Aren't you a sub guy? I'd meditate on that idea a bit longer and see if anything comes to mind.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Iran
- Thread starter Farva01
- Start date
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Yes. What did you have in mind?
Unit COs already have the authority to make other countries SSBNs disappear if a launch is imminent if that's what you're thinking about.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Under our current laws, a POTUS could order a nuclear preemptive strike without Congressional approval.
That should make people feel uneasy about how much power Congress has rescinded.
As to ideal future state: I suppose I have a bad imagination because I can't think of a scenario where the President has to emergency order a preemptive nuclear strike without waiting an hour or less for Congressional approval.
That should make people feel uneasy about how much power Congress has rescinded.
As to ideal future state: I suppose I have a bad imagination because I can't think of a scenario where the President has to emergency order a preemptive nuclear strike without waiting an hour or less for Congressional approval.
So far in the past month I’ve seen Brett warn the forum that conservatives are trolls, Trump supporters are cultists and racists and that Max is a bad actor working on behalf of the Russians and that we should be treated accordingly. Can someone who Brett isn’t claiming to be ignoring please tell him I said to shut the fuck up again? Thanks.
Agreed, but that has always been the case. That is not a power that Congress has rescinded in any way. Anyhow, the second point is that you don't have to imagine a scenario, because there's nothing stopping any POTUS from acting unilaterally to start a nuclear war.
Imagine POTUS receives intel that China is goading North Korea into launching a limited nuclear strike against our allies in West Pac. Upon launch warning, POTUS decides to launch a retaliatory strike against NK and China. Many would argue that goes beyond self defense. Does POTUS have a constitutional duty to get the Congress to authorize a major escalation?
The use of nukes is that one caveat to the normal process of properly authorizing force. We've talked ourselves into it being in a special category because of the Cold War need for rapid action in self-defense, but we've overlooked the potential for non-self defense use of nukes, for which there is virtually zero checks on the President's power to wage the most serious kind of warfare. Short of a constitutional amendment, I don't think there's a way to change that.
I got a kick out of being specifically called out as a Trump cultist considering I didn’t vote for him
in what scenario would Congressional approval only take "an hour or so"? If you are referring to approval of the Speaker of the House, or some version of Gang of 8, that's not the same thing as Congressional approval.
I agree with the concept of enforcing, or re-enforcing some limits on presidential power, especially prolonged military engagements but whether that means 90 days (war power act) or the new idea of 30 days, it's not the same thing as requiring congressional approval for real-time events
To move away from Politics Thunderdome 2.0...
R2D2 getting some, supposedly from the Iran attack.
R2D2 getting some, supposedly from the Iran attack.
Dude, I’m drunk but that’s a video game
I'd say in defense of the question, congress probably should have some sort of groupme or whatsap or whatever set up by now. So I'd love a change being "when in dire need to act fast, we can put a vote up". And if they don't respond fast enough POTUS is in charge. Not perfect but some sort of compromise; we definitely can't go back to waiting months for congressional approval in today's age.
I am too, and it admittedly got me good.
The point isn't to merely vote. The point is to debate, deliberate, and think through the issue.
Sir, I'm sure you are more enlightened on the process, but congressional debate is kind of a joke nowadays. It is worse than our political megadome thread.
I'm not sure I completely agree with that, but either way, the Constitution doesn't say the Congress shall have the power to declare war... unless they don't seem to be taking it very seriously, because if that's the case then fuck it, POTUS can do whatever he wants.
I would encourage you to look at some of the deliberations and debate that led up to the votes on the AUMF for Desert Storm, Afghanistan and OIF. They're on the CSPAN archives. I think you'll find that they were taking their responsibilities pretty seriously.