Mid

Nuclear Codes .............

Recommended Posts

Untitled.jpg.63ef8696ae85b48d1fd9a66d016aad94.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of Burn This Bitch Down do you not understand? I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than 10 to 20 million killed, tops! Uh, depending on the breaks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think and hope that a nuke order would be met with house arrest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd bet a ten-spot that Trump doesn't have direct access to real football or real codes. Pretty sure they've been put in safe and saner hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, the cooler heads in the Senate have discussed it but nobody has the balls to confront Trump.  The only hope is if he does go Postal that the commanders would disobey the order.  A preemptive strike is much different than a responsive one. When this is all over look for some restraints to be put in place much like those that prevent a sub commander from being able to launch without direct instructions, as mentioned at the end of Crimson Tide.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he'd have to body tackle the bloke with the football first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, d'ranger said:

Nope, the cooler heads in the Senate have discussed it ...

Yes, invertebrates are generally ectotherms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the guy with the "football" have a sidearm? This could be important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, pond sailor said:

These are guys that run scenarios for a living......you don't think there's a course of action in place?

Scenario 1: Trump loses his shit and blows up the world. Civilization Fucked.

Scenario 2: Trump blows a sprocket, but the "football" guy calls in sick that day. Civilization Saved.

Scenario 3: Trump goes berserk, opens the nuke briefcase only to find it's full of Nixon's old underwear. Civilization Saved. Big laughs for everyone in the oval office. Nixon was cool.

Scenario 4: Trump has a spasm, tries to enter the launch codes only to realize he can't read (even numbers). Civilization Saved. 

Scenario 5: Trump has a conniption fit, opens the briefcase and a bunch of those snake-in-a-can things hit him in the face. He dies of heart attack. Civilization Saved. Sales of Can-O-Snakes goes through the roof.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Nope, the cooler heads in the Senate have discussed it but nobody has the balls to confront Trump.  The only hope is if he does go Postal that the commanders would disobey the order.  A preemptive strike is much different than a responsive one. When this is all over look for some restraints to be put in place much like those that prevent a sub commander from being able to launch without direct instructions, as mentioned at the end of Crimson Tide.

Agree.  

Either the Senate or Congress held a hearing shortly after Trump was elected about the nuclear chain of command, I forgot which, and it was clearly demonstrated to the politicians that there IS a human between Trump's "football" and the Big Red Button. This checked a move for new legislation in this area. 

  That person, who is one of and in command of the very few others who man that station,  has sworn under oath that they have orders not push the button solely on command from the football. He's got to see some corroborating evidence of a need for an immediate strike or he's calling the Sec of D for a second opinion. This is a system that has been in place for a looong time. Just not many people know about it. The reason is a fear was that somehow someone MIGHT be able to hack that system. There is clearly another reason now.  

 It's on CSPAN somewhere. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olsonist said:

What part of Burn This Bitch Down do you not understand? I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than 10 to 20 million killed, tops! Uh, depending on the breaks.

You can't fight in HERE !     This is the War Room!

 

Thing is,  who is he gonna launch on ?  His buddy Vlad ? His pal Kim ? Jina ?   Canada ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Great Red Shark said:

You can't fight in HERE !     This is the War Room!

 

Thing is,  who is he gonna launch on ?  His buddy Vlad ? His pal Kim ? Jina ?   Canada ?

The thought of what a nuclear exchange would do to NYC property values....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mid said:

Untitled.jpg.63ef8696ae85b48d1fd9a66d016aad94.jpg

I think this is one of the major reasons Hillary lost and had to cheat to get the nomination. Imagion a sociopath with it's fingers on the nuclear codes! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Great Red Shark said:

You can't fight in HERE !     This is the War Room!

 

Thing is,  who is he gonna launch on ?  His buddy Vlad ? His pal Kim ? Jina ?   Canada ?

Um...bad news. A judge in Hawaii was the one that fucked up his Muslim Ban party. Sorry, you're toast. Literally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bhyde said:

Um...bad news. A judge in Hawaii was the one that fucked up his Muslim Ban party. Sorry, you're toast. Literally.

Crap, they're upwind. At least if he nukes Canada it's all downwind from here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bhyde said:

Um...bad news. A judge in Hawaii was the one that fucked up his Muslim Ban party. Sorry, you're toast. Literally.

