They can resign. Theoretically they can decide (as advised by DoD lawyers) that the order is not legal... which also involves resignation.If it does turn into actual orders, I don't think it matters. They have to respect the chain of command. If he says "Bomb cultural sites and go after civilians too, just for good measure," are they actually going to listen to their conscience when they've already let it go this far?
I don't think anyone could stop that train if it gets to that point. We're long past reasonable minds staying "stop, go no further" and getting results. Trump already knows that even if he broke out the nukes, Fox and 30% of America would cheer him on and claim it's what they always wanted.
See them take a page from Russia's election interference playbook and watch how fast Republicans suddenly care about election cybersecurityIran should just hit back by making sure Trump loses the election. Can't think of anything more that would piss him off.
Why the fuck is he targetting areas of cultural significance? It has no strategic purpose. It's purely political and a disgusting display at that.
While I'm sure most of us want trump to STFU, honestly, it scares me more when he goes silent. Making absurd threats is par for the course. It's when he goes silent during times like this that I get worried.
I strongly doubt Iran-proper will directly attack US assets. They would want to be able to deny being involved to keep escalation to a minimum.This is why killing Suleimani was such a dumb fuck move. US assets will be hit in one way or another. If Trump responds with an extremely disproportionate strike (there is a big chance of this happening) then really that's uncharted territory, even more so than now.
I think it's becoming more and more clear this was done to distract from impeachment and for the 2020 election.
Trump has a magical "newsworthiness" exemption to Twitter rules.
I strongly doubt Iran-proper will directly attack US assets. They would want to be able to deny being involved to keep escalation to a minimum.
He's famous. Twitter upholds trump's maxim "famous people can do whatever the hell they want."
yes
Whenever an American soldier die, the US just bomb shit. Sometime it's stuff that is connected to the death, sometime it isn't, but they always bomb the ever living shit out of everything when it happens.Any attack from a pro Iranian militia will be interpreted as an attack from Iran it sounds like.
IMO, cyber still seems like the much more likely attack by them. They can do more actual damage, and it greatly lowers the risk of US military retaliation.Any attack from a pro Iranian militia will be interpreted as an attack from Iran it sounds like.
Not just that.
At war we're championing them for doing deeds that may actually be harming the nation, and then if they are killed or injured doing so, the system basically ignores them. I don't understand why anyone would volunteer for our military.Whenever an American soldier die, the US just bomb shit. Sometime it's stuff that is connected to the death, sometime it isn't, but they always bomb the ever living shit out of everything when it happens.
If American soldiers get hurt, people will die, and if history is any indication, a large number of them are going to be civilians.
"& the Iranian Culture"This. I don't get why people think he's talking about historical sites
The economic incentives are pretty damn serious. For many people, it's a really good way to move up into the middle class. And don't forget, most soldiers in the military are not in combat roles, and only a very small percentage of them actually see combat.At war we're championing them for doing deeds that may actually be harming the nation, and then if they are killed or injured doing so, the system basically ignores them. I don't understand why anyone would volunteer for our military.
Again, it's not just a war crime (which of course is bad enough). It's against US military rules of conduct and, even completely divorced from any moral considerations, is just incredibly counterproductive to any strategic plan.Not just that.
The fact that he says he would target sites of Iranian cultural value means that he is threatening to commit a war crime.
That's legitimately insane. For all the faults of the United States, it has been military policy basically forever that "cultural significance" is a key reason not to attack a specific target.
Twitter is a private company that has no duty to the public to provide Trump a pulpit.(Unfortunately) he's in a very very privileged position.
As in, being a President of a superpower.
It's shitty, but he's beyond "deplatforming".
Twitter is a private company that has no duty to the public to provide Trump a pulpit.
I didn't mean to imply that the US never destroyed sites of cultural significance (obviously they have), but targeting sites because of their cultural significance is against policy, and even if done in secrete (which is of course awful), actively advertising that fact is absolutely insane.Unless you live in Laos. Or any other nation on the end of secret conflicts.
Twitter is a private company that has no duty to the public to provide Trump a pulpit.
I didn't mean to imply that the US never destroyed sites of cultural significance (obviously they have), but targeting sites because of their cultural significance is against policy, and even if done in secrete (which is of course awful), actively advertising that fact is absolutely insane.
Mỹ Sơn is perhaps the longest inhabited archaeological site in Indochina, but a large majority of its architecture was destroyed by US bombing during a single week of the Vietnam War.
French scholars investigating Mỹ Sơn at the beginning of the 20th century identified a then still existent edifice distinguished for "its majestic proportions, the antiquity of its style, and the richness of its decoration" as the temple of Sambhu-Bhadresvara constructed by King Sambhuvarman.[14] The edifice, which is known to scholars as "A1", was practically destroyed by US aerial bombing in the Vietnam War and is now little more than a formless pile of bricks.
Umm, from that article:
There was no strategic reason for that, the US was just frustrated and that was a really famous temple.
That was Vietnam's Angkor Wat, only better preserved, and the US turned it into rubble because it was losing the Vietnam war and had no idea what to do.
I'm completely open to the possibility it was targeted for it's cultural significance, but do you have any sources for that? I want to know about this.The area was part of a People's Army of Vietnam and Viet Cong base area and consequently United States aircraft bombed the region in August 1969.
"VIet Cong base area" is just what Nixon called the South Vietnam countryside.Umm, from that article:
I'm completely open to the possibility it was targeted for it's cultural significance, but do you have any sources for that? I want to know about this.
Either way, that's obviously abhorrent.
So, no source, but it's what you think the rational was."VIet Cong base area" is just what Nixon called the South Vietnam countryside.
This is just the bullshit America said to justify their carpet bombing campaign, they didn't know where the VC are. That attacked was also heavily condemned at the time.
I have been also been there, that place has no strategic importance, it's not in the way to or from anywhere important, nor is it a fortress.
It's just an ancient temple complex like Bagan or Angkor Wat but we never really got to see it because the US was bringing freedom to Indochina.
I didn't mean to imply that the US never destroyed sites of cultural significance (obviously they have), but targeting sites because of their cultural significance is against policy, and even if done in secrete (which is of course awful), actively advertising that fact is absolutely insane.
Wait till you find out what China Ian doing in Africa if you think only America is evil. I don't see anyone praising what's the U.S. Is doing, but using Russia as if they haven't been just as bad for the Middle East is baffling to me. They literally helped prop Assad up.Whatever helps you sleep at night Drew. I don't see a difference. If you haven't noticed countries slicing up Syria for the last few years I dunno what to tell you. Israel's occupation of the Golan heights is now official (rather than unofficial, like how Israel gets away with their other occupations) and named after Trump.
Not to mention America's more 'subtle' ways of imperialism, which is an invasion and regime change to favour themselves.
Like I said, it's considered inherently counterproductive (and obviously immoral) in modern military doctrine.Sure, but when the consequences for doing so are literally zero what's stopping the mask even going on.
Source to what?So, no source, but it's what you think the rational was.
OK, well, it's certainly posssible you are right.