# What would an "illegal nuclear strike order" be? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 18, 2017, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023 "2017-11-18T21:37:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/81 "2017-11-21T02:09:39Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m not sure either, but there almost has to be some way for a person to step in and fill the vacancy in a hurry in cases of a deceased / incapacitated / retiring SecDef. Imagine a scenario where the SecDef dies and the Russians launch an all-out attack because they know we’re vulnerable. I can’t picture the entire DoD sitting around saying, ‘well, that sucks, we can’t retaliate because we’ve got no SecDef’ while missiles are streaking across the North Pole. That’s just too big of a loophole to leave open. If the SecDef is incapacitated or dead then the regular succession happens just as in the wiki I linked too. However, if one is dismissed? And in this particular chain of events? I don’t know. I doubt there is anything specific for this very narrow, vertical circumstance, so whoever the president was (and those around him or her) they would be charting new ground and setting precedence for the future. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/82 "2017-11-21T02:10:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Aren’t those operators largely cruising beneath the waves or sitting around in a buried bunker? It’s not like they’re spending their days pouring over the latest NYT articles or CNN, right? They’re pretty dependent on the chain-of-command to tell them if it’s go-time or not. They’re not really in a position to be sufficiently-informed to make an independent determination. I always thought that was - at least in part - by design. The strategic forces are either on subs, underground ICBM control bunkers, or drive B-52s & B-2s from airfields stateside or overseas. The tactical forces (which I was) who will deliver a lot of the megatonnage in NK & similar places, are sitting on aircraft carriers or tactical fighter bases in theater. SLBM commanders are pretty isolated from CNN. OTOH, they may well receive a pretty good intel feed every day. Not my area of expertise. I am confident that if the Captain and Missile Launch Officer say to launch, launch they will. The guys in ICBM bunkers sit alert for less than 2 days at a time. A lot can happen in the day-ish since they left home and hearth, but they’re not that far in the dark. I have no idea how much connection to CNN, etc., they have down in the hole but it’s probably close to zero. The bomber & fighter/attack crews are a whole different situation. At least in peacetime they’re fully connected to the internet & TV until the horn goes off and they man the aircraft. In times of extreme tension short of war there were/are(?) plans to have crews sitting in airplanes ready to go at any moment. They’d be out of touch. But they’d also be replaced by another crew every few hours. Which crew had plenty of opportunity to get up to date on both the official intel feed and CNN and TwitFace’s version of events. Overall, the folks with their fingers on the real no-shit triggers aren’t as isolated as a civilian might expect. Nonetheless, when the “go” code arrives, go they will. The time for second thoughts as a crewman is far, far upstream in the training and certification process. ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/83 "2017-11-21T03:04:43Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > Contrary to your assumptions, the actual power the President has to order a nuclear strike is _not_ from the Constitution, but a law passed by Congress. Contrary to my initial assumptions, you _haven’t_ read your own citation. And your other posts in this thread hold about as much water as a sun-baked cow skull in Death Valley. In any case, I wouldn’t expect for a moment, that the Field Grade Officers and below would **not** do their job. The wrangling would be at the Flag Grade-level and higher, which delves into Congressional territory. Tripler No, SECDEF is _not_ a General. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/84 "2017-11-21T03:18:04Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Ref just this snip. > > Having been at the pointy end of this spear, my personal opinion is that once the order leaves the top level command center heading out towards the field, performance will be very, very close to 100%. Net of malfunctions and miscommunication. > > Intermediate HQs or operators at the periphery choosing to sit out is real, _real_ close to unthinkable. > > My first-hand knowledge is now 30 years old. Certainly some stuff has changed. My bet is not much has changed in this area. “Hey **LSLGuy** , take your shiny F16 and drop a B61 on Belfast. Yes, Belfast”. Won’t you be at least skeptical of such an order if it came out if the blue. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/85 "2017-11-21T03:21:34Z")
> [@Tripler](#): > > … > Tripler > No, SECDEF is _not_ a General. Agree completely with your overall point. But it true that the current SecDef is a former General. Which gives him a somewhat different perspective than prior purely civilian SecDefs may have had. ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/86 "2017-11-21T03:29:41Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > . . . the current SecDef is a former General. Which gives him a somewhat different perspective than prior purely civilian SecDefs may have had. _Current_ SECDEF. . . you’re right. I hadn’t been up on my Chain of Command since I retired. You’re absolutely right. I stand corrected. I remembered that traditionally, SECDEF was the first civilian rung on the ladder to POTUS. My point was that SECDEF is not _active_ military. Tripler We need more senior politicians with military experience. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/87 "2017-11-21T03:45:54Z")
> [@Tripler](#): > > _Current_ SECDEF. . . you’re right. I hadn’t been up on my Chain of Command since I retired. You’re absolutely right. I stand corrected. I remembered that traditionally, SECDEF was the first civilian rung on the ladder to POTUS. My point was that SECDEF is not _active_ military. > > Tripler > We need more senior politicians with military experience. Trump went to a military school as a kid. He seems to think that counts. Take your pick–\> :eek: :smack: 😃 :mad: ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/88 "2017-11-21T04:53:55Z")