God is punishing Hawaii Right now, for the judge's mistake.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not real worried. Half of California is already on fire. What's a little more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Great Red Shark said:

You can't fight in HERE !     This is the War Room!

 

Thing is,  who is he gonna launch on ?  His buddy Vlad ? His pal Kim ? Jina ?   Canada ?

The EU is his enemy.   He said so,   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, albanyguy said:

Iran

Doesn't really matter to us, as long as it's in the Northern Hemisphere.....

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Um...bad news. A judge in Hawaii was the one that fucked up his Muslim Ban party. Sorry, you're toast. Literally.

Obama's from Hawaii. Foregone conclusion, Kailua Bch is ground zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Doesn't really matter to us, as long as it's in the Northern Hemisphere.....

FKT

True

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, longy said:

Obama's from Hawaii. Foregone conclusion, Kailua Bch is ground zero.

No, he's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Olsonist said:

No, he's not.

Fuck, he's gonna bomb Kenya? Better than Winnipeg, I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ExOmo said:

53?14_77?Y

No. It had to be something Trump could memorize: iVANka=2GREATTITS!!!~ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mickey Rat said:

I think this is one of the major reasons Hillary lost and had to cheat to get the nomination. Imagion a sociopath with it's fingers on the nuclear codes! 

WTF do you think this thread is ABOUT?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Doesn't really matter to us, as long as it's in the Northern Hemisphere.....

FKT

You never read or saw On The Beach I take it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

You never read or saw On The Beach I take it?

Thanks for the reminder, it’s one I’ve never got around to reading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mid said:

Untitled.jpg.63ef8696ae85b48d1fd9a66d016aad94.jpg

I never thought America would ever become this paranoid....... looks like it has...

carry on...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Keith said:

I never thought America would ever become this paranoid....... looks like it has...

carry on...

 

Both parties are using fear-mongering and paranoia to stir up the base. The Democrats at least have one toe in the reality pool, as Trump is clearly unfit to hold office and the GOP is determined to dismantle a functioning government, but they do amp it up. OTOH, the Republicans create straw-men out of pure fantasy to stir up fear....example: Obama is a Kenyon-born Muslim intent of establishing Sharia Law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RKoch said:

Both parties are using fear-mongering and paranoia to stir up the base. The Democrats at least have one toe in the reality pool, as Trump is clearly unfit to hold office and the GOP is determined to dismantle a functioning government, but they do amp it up. OTOH, the Republicans create straw-men out of pure fantasy to stir up fear....example: Obama is a Kenyon-born Muslim intent of establishing Sharia Law. 

Thanks for proving my point, Looks like  America has been going down this road for a long time... too bad. 

carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mad said:

Thanks for the reminder, it’s one I’ve never got around to reading. 

I read it back when we worried about the nuclear holocaust.  Both the book and movie (the 1959 one) were well done - the ending with "Waltzing Matilda" was quite touching.  And Keith - yep, I have watched my friends and family get more and more wound up to the point that it's hard to even grasp the fear and anger they have.  In Texas I used to think I was in the middle politically, I haven't changed but the country has moved hard right.  I have disconnected from several that I was close to for that reason - just not worth listening to their paranoid lecturing.

Being the glass half full kind of guy I think that this too shall pass. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far back as Nixon, there was a quiet rule "If the President orders a nuclear strike, first check if he's drunk."

No need for checking with Trump: He's a total fuckwit 24/7/365. 

Fortunately, he only has the codes to order a strike. Wiser heads ensured that no politician ever comes anywhere near the actual firing button.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2018 at 1:46 PM, Mid said:

Untitled.jpg.63ef8696ae85b48d1fd9a66d016aad94.jpg

I suspect Trump has a different brand of cheese sliding off his cracker from brand that slides off crackers of the Hitlerian elks.

 Trump doesn't have a "grand plan" besides himself. He has good reason to believe that he can claim innocence  at all times and as long as he does that nothing can touch him, so it would be no big shock to me to see him loudly proclaiming it in an orange jump suit through the bars of his cell...provided there remains just a few loyalists. His imagination will make them a teeming horde of admirers, no problem. For the maximally self-absorbed there is no great "cause" lost as long as they have even a few doggies left, and he surely will. What else is Kellyanne going to do? 

 And he clearly does not deny women his essence.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to This article, there have been 11 accidental launch “close calls”.

frightening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

You never read or saw On The Beach I take it?

