Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 156 (8143 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-25-2014 9:47 PM
69 online now:
arachnophilia, Dr Adequate, Tanypteryx (3 members, 66 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MikeManea
Upcoming Birthdays: Coragyps, DrJones*
Post Volume:
Total: 738,623 Year: 24,464/28,606 Month: 1,765/1,786 Week: 627/423 Day: 54/113 Hour: 4/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
89
10
1112
...
17Next
Author Topic:   Global Futurism. A discussion of impending issues
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 136 of 241 (444599)
12-30-2007 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by tesla
12-30-2007 12:18 AM


Re: impending issues
Following the Kennedy memo, it was proposed that all nuclear bombs should be protected using code locks, and that there should be a “universal unlock” action message that only the president or his legal successors could send.

www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/SE-11.pdf

Capiche?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:18 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:30 AM molbiogirl has responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 525 days)
Posts: 1198
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 137 of 241 (444601)
12-30-2007 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by molbiogirl
12-30-2007 12:27 AM


Re: impending issues
nccs is not "the president"

and it only suggests that the military could not involve nukes without the presidents involvement, not that the president can launch nukes at will.


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides
This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 12:27 AM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 12:33 AM tesla has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 138 of 241 (444602)
12-30-2007 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by tesla
12-30-2007 12:30 AM


Re: impending issues
The NCCS quote I provided states:

The President has command and control of the NCCS.

You are dense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:30 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:37 AM molbiogirl has responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 525 days)
Posts: 1198
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 139 of 241 (444604)
12-30-2007 12:37 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by molbiogirl
12-30-2007 12:33 AM


Re: impending issues
not at all. I'm implying that tho he has control of it, there are protocols to action , requirements that must be met before a president would have full cooperation.

that the president cannot "exclusively" launch nuclear missiles.

I'm not dense, your just stubborn ;)


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides
This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 12:33 AM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 12:45 AM tesla has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 140 of 241 (444606)
12-30-2007 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by tesla
12-30-2007 12:37 AM


Re: impending issues
Wrong again.

The decision to launch is the President's ALONE.

There are guidelines in place for the President to consider. But there are no RULES that he has to follow. There are no "requirements to be met".

Military commanders have no authority to defy the President's order.

That's the whole point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:37 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:51 AM molbiogirl has responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 525 days)
Posts: 1198
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 141 of 241 (444609)
12-30-2007 12:51 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by molbiogirl
12-30-2007 12:45 AM


Re: impending issues
the sophisticated system in place was set up to limit launch ability, not give exclusive power to the president.

congress wouldn't allow it. the American people wouldn't allow it, the other countries would be horrified from it, and the political implications of the suggestion would be a breakdown of all democratic law.

there is no way a president, will have that power as long as congress, and the house of representatives, the media, and the people of the united states have any say about it.

your wrong.

presidents can be impeached, and defied, just like a military commander can be defied if one goes section 8

Edited by tesla, : No reason given.


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides
This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 12:45 AM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 1:00 AM tesla has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 142 of 241 (444610)
12-30-2007 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by tesla
12-30-2007 12:51 AM


Re: impending issues
Tesla, will you take the time to research your positions instead of pulling s*** straight out of your ass?

The Global Command and Control System (GCCS) is an automated information system designed to support deliberate and crisis planning with the use of an integrated set of analytic tools and the flexible data transfer capabilities.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/gccs.htm

The NCCS is the STAFF under the Secretary of Defense. The NCCS maintains and runs the GCCS. They have no role in the decision to launch.

This Directive: (1) Establishes, pursuant to reference (a) National Security Decision Directive, United States Nuclear Weapons Command and Control, August 21, 1987 and the authority vested in the Secretary of Defense, the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control System Support Staff under the Direction, authority, and control of the Secretary of Defense, who also serves as the Executive Agent for the Nuclear Command and Control System (NCCS); (2) Establishes the DoD NCCS Executive Review Committee (ERC) in support of the Secretary of Defense; and (3) Assigns the responsibilities, functions, relationships, and authorities of the U.S. NCCS Support Staff (NSS) and its Director, and those of the ERC.

http://www.stormingmedia.us/02/0230/A023072.html

not give exclusive power to the president

To repeat:

... that there should be a “universal unlock” action message that only the president or his legal successors could send.