> [@Tripler](#): > > Contrary to my initial assumptions, you _haven’t_ read your own citation. And your other posts in this thread hold about as much water as a sun-baked cow skull in Death Valley. > > In any case, I wouldn’t expect for a moment, that the Field Grade Officers and below would **not** do their job. The wrangling would be at the Flag Grade-level and higher, which delves into Congressional territory. > > Tripler > No, SECDEF is _not_ a General. Tripler, you may have been there and done that…but the links I gave are from a credible source and _specifically_ outline where the power for a nuclear strike comes from. Who are you to say any different? You weren’t even an officer in your military career, so your direct experiences are worthless. Skulls in death valley..at least I have a source. And the[SecDef is a (retired) general](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Mattis). ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/89 "2017-11-21T13:07:22Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > Tripler, you may have been there and done that…but the links I gave are from a credible source and _specifically_ outline where the power for a nuclear strike comes from. Who are you to say any different? You weren’t even an officer in your military career, so your direct experiences are worthless. It’s readily apparent you don’t read things. 1. Paragraph #2 of your link in Post #22: “The authority to order the use of nuclear weapons rests with the president, based on the U.S. Constitution.” Hem and haw about the Atomic Energy Act of '46, but even that law is based on Constitutional principles. Your link is of questionable credibility, at that. 2. I retired as a Major (O-4)–an officer–from the Explosives Ordnance Disposal career field. I have been stationed in Minot and Great Falls. I know a thing or two about nuclear weapons. 3. I live and work in a little town up in the foothills of Northern New Mexico, called Los Alamos. I work at a Laboratory up here. I know a thing or two about nuclear weapons. Your one post indicated SECDEF is a General. I see you mean that the incumbent is a _retired_ General. My point is that SECDEF is not an active military position, but a civilian one, regardless of who fills the position. And I posted that earlier. So I think that by my military career, and my direct experiences around and _with nuclear weapons_, your ranting and raving is worthless. Tripler I’d tell you to get your facts straight, but I think they would continue to elude you. ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/90 "2017-11-21T16:24:58Z")
> [@Tripler](#): > > It’s readily apparent you don’t read things. > > 1. Paragraph #2 of your link in Post #22: “The authority to order the use of nuclear weapons rests with the president, based on the U.S. Constitution.” Hem and haw about the Atomic Energy Act of '46, but even that law is based on Constitutional principles. Your link is of questionable credibility, at that. > 2. I retired as a Major (O-4)–an officer–from the Explosives Ordnance Disposal career field. I have been stationed in Minot and Great Falls. I know a thing or two about nuclear weapons. > 3. I live and work in a little town up in the foothills of Northern New Mexico, called Los Alamos. I work at a Laboratory up here. I know a thing or two about nuclear weapons. You mention specifically practicing hand jamming actual devices in past posts. That sounded an awful lot like a job that officers don’t do. I stand by my post, though. You’re arguing from authority that does sound pretty solid…still wrong. The 1946 act blocks officers like yourself in an active war from deciding when to use the nuclear munitions you might be entrusted with without a Presidential order. A 2017 Act could hypothetically explicitly make the first use of nuclear weapons a war crime, subject to the UCMJ, and would explicitly give all officers in the nuclear chain of command a legitimate reason to resist that illegal order. You know, the thing those JAG guys told you about. Even if the order came from the President. Right now, the President can’t order you to use VX on hippie protesters outside the post, right? Even though he’s the CinC. Everyone involved would either refuse or face a court martial where they would be certain to be convicted, right? So the same principle applies for the nukes. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/91 "2017-11-21T16:59:44Z")
> [@XT](#): > > It’s on the wiki I linked too. He can confirm the order or veto it…not sure how he’d do both. I assume the succession for this is whoever is next in line wrt the secretaries. My WAG (no time to look stuff up atm) is it would be SecState, and if they are dead then the next all the way to Secretary of Agriculture, which I’d presume last on this tier of list. 😉 And you think this process would be fast enough to complete it before missiles are raining down upon the US? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/92 "2017-11-21T17:13:10Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > And you think this process would be fast enough to complete it before missiles are raining down upon the US? I assume they would go with the next available for contact, and, yeah, I’d think there would be time. That said, if there were a large group of missiles headed towards the US and doomsday was upon us, my WAG is they would just say screw it and forget the two-man rule and simply go with the Presidents authorization. Not like many will be around after to split legal hairs. ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/93 "2017-11-21T17:13:36Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > And you think this process would be fast enough to complete it before missiles are raining down upon the US? As a side note, it’s possible to have a Russian submarine fire a cruise missile aimed at the white house with a nuke onboard. Flying low, without a big flare of light from the launch, it’s possible there would be no warning whatsoever. (seconds before initiation there might be systems that pick up the missile, but no time for the news that it’s coming to reach the President or even time for him to put down his coffee) This danger has always been there - apparently, if you fire an ICBM from a submarine in the Atlantic, from some firing zones the flight time is under 5 minutes. Not enough time to react before the President is no longer able to issue any orders. So there are alternate processes. The military leadership is already empowered to respond to a nuclear strike like this. There are obviously officers with the needed authority and codes, and so on. I just propose making sure these officers have their orders amended to say “no first use even if the guy in the oval office tells you too”. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/94 "2017-11-21T18:17:21Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > Not enough time to react before the President is no longer able to issue any orders. > > So there are alternate processes. The military leadership is already empowered to respond to a nuclear strike like this. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/95 "2017-11-21T18:18:09Z")
> [@XT](#): > > I assume they would go with the next available for contact, and, yeah, I’d think there would be time. That said, if there were a large group of missiles headed towards the US and doomsday was upon us, my WAG is they would just say screw it and forget the two-man rule and simply go with the Presidents authorization. Not like many will be around after to split legal hairs. If there is a rule that can just be disregarded, then it’s not really a rule then. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/96 "2017-11-21T19:25:13Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > If there is a rule that can just be disregarded, then it’s not really a rule then. If the world is basically ending in 30 minutes I don’t think rules lawyering is going to be a thing folks worry about. And I seriously doubt that in the event of a massive attack on the US and the SecDef being dead or incapacitated and everyone else on the list being out of touch they are going to just say ‘well, guess we can’t launch anything because we can’t properly comply with the two-man rule. Anyone have a deck of cards?’ ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/97 "2017-11-21T19:47:24Z")
> [@No\_Time\_For\_Fishing](#): > > Your scenario is ludicrous, that President Trump would react so callously is ludicrous. Threats of full “fire and fury” were not necessarily a nuclear threat. Any military action resulting in the deaths of millions or even thousands of civilians that would not conform to current international standards and treaties would be illegal. Strategic Command is well aware of all imminent and active threats and well trained in US and International Law to understand a legal and lawful response. > > It is beyond preposterous to claim or insinuate that President Trump is somehow less civil, less human, of less self control than previous President’s that a heightened threat of such a gross inhuman illegal action exist. You are being ridiculous if you believe that to be the case. Have you been paying attention to news for the last couple of years? The commander of U.S. Strategic Command (along with pretty much every human being that hasn’t been living in a cave for the last 2 year) suspects that the current POTUS IS less civil, less human, of less self control than previous Presidents and indeed that a heightened threat of such a gross inhuman illegal action exist. Hence why he made this statement. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/98 "2017-11-21T20:12:02Z")
Nitpick: A missile launched at the White House from a sub in the Atlantic wouldn’t be an ICBM. Those are the _really_ long-ranged ones, that can be launched from (say) mainland Russia to mainland US (hence the “intercontinental” in the acronym). Sub-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are generally much shorter range, and a cruise missile isn’t a ballistic missile at all. I suppose that it’s possible to launch a ballistic missile from a sub (after all, Russian subs have been used to launch payloads into orbit), but I’m not sure why you would bother. Part of the point of a sub is that it can get close enough to the target that you don’t need to. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/99 "2017-11-21T20:17:01Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Nitpick: A missile launched at the White House from a sub in the Atlantic wouldn’t be an ICBM. Those are the _really_ long-ranged ones, that can be launched from (say) mainland Russia to mainland US (hence the “intercontinental” in the acronym). Sub-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are generally much shorter range, and a cruise missile isn’t a ballistic missile at all. > > I suppose that it’s possible to launch a ballistic missile from a sub (after all, Russian subs have been used to launch payloads into orbit), but I’m not sure why you would bother. Part of the point of a sub is that it can get close enough to the target that you don’t need to. A lot of the old Soviet era boomers were kept fairly close to Russia for their protection against US attack boats during the cold war. I doubt that’s still an issue today for Putin, but it would be a reason why it was done in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2017, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023/100 "2017-11-21T20:32:46Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Nitpick: A missile launched at the White House from a sub in the Atlantic wouldn’t be an ICBM. Those are the _really_ long-ranged ones, that can be launched from (say) mainland Russia to mainland US (hence the “intercontinental” in the acronym). Sub-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are generally much shorter range, and a cruise missile isn’t a ballistic missile at all. Well, SLBMs generally have a range that substantially exceed those of medium- and intermediate-range land-based missiles; but yeah, SLBMs also tend to have about 2/3rds of the range of a land-based ICBM. I don’t really consider that to be “much shorter range.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-an-illegal-nuclear-strike-order-be/802023.md?page=6)