Of course I read it decades ago. It's fiction - we already have had the personal experience of nuclear fallout here thanks to the UK. Nobody was talking about a major nuclear exchange in this thread, just the odd nuke being popped off on Hawaii or somewhere. Air exchange between the north & south hemispheres is slow.

Try reading Russel Braddon's 'The Year of the Angry Rabbit' if you want an insight into Australia.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Of course I read it decades ago. It's fiction - we already have had the personal experience of nuclear fallout here thanks to the UK. Nobody was talking about a major nuclear exchange in this thread, just the odd nuke being popped off on Hawaii or somewhere. Air exchange between the north & south hemispheres is slow.

Try reading Russel Braddon's 'The Year of the Angry Rabbit' if you want an insight into Australia.

FKT

and the French (Mururoa) and us Americans (Bikini Atoll).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a good article in the Last Harper’s about this- the upshot is that the whole thing is pretty fucked up- either 3 guys in 2 silos can do it by themselves, or the whole chain of command thing hardly works-  there are some other scenarios, but during one close call, one of the guys who was supposed to be in the chain of decision was left behind, and had to drive back to DC, and during 9-11, Cheney or somebody sealed himself in a bunker and was incommunicado for more than a while. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2018 at 4:11 AM, Mark K said:

Agree.  

Either the Senate or Congress held a hearing shortly after Trump was elected about the nuclear chain of command, I forgot which, and it was clearly demonstrated to the politicians that there IS a human between Trump's "football" and the Big Red Button. This checked a move for new legislation in this area. 

  That person, who is one of and in command of the very few others who man that station,  has sworn under oath that they have orders not push the button solely on command from the football. He's got to see some corroborating evidence of a need for an immediate strike or he's calling the Sec of D for a second opinion. This is a system that has been in place for a looong time. Just not many people know about it. The reason is a fear was that somehow someone MIGHT be able to hack that system. There is clearly another reason now.  

 It's on CSPAN somewhere. 

Thanks.  I've been saying for a long time here every time this comes up that the POTUS cannot just start a nuke war on his own.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Thanks.  I've been saying for a long time here every time this comes up that the POTUS cannot just start a nuke war on his own.  

Is the official US nuclear doctrine “Don’t worry, maybe one of our key officers will disobey orders”?   In an institution with an ethos of obeying orders at all costs, even if it means invading other countries, this hardly seems like the safeguard of human civilization.    Since there is a 6 minute window to determine the validity of a threat and key people are often uncreachable in reality, the Harper’s article observes:

Thus, in a real or apparent crisis, the crucial and necessarily fraught conversation may be between two men: General Hyten and Donald Trump.

While Bush and Obama were at the helm, their untrammeled power to launch excited little public concern, even though both men were prone to initiating conventional wars. 

In the event that a commander did choose to defy the president, the former senior Pentagon official suggested, it could even lead to a situation where officers in the launch centers would be receiving contrary orders through different channels, leading to what he called “the biggest shitstorm in the world.”

 Contrary to the view expressed in the article, Congress doesn’t have to declare war protecting the world from a Trump first strike.   The president has to notify Congress within 30 days of destroying the world (just in case they fail to notice).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the realities of the world we inherited, wherein our leaders have but 15 or 20 minutes to make a decision before the bombs land on us, prohibits a session of Congress, which is not always in session, to hold debates and suss it all out in a Constitutional manner. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mark K said:

Unfortunately the realities of the world we inherited, wherein our leaders have but 15 or 20 minutes to make a decision before the bombs land on us, prohibits a session of Congress, which is not always in session, to hold debates and suss it all out in a Constitutional manner. 

 

Maybe in the days of Krushchev that philosophy made sense.   We need to maintain our credible nuclear deterrent.    Any power trying to destroy us needs to believe there is a high probability his country will lack all infrastructure and most of its population for many generations.    My feeing is it is better that there is a slight chance an attacking power will survive its attack, facing only a handful of surviving nukes from a sub or a few MIRVs from a silo launched missile.   The light cost of a few million dead people and an uninhabitable Capitol may seem a victory to a despot, but it seems better to me to risk losing a nuclear war in such a fashion instead of a default of blowing humanity up and confirming the need later.   At least the species survives, despots are temporary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lark said:

Maybe in the days of Krushchev that philosophy made sense.   We need to maintain our credible nuclear deterrent.    Any power trying to destroy us needs to believe there is a high probability his country will lack all infrastructure and most of its population for many generations.    My feeing is it is better that there is a slight chance an attacking power will survive its attack, facing only a handful of surviving nukes from a sub or a few MIRVs from a silo launched missile.   The light cost of a few million dead people and an uninhabitable Capitol may seem a victory to a despot, but it seems better to me to risk losing a nuclear war in such a fashion instead of a default of blowing humanity up and confirming the need later.   At least the species survives, despots are temporary.

