them before they nuke us is idiotic because if we do...the response of a nuclear power is going to a launch.

As for your allegation...its just as idiotic as all of your other reasoning.

 

[candycorn]

What a great idea! Let the world know we aren’t going to do anything to prevent being attacked they get the first shot. Load up Cuba with Russian nukes again. We promise we won’t do anything until you hit us.

You have the thought process of a fucking child.

You have the reading ability of a fucking child.

I was talking about a first-strike; not a retaliatory strike.

 

[candycorn]

What a great idea!

Thanks.

 

[fncceo]

What a great idea! Let the world know we aren’t going to do anything to prevent being attacked

I'm pretty certain they already know that ...

 

[eagle7-31]

As the 2024 presidential election season heats up, you'll have candidates weighing in on all sorts of issues to where their impact as President would be minimal at best. The President has nothing to do with crime on the streets, minimal impact on how society behaves, and almost nothing to do with job creation. OF course we like report cards, grades, and objective data so we apply rates and polls to points in time and attribute those to whomever is in office.

One area where the candidates could actually have an impact is to strip away some of the crazy power we give the chief executive. One of the most glaring idiocies is to give the President the ability to essentially end the world by launching a first-strike with a nuclear weapon.

There is no reason to ever have such an ability invested in one person. A retaliatory strike? Yes. But to squeeze off a nuke when we were not hit first is unthinkable and, up until recently, unimaginable.

The President is C in C of the armed forces. How do you get by that?

 

[candycorn]

The President is C in C of the armed forces. How do you get by that?

huh?

 

[eagle7-31]

huh?

Was just asking a question. I appreciate your concern about the topic you raised but the President is commander in chief of the Armed Forces so I was just wondering how that works so to speak.

 

[Nostra]

Biden is 1000 times more stable than Trump.

There is no reason to have a nuclear first strike invested in the wishes of one person.

You still have no clue how a nuke is launched.

Get educated, Simp.

 

[fncceo]

You still have no clue how a nuke is launched.

I know exactly ... they showed us a training film ...

 

[RhodyPatriot]

The President has nothing to do with crime on the street

Unless - of course - he endorses defunding the police and letting crooks off easy.

All while his mini bosses in every fiefdom across America emulates his example.

In that case, he may just possess a degree of culpability.

 

[candycorn]

Was just asking a question. I appreciate your concern about the topic you raised but the President is commander in chief of the Armed Forces so I was just wondering how that works so to speak.

She/he would still be in charge of the armed forces. Just not have the ability to bring about the end of the world by nuking someone first.

 

[candycorn]

You still have no clue how a nuke is launched.

Get educated, Simp.

When you use the word "simp", its clear you've lost.

 

[candycorn]

Unless - of course - he endorses defunding the police and letting crooks off easy.

Well POTUS doesn't fund the police so POTUS can't dufund the police.

Are you really this dense?

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Well POTUS doesn't fund the police so POTUS can't dufund the police.

Are you really this dense?

Me???

You so fuckin' dumb you don't even understand the post you responding too.

..............................................................................................................................................................

And don't even lemme get started on yo momma.

 

[Nostra]

When you use the word "simp", its clear you've lost.

Not when it fits, Simp.

 

[Rigby5]

Reality?... did you ever think people would fly commercial jets into buildings?... did you ever expect China to leak a virus from one of their labs that killed millions of people?....
Realty can change in an instant... and now think of how a China spy balloon floated across America and we did nothing.... please wake up....

The WTC attack was due to the US barbarism in the Mideast.
It we had not murdered tens of thousands of innocents, like the "Highway of Death" where we used illegal thermobaric weapons on civilians, then it would not have been necessary.

China was doing the "gain of function" research in Wuhan, under Fauci's direct orders, for pay by the WHO and CDC.
And if we had acted correctly, it would have killed no more than seasonal flu, about 60k.

The Chinese research balloon was perfectly harmless and legal. What was illegal was shooting it down.

 

[Rigby5]

While I do not think any president should be able to launch a "first strike", there likely is no way to stop them I can think of.
If you try to add more people to the launch codes, like they do in a sub or silo, then you would have to have all these people stick together all the time.
Remember you likely only have 15 minutes or so from detection to having to launch retaliation.
Maybe a half hour at most.
Not time to gather people up.

 

[Rigby5]

The President is C in C of the armed forces. How do you get by that?

The Commander in Chief is still supposed to follow orders from the legislative branch.

 

[candycorn]

While I do not think any president should be able to launch a "first strike", there likely is no way to stop them I can think of.
If you try to add more people to the launch codes, like they do in a sub or silo, then you would have to have all these people stick together all the time.
Remember you likely only have 15 minutes or so from detection to having to launch retaliation.
Maybe a half hour at most.
Not time to gather people up.

Politically its a given that a retaliation is going to be necessary and carried out. The reality of the situation though is that retaliation (and of course every knuckle dragger on the right is going to mis-read this) needn't happen immediately. What...if China nukes us is China going to run away where we can't find them? LOL..

I agree with you--obviously--that having anyone who can legally (there are guardrails to mitigate and hopefully some calmer heads that will stop it) independently launch a first strike of a nuclear weapon is nuts.