Total Posts:76|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Would you trust Trump with nuclear weapons?

Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,395
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 1:59:42 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
Using nuclear weapons is not something you do when you are angry, they are something one uses to bring an end to the world as we know it. They exist as a deterrent . nobody has ever invaded a country that had nuclear weapons.
You may have heard trump say bad things when he was mad, do you know if he ever actually did something bad ,when mad?
NothingSpecial99
Posts: 378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:03:08 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Yet Hillary Clinton's campaign declared war on Pepe the Frog
"Check your facts, not your privilege" - Christina Hoff Summers

If you go to jail for Tax Evasion, you're living off of Taxes as a result of not paying Taxes

"Facts don't care about your feelings" - Ben Shapiro
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:55:01 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

Commander in chief.

As best as i understand must notify (not that much I admit) that is after the fact.

They could quickly get the ball rolling on relieving him, but I wouldn't be so sure.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:06:39 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:55:01 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

Commander in chief.

As best as i understand must notify (not that much I admit) that is after the fact.

They could quickly get the ball rolling on relieving him, but I wouldn't be so sure.

Theoretically yes. It basically goes like this:

Pres says fire. Sec defense says yes/no based on threat. If no and pres insists, sec is relieved and on down the line of succession until there is a second yes. Then it goes to the joint chiefs who send the auth to officers who actually 'turn the keys'. Now they are officers who, under ucmj, don't follow orders but fulfill the duty of their role (meaning they can refuse. That would be followed by a court martial process but it is a different reg than us enlisted pukes were under which was article 92).

The 'football and daily key don't launch... it only sends the auth code.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:12:07 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:55:01 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

Commander in chief.

As best as i understand must notify (not that much I admit) that is after the fact.

They could quickly get the ball rolling on relieving him, but I wouldn't be so sure.

Believe it or not, after my asvab, my air guard unit tried to talk me out of my contract with them and go into the af space command (back then it was called the SAC, strategic air command).
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:31:44 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

It's okay Putin won't have to use nukes to conquer the globe as he proved in Syria and the Ukraine, because he clearly does not respect Obama or Clinton.
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:48:56 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

I don't trust anyone with nuclear weapons.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:11:09 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 3:12:07 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:55:01 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

Commander in chief.

As best as i understand must notify (not that much I admit) that is after the fact.

They could quickly get the ball rolling on relieving him, but I wouldn't be so sure.

Believe it or not, after my asvab, my air guard unit tried to talk me out of my contract with them and go into the af space command (back then it was called the SAC, strategic air command).

When did it change? I sure can recall it as "SAC". "Get SAC on the phone!"
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:29:11 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 12:11:09 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 3:12:07 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:55:01 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

Commander in chief.

As best as i understand must notify (not that much I admit) that is after the fact.

They could quickly get the ball rolling on relieving him, but I wouldn't be so sure.

Believe it or not, after my asvab, my air guard unit tried to talk me out of my contract with them and go into the af space command (back then it was called the SAC, strategic air command).

When did it change? I sure can recall it as "SAC". "Get SAC on the phone!"

Way back in the 90's. It became acc, air combat command (which then split again). We got rolled into amc, air mobility command (global reach, global power).

Here's what 'sucks'. In the af, few are issued weapons (security police, pilots, cct and pararescue). But in Iraq, if my 130 was down (not on mission), we went on convoys.. not enough people. Lol
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:35:44 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

for the love of all that there is, please tell me they can't do this via emails.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:42:17 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 12:35:44 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:35:12 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:18:05 AM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:13:58 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
No but I would trust all online critics as they are all infinitely wiser.

Jokes aside, an irrational order with no threat will not be followed. There is an exhaustive protocol in place.

So, ignoring the order of the CIC is part of the protocol? You sure about that?

Yes it's called the 'must notify' and includes sec of defense. If they deem it an unlawful order, the pres can relieve but then it goes to the vp who, of also deeming it unlawful, can/will invoke section 4 of amendment 25.

This is not the same as the 2 man rule (where both keys are turned at the same time).

By cic I assume you mean chain of command?

for the love of all that there is, please tell me they can't do this via emails.

Lol: no the final call from joint chief to the op officers is via secured analog line, or was, as its more hack proof
WizardOfSnakes
Posts: 73
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 1:21:34 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Just bomb them into oblivion and create ISIS. Oh shoot. That was Hillary.
Lookingatissues
Posts: 239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 1:51:59 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

You Posted,,"I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia."
We have an examples of the ability and competence of Hillary Clinton demonstrated in how she responded to September 11, 2012 - The US mission in Benghazi, Libya,... attacked and burned. US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other US nationals are killed in the attack. ...." who do you want answering the phone at 3:00AM
at the White House, ITs not Hillary Clinton, that's for sure!
MattTheDreamer
Posts: 1,404
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:29:54 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Do you trust Hilary with nuclear weapons?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:32:05 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:29:54 PM, MattTheDreamer wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Do you trust Hilary with nuclear weapons?

