On the contrary; there are reports that the Pentagon leadership was on Orange Alert for a few minutes between the first tweet and the second.
What’s really disturbing is that both descriptions apply equally to Trump and Kim. Who would’ve thought that we’d be in a situation where the hand-basket to Hell is actually the up elevator?
Wait - which one is which?
Does it matter?
“No question now what has happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
The Pentagon thought a Trump might be about to declare a war. That’s a far, far cry from a war accidentally starting because of an incomplete a tweet.
Yeah, but what happens when north korea thinks we are about to start a war?
Think that they will wait until official orders come down?
It’s like that time that German girl let all those red balloons go. That didn’t end well.
Orange. Ironic, isn’t it.
The Pentagon, and the military in its entirety, take this very seriously. They can’t afford to just blow it off and get it wrong. Throughout history, wars have been started for less.
Sure did, all neun und neunzig of them.
I think worrying that North Korea would initiate hostilities over that first Tweet Trump sent is only marginally less stupid than thinking the US military would do it.
I think you will find that for the most part of history, there’s not a lot of things less than a tweet that leaves you hanging.
MEANWHILE, Back At The Ranch -
A federal judge just blocked Trump’s order on transgender people in the military, on the grounds that Donald’s reasons for the order “do not appear to be supported by any facts.”
See here, for a brief article about it (this all just happened while we were admiring Robert Mueller’s footwork):
And here, for Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly’s decision
Not a good day for Trump. Which means it’s a wonderful day for the rest of us!
We haven’t seen the Twitterstormer-in-chief respond yet. I’m about 60% certain he will refuse to acknowledge the news, and 40% certain he’ll combine a tweet decrying the decision with one about “distracting us from Hillary’s crimes against humanity.”
But that doesn’t leave a percentage for casting aspersions on the judge’s ethnicity or gender.
While I’m thrilled that the ban has been blocked, is a “failure to be supported by facts” sufficient grounds for a judicial action?
With you on both accounts. So his justification for this nonsense is and always was BS – but is the CinC really legally impeded from issuing stupid orders based on BS justifications?
If they’re discriminatory against a protected class, including sexual orientation and gender identity, they need a rational basis.
At the Federal Level neither of those is explicitly a “protected class,” although there is numerous and growing court precedent that discrimination against gender identity and gender expression, as well as transgender persons like myself, is in fact sex discrimination. The current Administration has challenged and denies that transgender persons are covered under sex discrimination, and they may very well lose (unless Trump is allowed to pack the USSC with more people of his ilk).
Maybe it’s time to challenge the notion that “not having explicitly being declared an unacceptable reason for discriminate automatically makes something a valid reason to discriminate.”
That laundry list of protected classes was supposed to be a benefit, making it easier for people in one of them to get defense, but it gets treated as if it was an excuse for anything not listed there.