Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - Mod Warning updated in OP 12/2/26

1184218431845184718481871

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 987 ✭✭✭BettyS


    Every nation is going to scramble to develop nuclear weapons. It will be the only defence against despotic regimens. Trump has massively ratcheted up the stakes, moving the whole world towards a nuclear holocaust



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 31,338 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Who, that could make a difference, is going to do the shouting? Only his own staff and people, and they are not doing anything.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,756 ✭✭✭yagan


    He ordered the assassination of a country's leader, he could well swing back to assassinating the Danish head of state so they'll give him Greenland.

    This is where we're at.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭TinyMuffin


    didn’t France pull their gold out of America recently. Every country should do that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,861 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    nobod has had a serious conversation with Trump that his behaviour is completly unacceptable.

    Is everyone afraid to be fired?

    of course they are. look what happened to 'voices of sanity' in his first administration like john kelly



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 12,212 ✭✭✭✭J Mysterio


    This motherfucker is apparently completely missing any sense of irony in this. What a POS.

    27097.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 987 ✭✭✭BettyS


    From a SOP, will he face any resistance if he tries to access the nuclear weapons, to deploy them?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭TinyMuffin


    jd checking out some European couches. 🍆



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,276 ✭✭✭✭zell12


    eeek

    image.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,569 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Yes.

    No President can just hit the button. There's a series of processes that need to be observed first to avoid some loon pressing fire on a whim, even if they technically have sole control.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 987 ✭✭✭BettyS


    Will there be enough resistance amongst the current regimen? Thinking of Hegseth and the recent purge



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,220 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Whatever about "why isn't Europe doing something", there's a case to made for "Why aren't the countries of the middle East doing something?".

    Obviously they are no allies of Iran but the likes of Qatar, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, even Saudi should really be telling the USA that bombing roads, power-plants & bridges is a step too far - even potentially withdrawing permission for their countries to be flown over (symbolic only obviously, the USA would do what they want regardless).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,300 ✭✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    Nuclear weapons will not be used. It's an idle threat by a buffoon. Even Israel and the GCC wouldn't want that given the radioactive fallout. That said, threatening to use nuclear weapons is a violation of international law because it violates the principles of distinction between civilians and combatants. Not that he cares.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth house?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭spakman


    Refuse US permission to use their air space, territorial waters or bases. That would be a start if all European countries agreed to implement immediately.

    Of course Trump could just ignore it, but at least some steps were made. Then put diplomatic pressure on America through embassies that they cannot do business with US leaders who ignore international law and other countries sovereignty.

    I think it's gone past the point of just watching this maniac and hoping it all just goes away.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 987 ✭✭✭BettyS


    I sure hope that you are right, Cluedo…. I dread another Hiroshima… You see, logically when you up the stakes, you lose the ability to reconcile. I don’t see the exit strategy for Trump. He wants to play the tough man. And if he doesn’t follow through, he looks weak in his own mind



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,950 ✭✭✭✭8-10


    What processes?

    The US President has unilateral control over a nuclear strike, he doesn't have to inform anyone or get approval from Congress or any advisors



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,569 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    The President can give the order, he is the only one that can do so. But there's two contexts. One is he is woken up one morning and told "we're under attack", the other is a scenario whereby the US is the attacker. In the second context, there is a chain of command where the President's order has to be obeyed through a number of operators that go beyond his immediate inner circle. This chain of command can raise issues and questions about the validity and necessity of such an order making the process longer and more prone to being put off.

    If any decision is made to use nuclear weapons on Iran, it'll be a case of the second context because the US is the aggressor nation here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,300 ✭✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    What are they doing in the Hyacinth house?



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,432 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Can you imagine the absolute meltdown if a European Government official travelled over to the US in November to stump for a Democrat , or even if they expressed a preference for someone other than the GOP out loud?

    But they can send over the VP of their country to try to influence an election in Europe and everyone is supposed to be ok with that?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 12,567 ✭✭✭✭fullstop


    As he lectures the EU about interfering in the election. He’s an odious prick



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,291 ✭✭✭✭For Forks Sake


    Are we referring to since he became president, or at any point in his existence



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,808 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    They will hit power plants and transport infrastructure, bridges and rail.

    Iran will lash out again.

    Rinse and Repeat.

    It's way past time for congress to reign in the Dotard and his Ghouls.

    Because it's not them up for re-election in November.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,808 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    I'm okay with it, because I think Vance is such a dislikeable cretin he will encourage more voting against Putins Pet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,220 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Bob Woodward (hopefully considered a reliable source) suggested that a now-retired general put himself into the nuclear procedure in the final days of Trump I.