Sure. Do I trust her not to push nuclear brinkmanship? Absolutely not. MAD demands mutual respect.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 2:48:52 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
A better question for the OP being a British citizen: do we trust There's May with her finger on the button?
v3nesl
Posts: 4,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:29:15 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 1:59:42 AM, xus00HAY wrote:
Using nuclear weapons is not something you do when you are angry, they are something one uses to bring an end to the world as we know it.

Yeah, same old same old playbook they used on Reagan, and as best I can remember, Reagan didn't use any nukes. He did preside over the fall of the USSR and the Berlin wall, I DO remember that. And I remember that the left said it couldn't be done. They were small minded people back then too.

I'm always amused by how backward "progressives" are. It's probably the most ironic political handle of my lifetime. Socialist, communist, conservative, liberal - they all have some connection to their self identification. But Progressives just want to rerun the last century. Great Depression and all, presumably.
This space for rent.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:34:12 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 3:31:44 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

It's okay Putin won't have to use nukes to conquer the globe as he proved in Syria and the Ukraine, because he clearly does not respect Obama or Clinton.

How does invading some other foreign country in which we have some real loose ties and no real diplomatic or trade deals with, much less strong ally with show disrespect to US?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
v3nesl
Posts: 4,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 3:44:06 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 2:32:05 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/12/2016 2:29:54 PM, MattTheDreamer wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Do you trust Hilary with nuclear weapons?

Sure. Do I trust her not to push nuclear brinkmanship? Absolutely not. MAD demands mutual respect.

Eh, it's yesterday's world. The [future] nuke power we have to worry about now is Iran. As to respect, I don't know if Putin would respect Hillary. He probably would, but he thinks Obama is a paper tiger. Under his watch they've gotten Crimea back, maybe Ukraine, and are making a big push to solidify Syria before a new president gets in. An advantage for Trump is that he would lose no face by withdrawing from our ill-advised meddling in Syria. Let the Russians have it back, and then let's cooperate with them to squash the JV ISIS team. This business of encouraging the civil war and thereby forcing refugees all over Europe and the US, it's pretty insane.

And btw, I don't think the Russians are trying to influence our election so much as confuse it. They just want us weakened, they don't care who presides over the disarray.
This space for rent.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 5:27:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Actually, Trump has demonstrated very thick skin this past year. Respectable news sources write dozens of negative articles about him every day, and countless celebrities have denounced him, and even his own party is trying to distance itself from him, but still he's yet to explode (at least not in public).
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 6:30:51 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 3:34:12 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 10/12/2016 3:31:44 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

It's okay Putin won't have to use nukes to conquer the globe as he proved in Syria and the Ukraine, because he clearly does not respect Obama or Clinton.


How does invading some other foreign country in which we have some real loose ties and no real diplomatic or trade deals with, much less strong ally with show disrespect to US?

Maybe Putin is just stating the obvious, no matter who gets elected, the age of World Police is over.
xus00HAY
Posts: 1,395
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 6:33:48 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At sometime during W's term in office, the air force must have figured out a way that it would appear that some kind of a computer glitch stopped the missiles from firing.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 9:40:15 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 3:31:44 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

It's okay Putin won't have to use nukes to conquer the globe as he proved in Syria and the Ukraine, because he clearly does not respect Obama or Clinton.

I agree he does not respect Obama or Clinton. I don't think he has any plans to conquer the world though, he wants to increase Russian power and influence and have more allies around the world, particularly in countries that were previously part of the USSR.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 9:44:06 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 3:48:56 AM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

I don't trust anyone with nuclear weapons.

I would imagine though there are some people you trust even less than others in terms of their suitability to be in charge of a potentially world ending nuclear weapons stockpile?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2016 9:46:17 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 1:21:34 PM, WizardOfSnakes wrote:
At 10/11/2016 10:22:06 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
I find it quite a frightening thought to be honest, especially while Vladimir Putin is president (dictator) of Russia.

How would a man who gets angry about offensive tweets react to military and diplomatic setbacks?

Just bomb them into oblivion and create ISIS. Oh shoot. That was Hillary.

Would you trust Trump with nuclear weapons?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.