Who Would Stop Trump's Armageddon Order?

[Bill Ryan]

It's possible that a more useful (and interesting!) discussion might be in response to the question:

• "Who would stop any sitting US president's Armageddon order?"

That's because an 'Armageddon order' may VERY well have come from Hillary Clinton, had she been elected, and also conceivably from any other president in our lifetime, including Obama, Reagan, both of the Bushes, and certainly JFK.

@Brian: pinning Trump's name to this very intriguing question underscores your belief that he's more likely to be the president giving the order than anyone else (which itself may be very debatable). And so you're using the thread for a dual purpose, one of which is political.

Which issue would you like readers to address?

[Fellow Aspirant]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
It's possible that a more useful (and interesting!) discussion might be in response to the question:

• "Who would stop any sitting US president's Armageddon order?"

That's because an 'Armageddon order' may VERY well have come from Hillary Clinton, had she been elected, and also conceivably from any other president in our lifetime, including Obama, Reagan, both of the Bushes, and certainly JFK.

@Brian: pinning Trump's name to this very intriguing question underscores your belief that he's more likely to be the president giving the order than anyone else (which itself may be very debatable). And so you're using the thread for a dual purpose, one of which is political.

Which issue would you like readers to address?

Hi Bill

Such a question would be better asked of the nuclear launch officers who posted the open letter. My thread could have been started by a staunch supporter of Trump in an attempt to highlight disciplinary concerns w/i the military. It wasn't ME who pinned Trump's name to it.

As their actions are a historical first, I'd bet that their felt need was a response to the sitting president. Why has/had there never before been such a letter?

One only has to read the contents of their letter to understand that their action has been taken to respond to their reading of the character of this specific president. They mention no other leader:

"In the final weeks of the presidential election, we sounded our alarm over Donald Trump’s fitness to serve as commander-in-chief, with absolute authority over the nation’s nuclear arsenal. Joining hundreds of leaders across the political spectrum in questioning Trump’s temperament, judgement and indifference to expert advice, we warned that Trump should not be allowed to have his finger on the proverbial “Red Button.”

One year into the Trump presidency, our alarm has only intensified and we must raise our voices again. The president has had ample opportunity to educate and humble himself to the grave responsibilities of his office. Instead, he consistently shows himself to be easily baited, stubborn in his ignorance of world politics and diplomacy, and quick to brandish nuclear threats. The reality of this presidency is worse than we feared.

[edit for brevity]

We and our nation cannot abide being hostages to the mood swings of a petulant and foolish commander - in-chief. No individual, especially Donald Trump,
should hold the absolute power to destroy nations. That is a clear lesson of this presidency and one that we, as former stewards of the launch keys, embrace with full conviction."

Within the letter, they call for a more robust policy and sequence of launch protocols. This concern is based, they say, on the behaviour of Donald Trump.

So, my purpose in posting the open letter was to draw attention to the fact that this had occurred. By its very existence it is very political, and speaks to the rifts within the US military and the opinions of some within it about their trust in the decision-making abilities of Donald J. Trump.

Whether this is the result of a 'White Hat' group within the military, I cannot say. I'd bet, though, that it is more the actions of a brotherhood/sisterhood of former officers who have this one issue on their agenda, rather than the actions of an ongoing group with other things on their plate.

For these former officers, even though they are no longer serving, to openly express the possibility of mutiny/treason is virtually unprecedented, and conveys starkly the new reality that the United States finds itself in.

Having said that, even though Trump is the one whose thinking is being second guessed by these officers, it's entirely possible that the problem of having an unreliable Commander in Chief may occur again. For this future, the LCOs urge change in the process. Such a revamp had been mooted for many years, but the spectre of an irrational cause of nuclear war was never seen to be particularly urgent. So again, this is a first; before Trump, it did not happen. So what, we may ask, is different about him?

Subsequent commenters are free to speculate about other hypothetical presidential behaviour, but the issue presented has triggered by Trump. And the question remains: "Who would stop Trump's Armageddon Order?"

Political. You bet.

Brian

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
So what, we may ask, is different about him?

He's [largely] independent, [largely] not in the pockets of the globalists, and seen as [to quite some extent] a highly irritating obstacle to the NWO/Deep State agenda.

Therefore the Mockingbird Media (as Doug Hagmann is now calling them) is acting almost in complete conducted chorus as a propaganda arm for the Deep State.

Quite a few people are still buying that propaganda, no doubt including some in the military.

Moral of the story: be smart and look deeper.

