U.S. admiral stands ready to obey a Trump nuclear strike order

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

CANBERRA, Australia — The U.S. Pacific Fleet commander said on Thursday he would launch a nuclear strike against China next week if President Donald Trump ordered it, and warned against the military ever shifting its allegiance from its commander in chief.

Adm. Scott Swift was responding to a hypothetical question at an Australian National University security conference after a major joint U.S.-Australian military exercise off the Australian coast. The drills were monitored by a Chinese intelligence-gathering ship off northeast Australia.

Asked by an academic in the audience whether he would make a nuclear attack on China next week if Trump ordered it, Swift replied: "The answer would be: yes."

"Every member of the U.S. military has sworn an oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and to obey the officers and the president of the United States as commander and chief appointed over us," Swift said.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-admiral-stands-ready-to-obey-a-trump-nuclear-strike-order/ar-AAoTgC5?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=edgsp

[FreepFryer]

1. And what serving military officer would say otherwise? (n/t)

[Kaleva]

2. He really couldn't give any other answer to such a hypothetical question

[pangaia]

4. He could have kept silent !!

[TexasProgresive]

7. It's common knowledge that if the president orders a nuclear strike it is done.

From a Business Insider piece by Dave Mosher Apr. 7, 2017, 3:57 PM 20,364

The single-handed authority of the US president to use his "nuclear football" has been public knowledge for decades.
http://www.businessinsider.com/president-nuke-option-requires-no-permission-2017-4

[GulfCoast66]

20. No, not really

And kept his job. Would be the same if Hillary were president

Commander in Chief is not ceremonial.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. He could have qualified it with "if the situation was such that an attack was justified"

His job is not to do whatever a president tells him without question. He has to work out if the president is insane, for instance. If there was no conflict between China and the USA, he should delay passing on an order like that and get clarification.

A Soviet lieutenant colonel used his judgement in 1985 to avoid the response his order had told him he should make when their computers said there were incoming American missiles. He saved the world by thinking, and American military personnel should do the same.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alarm_incident

[Kaleva]

9. He cant get into that.

It would call into question the civilian authority over the military. Doing what you suggest would mean the military could overthrow the president.

[pangaia]

10. You said it, not me... LOL..

[Kaleva]

12. ??????

[pangaia]

14. "Doing what you suggest would mean the military could overthrow the president."

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. So all US officers have to obey orders without question, even if they appear genocidal?

I don't think so. And make no mistake, launching a nuclear attack when not at war is genocidal. Given there is nothing approaching a physical conflict between the USA and China now, an order next week to launch nuclear weapons would be against all international law, and genocidal.

[Lee-Lee]

17. The orders for a nuclear strike are unique

The presumption is that they are given because a strike against the US is either occurring or inmenent. There is no time to run if and check your twitter feed to see what happening.

The order is given, the procedures are executed as rapidly and precisely as possible. Because the assumption is that if the order has been given then there is likely a warhead already in the air headed toward the location the people launching are working and they need to compete their mission before they get blown up.

These things can happen in an instant. Things may appear fine between us and China or us and Russia now and 30 minutes from now they could launch a totally unforeseen attack- if a country has the capability you have to assume they can use it at any moment. And those subs at sea likely won't know what's happening until they get an order to strike.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. It's a fucking shame that the USA has nuclear weapons, then

Especially you now have a psychopath in charge.

[LanternWaste]

16. United States v. Keenan seems to deny your unsupported premise.

United States v. Keenan seems to deny your unsupported premise.

[Kaleva]

18. That doesn't apply here.

The admiral was asked a hypothetical question and he gave the correct stock answer to such questions.

[Pachamama]

3. This is why everyday I am terrified about what the Traitor in Chief beholden to the Russians and not

...stable might order our military to do....

Admiral Swift had no choice but to answer and say that....

Here is to hoping he and others might "stall"....

[ProudLib72]

5. Already tweeting about it

[pangaia]

11. Loyalty pledge...???

[tblue37]

15. Hitler's officers pledged personal loyalty to HIM, not to Germany. nt

[smirkymonkey]

8. "all enemies, foreign and domestic..."

Trump is an enemy of the entire world. He has to go. He is spinning more out of control every day and it's only going to get worse until someone, or many someones, stop him.

[workinclasszero]

21. The one and only group of people that can stop Trump

is the Republican House of Reps.

Look at all the shit they have overlooked so far with Putin's puppet.

I would like to know what exactly Trump would have to do to get the House of Rep's to impeach him!