ONLY. O-N-L-Y.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 12:51 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 1:06 AM molbiogirl has responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 525 days)
Posts: 1198
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 143 of 241 (444611)
12-30-2007 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by molbiogirl
12-30-2007 1:00 AM


Re: impending issues
o-n-l-y a nuclear launch activation can be made with presidential inclusion. not only the president can unlock it and by self desire initiate the launch.

interesting..you also just added another group: erc

did you read my last post? what your suggesting is communism.

does it matter how much proof i put before you that your suggestion is impossible in this democracy?

I'm starting to feel like I'm trying to convince the chicken the sky is not falling....


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides
This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 1:00 AM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 2:10 PM tesla has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 144 of 241 (444710)
12-30-2007 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by tesla
12-30-2007 1:06 AM


The ERC is under the Secretary of Defense.

Subordinate to. Reports to. Under the command of.

The Secretary of Defense is under the President.

Unlike the U.S. system, where only the president can authorize a nuclear-missile launch, the Russian leader enjoys no such monopoly. In Russia, three people control a cheget nuclear football: the president, the defense minister and the chief of the general staff. Any of them can give permission for a nuclear launch.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_7_17/ai_72328612

I posted this link in Message 125.

You misread it:

yes but as the article points out: not exclusively.

What part of "only the president can authorize a nuclear-missile launch" and "monopoly" don't you understand?

Tesla, for a guy who thinks he has an insight into physics that the thousands of brilliant theoretical and experimental physicists working today have somehow missed, you show a remarkable lack of reading comprehension.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 1:06 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 2:16 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 525 days)
Posts: 1198
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 145 of 241 (444713)
12-30-2007 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by molbiogirl
12-30-2007 2:10 PM


beating the dead horse.
i believe that the "proof" your showing me is either: no longer in compliance, or outright propaganda.

the purpose of a democracy is to limit power of a single entity.

suggesting that a power as dangerous as nuclear launches would be accepted by the government, or by the world in a power as powerful as the united states,to one individual, is absurd.

no matter how many documents you show me to try to prove that what your saying is correct: it would be impossible to implement it politically.

the potential of a president to loose his mind is realistic, therefore the government was established so that no one entity in the government would have exclusive power.

Edited by tesla, : No reason given.


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides
This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 2:10 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by purpledawn, posted 12-30-2007 4:39 PM tesla has not yet responded
 Message 152 by obvious Child, posted 12-31-2007 12:23 AM tesla has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 146 of 241 (444736)
12-30-2007 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by tesla
12-30-2007 2:16 PM


The Call
The President is the one who has to make the decision to launch nuclear weapons.

Two Minutes to Launch
On receiving a report of a Russian nuclear attack, perhaps in the middle of the night, our commander-in-chief must decide whether the report is true or false and whether to order a retaliatory strike. And he must do this in mere minutes, bearing in mind that a single warhead--from either side--could destroy any large city.

Your concern is if the President should become unstable or decide to launch weapons while sleep walking, correct?

Since the launch information is kept in a briefcase that is manned by a military aide, my guess is that there are protocols in place for such a possibility. The military aide would be familiar with possible scenarios.

Nuclear Football
When the president is at the White House, the football is kept in a secure location there. One of the military aides always is able to retrieve it quickly.

For obvious reasons those protocols would not be available for everyone to see. I can't imagine the Government answering you, other than saying that there are safeguards in place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by tesla, posted 12-30-2007 2:16 PM tesla has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 6:07 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 584 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 147 of 241 (444740)
12-30-2007 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by molbiogirl
12-29-2007 5:44 PM


quote:
I have a very low BP, a very low heart rate and a low body temp. In fact, by the time I reach 98.6, I have a raging fever.

