US Nuclear General Says He Would Resist “Illegal” Trump Order to Launch Nuclear Weapons” (Reuters)
(“Hyten’s remarks come after a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing this week on the President’s authority to launch nuclear weapons — the first such congressional hearing in more than 40 years.”)
Perhaps Reuters’ headline should read “Obama General Would Resist Trump Order…”
– According to the Wikipedia bio, General Hyten is another “Obama General”. Is he another cog in the Obama-inspired ‘Military Resistance Machine’?
– Recall any general being asked if he/she would resist any Obama order?
– Anyone remember when Obama’s Navy Secretary Mabus was asked if he objected to the State Department’s ‘order’ to the US Marines to surrender their weapons as they were “evacuated” from Yemen*? (Didn’t think so”)**
One more Constitutional Presidential Authority to be stripped from the Trump Presidency? Already applauded by the left is the determination that any two-bit Obama judge has authority over US immigration policy…not President Trump!)
Another interesting take on Hyten’ nomination from. . .
Retired US general says nuclear launch order can be refused
[Associated Press] (bold emphasis ours)
A president who decided to launch a nuclear attack — either in retaliation for a nuclear strike or in anticipation of one — would first hold an emergency conference with the defense secretary, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman and other advisers. The commander of U.S. Strategic Command, now Air Force Gen. John Hyten, would brief the president on strike options, and the president would make his decision.
The president would communicate his decision and transmit his authorization through a device called the nuclear football, a suitcase carried by a military aide. It’s equipped with communication tools and a book with prepared war plans.
As to General Hytel, by the scenario described above, him solely saying the order is illegal does not start or end the matter and he should have pointed that out. Hytel would be part of any decision process by the president in the course of briefings with all options explored. The recommendation and the legality would be determined not just by him but by others. What he does not open up to is — what if he was the outlier, attempting to delay a necessary and lawful order only he found “unlawful”?
DLH with R Mall
*You would have to go pages and pages into a google search to find a conservative publication mentioning or critiquing the story and its implication. Yet many did as its origin was from wire services. Liberal outlets that regurgitate it are listed in front of, virtually piling on and obscuring conservative treatments.
**It was later reported that the Marine embassy detachment disabled all crew served weapons prior to abandoning them and disabled “personal” weapons prior to departure, although it is unclear if the disabled personal weapons were handed over or left behind. It still remains an issue as to diplomatic precedence regarding embassy guards “our national territory” and the Obama administration’s weakness leading up to the Yemen situation and the failure to extract a price. We also do not buy the commercial airline excuse regarding the weapons as they could be unloaded, locked and stowed. We presume the Marines were under orders so we do not criticize them.