There is a school of thought that there should be plans for limited nuclear exchanges, but in war gaming they haven't worked real well. It usually boils down to "use em or lose em" and most of the time everybody pulls out the stops. 

  Another school suggests that by allowing the planning of limited nuclear war increases the chances of one beginning, and the same escalation ladder is climbed. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mark K said:

There is a school of thought that there should be plans for limited nuclear exchanges, but in war gaming they haven't worked real well. It usually boils down to "use em or lose em" and most of the time everybody pulls out the stops. 

  Another school suggests that by allowing the planning of limited nuclear war increases the chances of one happening. 

 

I’m not suggesting we plan or advertise a plan of blowing up a few token cities or armies as a warning.   I’m suggesting we have sufficient overkill and resiliency that any attacker has to expect at the very least one nuclear sub or deep silo will survive.   After we know for sure who did what a response is nearly certain, even if they manage to destroy most everything first.   A handful of people sitting in a silo or submarine, knowing their families are puking up their intestines and they have only a few weeks of food, will figure out a way to strike back.   It’s in our nature.   

The North Korean missile attacks on the ocean were not stopped by the United States.   That strongly suggests our anti missile systems are sufficiently unreliable that a failure to stop one missile from a third world county was plausible and we didn’t want to be embarrassed.    What good is a deterrent if nobody believes it works?    If we knew it worked reliably we would have demonstrated it.   We want to keep its accuracy percent hidden under a cloud of secrecy and leave any attacker uncertain how often it misses.    If we lack faith in our own systems, do we really believe other counties have that much of a technology gap over us?   Most likely more then one sub or silo would still be able to respond, even if Russia decided to write off the Trump investment,   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Limited nuke war is bullshit - as soon as one side starts losing it will escalate.

The Boomers make it impossible for anyone to "win" over the USA - they carry enough freight to destroy 1/2 the world. One of them is enough to lay waste to the biggest counties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Russians are infiltrating the US and the Chinese and Russians both are just buying the place up. It’s becoming increasingly difficult the need for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mad said:

The Russians are infiltrating the US and the Chinese and Russians both are just buying the place up. It’s becoming increasingly difficult the need for them. 

I noticed that a few years back - the Chinese seem to have decided to just buy the world with cheap stuff instead of killing millions.

Pretty shrewd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mad said:

The Russians are infiltrating the US and the Chinese and Russians both are just buying the place up. It’s becoming increasingly difficult the need for them. 

We are always fighting the last war with the last war’s weapons,   For every General Billy Mitchell there are a dozen Minister Andre’ Maginots.   This new combination of economic infiltration and cyber warfare is lot less wasteful then tanks and bombers.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mad said:

The Russians are infiltrating the US and the Chinese and Russians both are just buying the place up. It’s becoming increasingly difficult the need for them. 

No. It has been demonstrated by Pakistan that the US will not invade any country that has nukes, even if Osama flees there. Instead, he beat the sweet bejebus out of Iraq. 

 Nations are going to seek nukes in a world dominated by a drunken, staggering Jolly Green Giant which flails about wantonly whenever it a mosquito bites it. They have become part of the landscape. Frankly, it is fair to suggest that if there had been no MAD between the US and the USSR, between India and Pakistan, and now, perhaps, even between China and India, a billion or more would have perished in conventional wars. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mark K said:

No. It has been demonstrated by Pakistan that the US will not invade any country that has nukes, even if Osama flees there. Instead, he beat the sweet bejebus out of Iraq. 

 Nations are going to seek nukes in a world dominated by a drunken, staggering Jolly Green Giant which flails about wantonly whenever it a mosquito bites it. They have become part of the landscape. Frankly, it is fair to suggest that if there had been no MAD between the US and the USSR, between India and Pakistan, and now, perhaps, even between China and India, a billion or more would have perished in conventional wars. 

