• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats introduce bill to take nuclear football out of Trump's hands

American said:
You're not even part of the conversation.
Click to expand...

Actually I am. Post #38 just one page ago.

poweRob said:
Don't know enough about it to form an opinion yet. Tripped over your incredulous projection and that's where we are. The bit about having to go through congress to declare war... Like the Constitution says, seems like pretty good idea though.
Click to expand...

You know... the one you ignored so you could rant about crowd sizes.
 
beefheart said:
You have to believe there is some kind of protocol being used to keep Trump away from doing anything dangerous when he frequently goes nuts. The guy will eventually be declared non compos mentis.
Click to expand...

Forget other countries. I am worried he is going to nuke Rosie O'Donnell's house next time he is in a bad mood.
 
American said:
The leftwing media are the ones with an axe to grind. They lost the elections............big league.
Click to expand...

LOL!!!!! You think the press lost? Good god, covering Trump for the next four years however long he avoids impeachment is literally printing money.

And what's funnier is that you think that you won. Voting for a candidate that wins doesn't make you a winner. It's like voting for an American idol contestant and thinking that makes you a good singer.
 
American said:
Democrats introduce bill to take nuclear football out of Trump's hands | Fox News



No doubt the lefties will support this, they're a lockstep party; stragglers will be persecuted. Anyhow, we have at least two Dems that are desperate. This is purely political swaggering, since they know it will never pass.
Click to expand...
A deliberate DOA bill meant to placate the morons who vote for them. no republican is going to vote for this bill and even if it made to Trump's desk he wouldn't sign it. Republicans did the same thing with stupid stand alone Obama-care repeal bills.
 
poweRob said:
Don't know enough about it to form an opinion yet. Tripped over your incredulous projection and that's where we are. The bit about having to go through congress to declare war... Like the Constitution says, seems like pretty good idea though.
Click to expand...
In theory, yes, but as a practical matter I'm not so sure.

We get nuked but before we can respond, congress must be convened to vote on a formal declaration of war.

-The bill is introduced on the Senate floor.
-A group of Senators immediately propose an addendum be attached allowing for the completion of the pipeline.
-Another group of Senators filibuster.
-While this is going on, yet another group of Senators try slipping in a spending bill to fund Planned Parenthood.
-The bill is shelved until the Senate reconvenes after spring break.
-3 weeks later Chinese is the official language everywhere east of the Mississippi.
-People west of the Mississippi now speak Russian.
 
I probably would support this and I am not a progressive.
I was bothered by the destruction of the 4th amendment under Obama and the Presidential war making done without the consent of Congress. The President should not have this much power. Obama stated that he liked planning drone attacks on SUSPECTS. He was one small step away from thinking, hey, let's bomb this country. I am not worried about Trump but I am worried about future Presidents.

At Glenn Reynolds might say, if you are so worried about what a President might do than the President has too much power and you should support taking some of that power away.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
In theory, yes, but as a practical matter I'm not so sure.

We get nuked but before we can respond, congress must be convened to vote on a formal declaration of war.

-The bill is introduced on the Senate floor.
-A group of Senators immediately propose an addendum be attached allowing for the completion of the pipeline.
-Another group of Senators filibuster.
-While this is going on, yet another group of Senators try slipping in a spending bill to fund Planned Parenthood.
-The bill is shelved until the Senate reconvenes after spring break.
-3 weeks later Chinese is the official language everywhere east of the Mississippi.
-People west of the Mississippi now speak Russian.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt if we were under direct attack on our land that there wouldn't be a special session with an expedited move.
 
I am of the opinion that Trump won't use them at all. Makes no sense for him to push for a nuclear war with anyone, he's a business man that depends on branding, that would ruin his brand. Now being pro defense, that's good for the brand, people like to feel safe. I doubt Trump will even have a nuclear scare, him wanting to expand the arsenal is probably a payoff to his supporters in those industries. Nukes cost money, someone makes that money. Whether we use it or not. So I have no worries about nuclear war or Trump being the final decider. He's got more to lose than anyone.
 
I look at like this, the Bill is not going to pass and they know it but they can at least go down in history for having tried to prevent it. As for trump I go to his words, during his run for the WH he asked why if we have nukes can't we use them, then he says we need to build more, seems like from those statements he may very well use them or at least Reeeealy want to. The clocked ticked down another minute when he was sworn in, it is ludicrous to think otherwise.
 
poweRob said:
I seriously doubt if we were under direct attack on our land that there wouldn't be a special session with an expedited move.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt congress's ability to **** that up, though. Additionally, if we were actually under attack, just getting congress together may not even be an option.
 
Mithros said:
LOL!!!!! You think the press lost? Good god, covering Trump for the next four years however long he avoids impeachment is literally printing money.