    Woodward/Costa book: Worried Trump could ‘go rogue,’ Milley took secret action to protect nuclear weapons | CNN Politics

    So there is precedent for someone putting a brake (or at least a slow down) into the procedure. There may be no such equivalent of General Milley now. You'd hope someone would step up though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,569 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    It's true that the President has sole authority to issue the command, but after that command is issued there's a series of others that have to follow through right down the person who does push the button. Technically he doesn't have to consult anyone, though, and lawfully he cannot be challenged.

    But from launch order to actually launching missiles there are numerous steps whereby one would hope better heads could prevail.

    In any case, as sociopathic as Trump undoubtedly is, I cannot see any order being give for nuclear weapons to be used, nor can I see that order actually being carried out if it was indeed issued. Trump and his wackos may be deranged, but the US government and military is more than just his lunatic fringe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 12,212 ✭✭✭✭J Mysterio


    If the U.S. president, who is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, decides to order the use of nuclear weapons, the briefcase would be opened. A command signal, or "watch" alert, would be issued to the United States Strategic Command and perhaps the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The president would review the attack options with others such as the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and decide on a plan, which could range from the launch of a single ICBM or nuclear-armed bomber to options for multiple, even hundreds of ICBMs or bombers. These are among the preset war plans developed under OPLAN 8010 (formerly the Single Integrated Operational Plan). A two-person verification procedure would precede the entering of the codes into a Permissive Action Link.

    Before the order can be followed by the military, the president must be positively identified using a special code issued on a plastic card, nicknamed the "biscuit". The authentication is conducted between the president and the National Military Command Center deputy director of operations, using a challenge code of two phonetic letters. The president will read, from the biscuit, the daily phonetic letters, and the deputy director will confirm or deny that it is correct, confirmation indicating the person is the president and the attack orders can be given. Down the chain of command, the United States has a two-man rule in place at nuclear launch facilities. This verification process ensures the order came from the actual president. Many sources indicate that the president has sole launch authority, and the defense secretary has no veto power. A Congressional Research Service provides a detail reason: There is a short time before nuclear weapons from adversaries will strike US soil and a similar short time when advisers relay options to the US President. During the Cold War, some analysts argued that a launch under attack was the preeminent option, and that the command and control system was designed to permit such a prompt launch of U.S. nuclear weapons. The time for any US response was noted as thirty minutes. Secondly, the US may conduct a pre-emptive strike if the assessment was its territory or allies were facing an imminent nuclear attack. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will also be an advisor to the President, but is by law only allowed to advise, and has no operational control over US forces.The secretary of defense also advises but the Goldwater–Nichols Act Section 162(b) states the chain of command to a unified or specified combatant command runs "from the president to the secretary of defense," and "from the secretary of defense to the commander of the combatant command".

    However, it has been argued that the president may not have sole authority to initiate a nuclear attack because the defense secretary is required to verify the order but cannot veto it. U.S. law dictates that the attack must be lawful; military officers are required to refuse to execute unlawful orders, such as those that violate international humanitarian law.

    Some military officials, including General John Hyten, have testified to the U.S. Congress that they would refuse to carry out an unlawful order for a nuclear strike. In addition, off-the-shelf strike packages are pre-vetted by lawyers to confirm that they are legal and, thus, such a strike would be presumed to be a lawful order.

    Military service members have been reprimanded for questioning U.S. protocols for nuclear strike authority. In 1975, Major Harold Hering was discharged from the Air Force for asking, "How can I know that an order I receive to launch my missiles came from a sane president?" Nevertheless, the president, once in office, as noted by former Defense Secretary William Perry and Tom Z. Collina, retains the sole authority to launch a nuclear strike or attack.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_football?wprov=sfla1



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 31,430 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Obviously Trump is an evil lunatic devoid of any redeeming qualities, but somehow I often find Vance is an even more detestable figure. It’s the sheer repulsive smugness that gets me, which is pure calculating and cunning in a way beyond Trump’s base-level ego and vapidness.

    An individual devoid of any sense of shame, and he knows it. All while writing books about his supposed faith. An embarrassment of a human being.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭McFly85


    Nuclear weapons don’t really have a lasting fallout - the affected area will produce immediately lethal levels for a few minutes with the area safe after a few hours.

    Theyre horrific weapons regardless that no sane person should ever think about using, though. Unfortunately we don’t have sane people at the top right now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,044 ✭✭✭rogber


    Europe has immense economic power (the only power it has), it could threaten Trump massively on trade as threats and aggression are the only thing he responds to.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭TinyMuffin


    that’s why Vance’s mother was a drug addict. Jd was her son.



Advertisement
Advertisement