Don't necessarily buy and swallow what you see and hear on CBC. Brian, they're controlled and choreographed, too.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
So what, we may ask, is different about him?

He's [largely] independent, [largely] not in the pockets of the globalists, and seen as [to quite some extent] a highly irritating obstacle to the NWO/Deep State agenda.

Therefore the Mockingbird Media (as Doug Hagmann is now calling them) is acting almost in complete conducted chorus as a propaganda arm for the Deep State.

Quite a few people are still buying that propaganda, no doubt including some in the military.

Moral of the story: be smart and look deeper.

Don't necessarily buy and swallow what you see and hear on CBC. Brian, they're controlled and choreographed, too.

Bill

Although I am a huge skeptic wrt the MSM, I am less skeptical when it comes to quotations of people and/or their written words. In this case, I am reporting on a published letter containing the names of its authors. Plus,as I said, the opinion of a friend. I know my friend exists. Are you saying I should doubt the existence of the 17 authors of the letter? What possible role could the MSM have had in the creation of such a letter?

Brian

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
What possible role could the MSM have had in the creation of such a letter?

It's highly probable that the MSM had a view in forming (and, I'd suggest, contaminating) the authors' views.

It's unlikely that any of the officers in question know Trump personally, or are senior enough to be connected at very high levels in the Pentagon.

Basically, they're citizens with a very specialized job, and listen to gossip just like many other humans. I'd suggest it's highly likely they're media-influenced.

[Fellow Aspirant]

I don't think you're suggesting that one should have had some personal exposure to the President before being handed "The Keys", are you? That would be raising the bar on selection for the position a little too high, I would think. Besides, it would be safe to say, in the same vein, that no other president had personally vetted any or all of the LCOs, either. So, yeah, these people have obviously formed an opinion of Trump based on second hand information. So let's put that objection to the side.

I assume that by media influenced, you mean the MSM. And yes, how anyone can avoid encountering the MSM these days is beyond me. Being people, I would assume that they would be subject to the same influences as anyone else (including us) in our culture: rumours (the military is rife with rumours) personal interactions with their families and professional colleagues, professional interactions with the same, and, of course, the press, television and online purveyors of their choice. So of course their opinions are influenced by the media. But what does this mean? Is the vile CNN or MSNBC or NY Times required exposure for these people? Are they all avid followers of these outlets? Or only these outlets? How about the FOX network? Or Russia Today? Maybe some of them support Alex Jones or even Benjamin Fulford? They swim in the same sea as us, and we know what's true, don't we? For that matter, they may all be members of this forum.

There are thousands of places for one to find "the truth" these days. It comes down, as always, to discernment. We are in no better position to know what these officers regularly peruse than we are to know if they have ever shaken the President's hand. Let's not dismiss the thinking of these highly intelligent, deeply responsible officers because we disagree with their political views. (And I continue to maintain that everything is political).

I think we make a grave error in logic if and when we look askance at anyone who disagrees with us and label them misinformed or ignorant. For all we know, they may be influenced by Reptoids or the Illuminati or even by an infusion of sentient black goo.

The point is not HOW they formed their opinions but what they have done based on their beliefs. And they have openly questioned the fitness of the current Commander in Chief to declare nuclear war. They have also advocated for a different set of nuclear protocols in order to prevent any future President from having the same unilateral power.

So, unless we are prepared to doubt the existence of these seventeen (plus one) former Launch Control Officers, we are faced with the fact of their open call for change. I think that they exist, and that their opinions were arrived at by a soverigne, conscious weighing of their personal realities.

They stand by their convictions, as must the current holders of the keys. To spell it out, the real question I have posed is:

"Would the current holders of the keys mutiny rather than unleash Armageddon?"

For the first time in the nuclear history of the United States, there is doubt. There are, as I see it, only two ways we will ever know the answer to this: either they send an open letter to the world declaring their intent, or Trump gives an order to launch.

How has it come to this?

Brian

[AutumnW]

Probably a red herring. Trump isn't likely going to be pushing any buttons but can see where people might be concerned. There's only one very large and well organized group on the planet who have members high up in all branches of government and who could easily see one of their own in power -- and that is Christian fundamentalists trying to bring about Christ's return. And pushing the button they probably feel would be one of the ways to initiate it.

Trump is not religious or suicidal.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Good point, AutumnW. The Illuminati are unlikely to kill the "Golden Goose", but folks who want Armageddon are always itching for it.

So far, so good.

B.