And what's funnier is that you think that you won. Voting for a candidate that wins doesn't make you a winner. It's like voting for an American idol contestant and thinking that makes you a good singer.
Click to expand...

And voting for a corrupt candidate that lost doesn't make you a winner.
 
poweRob said:
I seriously doubt if we were under direct attack on our land that there wouldn't be a special session with an expedited move.
Click to expand...

None of this 'nuclear option' talk would have happened without trump's erratic and braggadocious behavior in tweeting about using nukes, as well as doing it at campaign rallies, press conferences, and interviews.

Each new day trump heads us closer towards his own Cuban missile crisis, wherever that may be. He's openly flaunted expanding nuclear weapons to our Allies. No time for no drama Obama, I now consider us on an unknown war footing as per the words out of trump's own mouth.

There's no way to get congress together on this if we are attacked first. It really looks like trump wants a USA/Russian alliance against China. What we do know is that trump will pick a fight with somebody every day from his own actions since the election. As he did with Mexico yesterday. One may not be enough for him per day.

For better or worse, our nuclear lives are now in the hands of trump and hopefully he has capable people if God forbid .
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I don't doubt congress's ability to **** that up, though. Additionally, if we were actually under attack, just getting congress together may not even be an option.
Click to expand...

Then they could use the fact that they aren't in attendance.

The rules aren't inflexible, but the idea that President Trump shouldn't really have the ability to deploy every nuclear warhead without congress being so much as aware should be frightening to both sides.

Sadly, the right is choosing, instead, to irresponsibly mock the left.
 
KevinKohler said:
He doesn't. No president does.
Click to expand...

Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority
 
American said:
Democrats introduce bill to take nuclear football out of Trump's hands | Fox News

No doubt the lefties will support this, they're a lockstep party; stragglers will be persecuted. Anyhow, we have at least two Dems that are desperate. This is purely political swaggering, since they know it will never pass.
Click to expand...

It will never pass, but might make for good discussion and good political theatre.

So, I guess that makes you pro-choice; giving the Donald the right to chose.
 
Last edited:
American said:
And voting for a corrupt candidate that lost doesn't make you a winner.
Click to expand...

When do you think trumposters will be able to defend him in a positive way without resorting to tds--trumpistan deflection syndrome, one wing which is to attack a defeated candidate as corrupt, as you did?

There's not a chance in hell you'll ever look at evidence of how corrupt trump is, how dangerous he is, and what a flaming bald-faced liar he is.

trump is taking us back to the dangers of 56 years ago and the Cuban missile crisis, when my Father was still stationed at Ben Guerir USAF Base in Morroco, Africa and I was 7-yo, in which the Bay of Pigs originated in the Eisenhower/Nixon admin .
 
upsideguy said:
It will never pass, but might make for good discussion and good political theatre.

So, I guess you are pro-choice on this issue: giving the Donald the right to chose.
Click to expand...

Especially should things go terribly wrong, but then again, who would be around to discuss it.
 
Absentglare said:
Then they could use the fact that they aren't in attendance.

The rules aren't inflexible, but the idea that President Trump shouldn't really have the ability to deploy every nuclear warhead without congress being so much as aware should be frightening to both sides.

Sadly, the right is choosing, instead, to irresponsibly mock the left.
Click to expand...
Has the President's ability to launch nukes changed in any way since Trump took office?
 
jamesrage said:
A deliberate DOA bill meant to placate the morons who vote for them. no republican is going to vote for this bill and even if it made to Trump's desk he wouldn't sign it. Republicans did the same thing with stupid stand alone Obama-care repeal bills.
Click to expand...

Yep. Symbolic tripe for their base consumption. Another yawner.
 
Cardinal said:
On a separate note, who here can say with absolute sincerity that they're okay with the idea that trump now has the final word in declaring nuclear war?
Click to expand...

Just as OK as I have been with every other President having that control. The only difference between them and Pres. Trump, is the level of unreasoning hate directed towards the President.
 
faithful_servant said:
More crap being made up to use to justify the Dem's blind hate of Pres. Trump. Is there nothing too low for the Dems.?
Click to expand...

Actually I thought Hillary was a low as you could go, but if there's a way the Dems will find it.
 
faithful_servant said:
Just as OK as I have been with every other President having that control. The only difference between them and Pres. Trump, is the level of unreasoning hate directed towards the President.
Click to expand...

I concur that the hate toward the current one is reasoned.
 
Kobie said:
Of course it's partisan! Specifically, partisan against the biggest loose cannon we've had as a president in recent memory. But thanks for moving the goalposts, since you couldn't stick me on "leftwingers being in lockstep."
Click to expand...

More made up facts used to justify hating Pres. Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom