Will Trump start a nuclear war?

[SnowLabrador]

I just want to hear your opinions. I think that, once the pressure mounts, and Trump's mental state deteriorates enough, that will be the logical conclusion.

[Beet]

This is why you should jump on the Trump train. Can't let things go south for him too much.

[dead0man]

I just want to hear your opinions. I think that, once the pressure mounts, and Trump's mental state deteriorates enough, that will be the logical conclusion.

The POTUS can't just call up a bomber wing and tell them to hit Tehran.  Perhaps he could instigate a chain of events that left us with no choice, but he can't just call up StratCom and tell them to start dropping bombs.  I'm sure Trump wishes it was that way, he's clearly jealous of other leaders that do have that kind of power in their countries, but that's not how it works here.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Maybe? I don't know. Do you?

Hope for the best, expect/prepare for the worst.

[Banana Republican]

I just want to hear your opinions. I think that, once the pressure mounts, and Trump's mental state deteriorates enough, that will be the logical conclusion.

The POTUS can't just call up a bomber wing and tell them to hit Tehran.  Perhaps he could instigate a chain of events that left us with no choice, but he can't just call up StratCom and tell them to start dropping bombs.  I'm sure Trump wishes it was that way, he's clearly jealous of other leaders that do have that kind of power in their countries, but that's not how it works here.

Are you saying that if Trump gives a direct order to the US military, they will disobey it? Or are you simply saying that in order to give the order, Trump orders the generals to do it, and then it filters down through the chain of command?

[emailking]

Don't know if this actually happened, but there's that scene in 13 Days where Kennedy tells the commander not to fire unless he hears directly from him.

[The Night Owlditor]

Don't tempt him.

[dead0man]

I just want to hear your opinions. I think that, once the pressure mounts, and Trump's mental state deteriorates enough, that will be the logical conclusion.

The POTUS can't just call up a bomber wing and tell them to hit Tehran.  Perhaps he could instigate a chain of events that left us with no choice, but he can't just call up StratCom and tell them to start dropping bombs.  I'm sure Trump wishes it was that way, he's clearly jealous of other leaders that do have that kind of power in their countries, but that's not how it works here.

Are you saying that if Trump gives a direct order to the US military, they will disobey it? Or are you simply saying that in order to give the order, Trump orders the generals to do it, and then it filters down through the chain of command?

I'm saying that if Trump, 5 minutes from now, picks up his red phone, calls the guy in charge at the Pentagon and tells him to prepare to level Pyongyang that they (the Pentagon) won't do it just because he said so.

[หมูเด้ง]

I dunno. Maybe. Let's see what happens to North Korea. My guess is that the only reason why he might avoid even a minor war is that he is all about appeasement on steroids. If that doesn't work, there might be a small but very decent chance of nuclear war in the middle term.

[C r a b c a k e]

I could totally see him doing it for the sake of shock and awe.

[NewYorkExpress]

He certainly could nuke some backwards country with no real military power like Venezuela...but he's not going to drop a nuke on someone like Russia (who he's in bed with), China (he's reckless, but it's more likely China would the first nukes in that confrontation), India or Pakistan (ditto).

[Banana Republican]

I just want to hear your opinions. I think that, once the pressure mounts, and Trump's mental state deteriorates enough, that will be the logical conclusion.

The POTUS can't just call up a bomber wing and tell them to hit Tehran.  Perhaps he could instigate a chain of events that left us with no choice, but he can't just call up StratCom and tell them to start dropping bombs.  I'm sure Trump wishes it was that way, he's clearly jealous of other leaders that do have that kind of power in their countries, but that's not how it works here.

Are you saying that if Trump gives a direct order to the US military, they will disobey it? Or are you simply saying that in order to give the order, Trump orders the generals to do it, and then it filters down through the chain of command?

I'm saying that if Trump, 5 minutes from now, picks up his red phone, calls the guy in charge at the Pentagon and tells him to prepare to level Pyongyang that they (the Pentagon) won't do it just because he said so.

That is comforting/hopeful, but not very specific or concrete - and thus only comforting to a very limited extent.

So if there is a process through which this hypothetical situation would be prevented, what is the sort of process we are talking about? Here is how I imagine it might go (lacking the inside knowledge that someone like you might have).


Let's say Trump calls up Mattis and says, "Mattis, I need you to nuke Pyongyang. Now. And that's an order."

Maybe Mattis responds with something like "But I thought you were getting along so well with Little Kim. Why nuke him now, after the great success of the summit in Singapore?"

Trump says, "Because I feel like it. Do it. That's an order."


What happens at this point? If Mattis simply outright refuses, can't Trump fire him? If so, can't he just keep Saturday night massacring until he gets someone to do it?

Mattis probably can't really just outright refuse, so maybe he says something like, "OK, I will look at the options and prepare a briefing." Hopefully Trump is satisfied with that for the moment.

What next? Maybe Mattis calls up the Congressional leadership and leaders/members of the Armed Services committees.

They say, "This is crazy," they let Trump know that if he tries to do this, he will be immediately impeached and convicted by the Senate, at which point Trump is forced to back down or else be impeached/convicted.

Is the process that would occur something broadly similar to this sort of thing, or what?

If I have it broadly right, an important problem is that it depends on having someone like Mattis and him having the courage to do the right thing. And it also depends on Congress being able to intervene and stop it. What if Mattis were not there? Mattis could be fired and replaced a few weeks beforehand with someone more... "accomodating." And I don't know how much I trust Congress to have the courage to do the right thing. I do think they would, but given the stakes, I am not sure that just thinking so is enough to be safe.

[SnowLabrador]

I'm just terrified. He seems to be getting worse mentally, not better.

[PSOL]

Calm down, he will probably expand or start some type of intervention by 2018 end-2019 the latest. Things are boiling up on the periphery

[SnowLabrador]

How is that supposed to make me calm down?

[PSOL]

How is that supposed to make me calm down?

Compared to Nuclear war, which if hit at key areas would decimate the Western Hemisphere several times over, this has a much higher chance of surviving for the future

[SnowLabrador]

I'm worried that he'll just wake up one day and decide to launch nuclear weapons to distract from the Mueller investigation.

[dead0man]

That is comforting/hopeful, but not very specific or concrete - and thus only comforting to a very limited extent.

indeed, on all counts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

yeah, more or less.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Even if Trump got Mattis (or whomever) to play ball, there are a lot of sign offs that still have to be made before the atoms start smashing together and every step has humans who are going to say, "WTF!" to the higher up giving the command.

Legally the POTUS can technically launch a first strike without Congressional approval, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that it's one of those "just for show" things to keep lesser enemies from getting too stupid.



Now, to be clear, I think Trump is mentally ill and we should be worried a little, I just don't think we should be like, seriously worried.  There isn't a zero percent chance of something like this happening, and that's been the norm until now.  Lets not elect any more insane Presidents, k?

[Democrat 2028]

It won't be nuclear, but I do believe he'll go to war with somebody.

[dead0man]

It won't be nuclear, but I do believe he'll go to war with somebody.

the other side has said that about the last two (at least) Presidents.  Granted, Trump is just stupid enough to try it unlike Dubya and Obama.

[Wells]

I think he would have done it already if it was going to happen.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

No.

Don't be silly.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I always expect the worst out of Trump, but this is one where I don't think it will ever come to fruition. He loves North Korea now, and his threats to Iran are all bluster that will probably end up putting us in a similar situation like with North Korea. That may sound like a good thing, but our national interests and the rest of the world's will be sold out as an expense.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Are we in a time warp back to December of 2016?

To be fair, nearly every other fearful suspicion about Trump being President has proven to be true.