You'll have to excuse me if I don't believe that for a second.

quote:
Oh dear. I see. You're on of those.

So you're saying that his WMD argument was just a cover for his religious reason?

The whole issue of Bush as a religious whackjob doesn't make sense. He only pulls out religion when a issue arises that he can't browbeat people into doing. Controversial issues that he can't force people to vote for is when he pulls out the card. And when he wins, the card disappears from that issue until he needs it again. Bush hyped up gay marriage in the 2004 election promising to ban it but once he won, he never talked about it again it the context of marriage. Plus his comments during his governorship hardly suggest what you do. IMO, if someone only uses religion to get votes or what he wants, he's not a actual believer, but instead uses religion as a tool.

Just because we have a religious president doesn't mean the world will end.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by molbiogirl, posted 12-29-2007 5:44 PM molbiogirl has not yet responded

  
obvious Child
Member (Idle past 584 days)
Posts: 661
Joined: 08-17-2006


Message 148 of 241 (444742)
12-30-2007 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by molbiogirl
12-29-2007 10:02 PM


Re: End Time Belief and Political Power
That makes absolutely no sense. From a strategic MAD point of view, that is suicide. A single decapitating attack would instantly remove the US's ability to respond to a nuclear attack. Given how the US has historically spread authorization and defense hubs across the US, it makes no sense for a single man who can be eliminated to have sole authority.

Furthermore, it doesn't mean that only the president can launch.Sagan and Waltz describe several instances where US missile commanders jury rigged missile to launch on command, and not from the president.

And that's only half the equation. As stated before, the Russians almost killed everyone when a glitch reported a full scale attack by America. Russia doesn't have the same systems as the US does, allowing regional commanders, even as low as a half bird colonel to end the world.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by molbiogirl, posted 12-29-2007 10:02 PM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by molbiogirl, posted 12-30-2007 6:00 PM obvious Child has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 149 of 241 (444747)
12-30-2007 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by obvious Child
12-30-2007 5:29 PM


Re: End Time Belief and Political Power
A single decapitating attack would instantly remove the US's ability to respond to a nuclear attack.

The death of a President is the death of a President, whether by heart attack or nuclear attack.

Order of Succession:

* The Vice President
* Speaker of the House
* President pro tempore of the Senate
* Secretary of State
* Secretary of the Treasury
* Secretary of Defense
* Attorney General
* Secretary of the Interior
* Secretary of Agriculture
* Secretary of Commerce
* Secretary of Labor
* Secretary of Health and Human Services
* Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
* Secretary of Transportation
* Secretary of Energy
* Secretary of Education
* Secretary of Veterans Affairs
* Secretary of Homeland Security

Furthermore, it doesn't mean that only the president can launch.Sagan and Waltz describe several instances where US missile commanders jury rigged missile to launch on command, and not from the president.

If I jury-rig a landline telephone to deliver a deadly shock to anyone who picks up the reciever, does that mean telephones are deadly?

And that's only half the equation.

I know.

You didn't read the thread, did you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by obvious Child, posted 12-30-2007 5:29 PM obvious Child has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by obvious Child, posted 12-31-2007 12:17 AM molbiogirl has responded

  
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 648 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 150 of 241 (444749)
12-30-2007 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by purpledawn
12-30-2007 4:39 PM


Re: The Call
I think it's important to include the sentence that immediately precedes the one you quoted from your first cite, PD:

Americans incline toward a similar but even more optimistic assumption about the control of nuclear weapons in an emergency: There must be a careful, deliberative process in place to protect us. Alas, that's not the case.

Tho I doubt Tesla will be impressed.

He rejects out of hand any evidence we might offer, because "it just can't be that way".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by purpledawn, posted 12-30-2007 4:39 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
Prev1
...
89
10
1112
...
17Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014