Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

Not true, any and every launch order would have to be confirmed by the secretary of defense.

Even if this is true, the job of SecDef, as well as the entire military, is to carry out the orders of the president.

"It's okay if Trump is elected president because the rest of the government will just mount a coup against him if he does anything bad" strikes me as a very weird argument. Why would you support a candidate that would just delegitimize our system of government?

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Even if this is true, the job of SecDef, as well as the entire military, is to carry out the orders of the president.

"It's okay if Trump is elected president because the rest of the government will just mount a coup against him if he does anything bad" strikes me as a very weird argument. Why would you support a candidate that would just delegitimize our system of government?

Because people are accustomed to just how much peace, stability, and prosperity we have compared to other periods of human existence and other parts of the world this very day. To them, a boogey man establishment holding them back from achieving their dreams must be demolished and only Trump can do that.

 

[Amir0x]

Even if this is true, the job of SecDef, as well as the entire military, is to carry out the orders of the president.

"It's okay if Trump is elected president because the rest of the government will just mount a coup against him if he does anything bad" strikes me as a very weird argument. Why would you support a candidate that would just delegitimize our system of government?

If the Secretary of Defense disagreed with the President on launching nukes, the President is literally allowed to fire that individual until he gets a Secretary of Defense that does agree with him. Sooo...

 

[ApharmdX]

LOL - wrongdoing.

What Hillary did amounts to violating a work policy that many other people are also guilty of violating. "Wrongdoing" isn't the appropriate term for that.

"Amounts to violating a work policy that many other people are also guilty of violating" is surfing Neogaf on your work computer, or eating fries behind the counter of a fast food joint. When you're head of the State Department, and charged with classified information at a high level, it's a big deal, and goes beyond "she just violated policy". People have been charged for being irresponsible with classified info. Typically misdemeanor charges, when it's unintentional, but they've been charged.

In fact, Hillary Clinton would throw Edward Snowden in prison for mishandling classified information.

Politics are a team sport, but we should hold our representatives to a higher standard. When you are running for the head of the military apparatus, placing your own convenience and personal secrecy ahead of national security is NOT a great selling point.

Even if this is true, the job of SecDef, as well as the entire military, is to carry out the orders of the president.

"It's okay if Trump is elected president because the rest of the government will just mount a coup against him if he does anything bad" strikes me as a very weird argument. Why would you support a candidate that would just delegitimize our system of government?

Yeah, this argument for Trump is weird to me. I had some in-laws over yesterday and we had a pretty heated argument over Trump (my wife and I are voting Hillary but supported Bernie, they are both Trump voters). They had some charges against Hillary, that she was corrupt, that the Clintons have acted inappropriately, which were hard to refute, but their defense of Trump was hilarious. My wife's like- "he's said point-blank that he'll target the families of terrorists or suspected terrorists, which is unacceptable". They responded- "oh, he won't do that." But that's what he said he would do! It's not like we have anything except his statements to go off of. We know what kind of president Hillary would be, or we have a damn good idea. If you take Trump at face value he'd be an extremely dangerous president.

 

[excelsiorlef]

"Amounts to violating a work policy that many other people are also guilty of violating" is surfing Neogaf on your work computer, or eating fries behind the counter of a fast food joint. When you're head of the State Department, and charged with classified information at a high level, it's a big deal, and goes beyond "she just violated policy". People have been charged for being irresponsible with classified info. Typically misdemeanor charges, when it's unintentional, but they've been charged.

In fact, Hillary Clinton would throw Edward Snowden in prison for mishandling classified information.

Politics are a team sport, but we should hold our representatives to a higher standard. When you are running for the head of the military apparatus, placing your own convenience and personal secrecy ahead of national security is NOT a great selling point.



Yeah, this argument for Trump is weird to me. I had some in-laws over yesterday and we had a pretty heated argument over Trump (my wife and I are voting Hillary but supported Bernie, they are both Trump voters). They had some charges against Hillary, that she was corrupt, that the Clintons have acted inappropriately, which were hard to refute, but their defense of Trump was hilarious. My wife's like- "he's said point-blank that he'll target the families of terrorists or suspected terrorists, which is unacceptable". They responded- "oh, he won't do that." But that's what he said he would do! It's not like we have anything except his statements to go off of. We know what kind of president Hillary would be, or we have a damn good idea. If you take Trump at face value he'd be an extremely dangerous president.

Snowden didn't mishandle information he stole it and released it. We can argue about whistle blowing and heroism elsewhere but you can't bloody well compare what Snowden did and what Clinton did and expect to be taken seriously. Come on.

 

[ApharmdX]

Snowden didn't mishandle information he stole it and released it. We can argue about whistle blowing and heroism elsewhere but you can't bloody well compare what Snowden did and what Clinton did and expect to be taken seriously. Come on.

I'm not directly comparing them. I noted before that any classified information released by Hillary was done so unintentionally*. On the other hand, Snowden sought to go through the proper whistleblower channels and was forced to intentionally release classified information. The situations are difficult to compare directly but my point is that Hillary would love to see Snowden punished to the full extent of the law for his violation of security policy.


*Hillary's release of information was unintentional but negligent.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I'm not directly comparing them. I noted before that any classified information released by Hillary was done so unintentionally*. On the other hand, Snowden sought to go through the proper whistleblower channels and was forced to intentionally release classified information. The situations are difficult to compare directly but my point is that Hillary would love to see Snowden punished to the full extent of the law for his violation of security policy.


*Hillary's release of information was unintentional but negligent.

It kind of feels like you have directly compared them two posts in a row. If you didn't want a comparison why did you bring it up?

 

[Marcin Gulik]

I'm glad we're having an intelligent discussions here instead of going all out apeshit like all of the comment sections on the internet

 

[Speely]

For those uninitiated in the mysteries of the Pentagod

Omg thank you for this. I had no idea... WOW.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I'm not directly comparing them. I noted before that any classified information released by Hillary was done so unintentionally*. On the other hand, Snowden sought to go through the proper whistleblower channels and was forced to intentionally release classified information. The situations are difficult to compare directly but my point is that Hillary would love to see Snowden punished to the full extent of the law for his violation of security policy.


*Hillary's release of information was unintentional but negligent.

Snowden actually committed a crime, we can talk about his reasons and whatever but he actually did something illegal. Thus far nothing has shown that Clinton did anything illegal.

Pointing out that Clinton would have Snowden charged isn't the checkmate QED statement you think it is.

 

[Syder]

Oh, right, because it doesn't fit your "free pass" narrative which is actually completely made up and not true.

Should have been pretty obvious that I was talking about the internet. Whatever, I've never made a habit of consuming American news broadcasters and I'm not about to start.

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm not directly comparing them. I noted before that any classified information released by Hillary was done so unintentionally*. On the other hand, Snowden sought to go through the proper whistleblower channels and was forced to intentionally release classified information. The situations are difficult to compare directly but my point is that Hillary would love to see Snowden punished to the full extent of the law for his violation of security policy.


*Hillary's release of information was unintentional but negligent.

Where was it confirmed that Hillary unintentionally released information?
Or are you referring to the hacked emails? In such case, there are quite a few people guilty of being hacked, including the US Government.

 

[davepoobond]

if her emails were on the government's system they would have been hacked even more than they possibly were (if at all). john kerry's email was compromised last year wasn't it?

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

*We will return to Survivor: Detroit after this important announcement from the President of the United States*

Ladies and gentlemen of these United States: I, your president, President Donald J. Trump, have an important announcement.

As many of you know, the other day, my ex-great friend Vladimir Putin decided to start a war with America when he called me a "manpeeg vith tiny beebee hands" or whatever. I can't do the accent. It's a stupid accent. He insulted me, right? He insulted the President of America. And you know what? That makes him a liar. He's a liar and he talks funny and he's got a big stupid face. He's a liar because my hands are fantastic, okay? They're big, and strong, and very very nice.

So he's a liar and he refused to apologize. Like a baby. That's right, he's the baby. Only babies refuse to apologize, because they can't talk, okay? He can talk. He talks all the time with that stupid accent, okay? So he wouldn't apologize. Which left me with no choice. I launched the nukes. I launched all the nukes. All of 'em. I only wanted to launch one, but my hands are so big that they pressed all the buttons at once. Could someone with small hands press all the buttons at once?

But don't worry--stop worrying. We're gonna go out in the biggest, most luxurious mushroom cloud you've ever seen, okay? We're gonna--

*Transmission ends*

Wow, this is fantastic.

 

[egruntz]

Wow, this is fantastic.

....?

 

[TheOMan]

Wow, this is fantastic.

Wrong thread?