There’s a certain irony in countries developing nukes to defend themselves against the US (policeman, protector  and leader of the free world) 

But yes, I can see how this MIGHT reduce the escalation of a conventional war........maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mark K said:

Frankly, it is fair to suggest that if there had been no MAD between the US and the USSR, between India and Pakistan, and now, perhaps, even between China and India, a billion or more would have perished in conventional wars. 

Absolutely correct. It's the one thing that I think that scumbag Teller got right - nukes have prevented large scale war since their inception.

Even WITH them it has come down to a razors edge like in Cuba. NATO and Russia would have gone to war for certain if not for the nukes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, mad said:

There’s a certain irony in countries developing nukes to defend themselves against the US (policeman, protector  and leader of the free world) 

But yes, I can see how this MIGHT reduce the escalation of a conventional war........maybe?

So far...so good....I'm wondering if we should place the nukes under control of perhaps a really big computer, globally linked with perhaps a counterpart on the Russian and Chinese sides, who are the only others who have a globally threatening arsenals. We could call it a nuclear safety net, linked by satellites?  Safety Computer Interconnecting Emergency Nuclear Electronic Targeting, maybe?

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mark K said:

So far...so good....I'm wondering if we should place the nukes under control of perhaps a really big computer, globally linked with perhaps a counterpart on the Russian and Chinese sides, who are the only others who have a globally threatening arsenals. We could call it a nuclear safety net, linked by satellites?  Safety Computer Interconnecting Emergency Nuclear Electronic Targeting, maybe?

  

Skynet has a nice ring to it. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mad said:

Skynet has a nice ring to it. :ph34r:

The human factor must be eliminated...before something bad happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I think that's only because we've barely hit the skirmish stage with these new weapons:

https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-cyberattack-ukraine-russia-code-crashed-the-world/

It’s hard for me to equate loss of organization from a down computer to the loss of a ship, even though the economic costs were far greater.   The Maersk company fate was held by one hard drive in Ghana saved by a power failure.   Maybe that’s why they are back peddling on robot ships.   https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/maersk-to-trial-autonomous-navigation-firm-s-technology#gs.5AuhItM   

Thanks for the read.   You’ve convinced me not to try to save money at work by moving to a cloud based software that requires less equipment upgrades and cheaper support fees.    If one user goes down they all do.    I’m just a little guy standing at the back of a long line hoping to get back in business.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lark said:

Thanks for the read.   You’ve convinced me not to try to save money at work by moving to a cloud based software that requires less equipment upgrades and cheaper support fees.    If one user goes down they all do.    I’m just a little guy standing at the back of a long line hoping to get back in business.   

 

A couple of the labs running my software have an isolated LAN (and the servers are unix/linux based) because uptime is essential. There's maybe one machine with dual NIC's to bridge the systems - which from that article is also a point of failure.

Personally I think it's time I plugged in my external HDD and told the o/s to do a routine backup. All my source code is also stored in a repository on a cloud server, which is great - if the cloud server remains intact.....

I only run Windows systems in a VM sandbox or physically disconnected from the internet but I realise few people have that luxury.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

A couple of the labs running my software have an isolated LAN (and the servers are unix/linux based) because uptime is essential. There's maybe one machine with dual NIC's to bridge the systems - which from that article is also a point of failure.

Personally I think it's time I plugged in my external HDD and told the o/s to do a routine backup. All my source code is also stored in a repository on a cloud server, which is great - if the cloud server remains intact.....

I only run Windows systems in a VM sandbox or physically disconnected from the internet but I realise few people have that luxury.

FKT

Do you speak English?

I tried google translate but all I got was more gibberish.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was speaking in Olde Geek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lark said:

It’s hard for me to equate loss of organization from a down computer to the loss of a ship, even though the economic costs were far greater.  

that's why I'm thinking of it as a skirmish era, a phony war if you will. some shots exchanged but not a full battle, yet. But so far the losses look like they could be pretty large.Billy Mitchell sinking a battleship in 1921 - it shows it can be done.

I know at least one midwest Mondelez distributor stopped delivering for multiple days because of the same virus - I'd be curious to know what the full losses were from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking news: Trump ordered a limited strike on a ranch in Arizona, but was surprised when the Air Force officer carrying the football recited the Sailors Creed by way of reply. Within minutes, flags at the White House were lowered to half staff by a Navy staffers, and the president was invited to change it if his bone spurs didn't prevent it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now