Fine. All he had to do was say no.
Remember the outrage when anyone in the Trump administration would be even seen talking to a Russian?
2 Likes
I have no idea.
Iād be quite interested in your thoughts on this.
First, I assume that you would agree that a general is free to ignore an unlawful order? For example, the article talks about āTrump attacking Chinaā. If he were to order a first strike without a DoW from congress, shouldnāt that order be ignored?
Next, assume hostilities are already underway. Suppose under the current AUMF (which I think needs to be rescinded), thst the president orders an attack on some city, without regard to civilian casualties; raze the city to the ground. We are legally at war, nevertheless, should that order be ignored?
I doā¦ but IMO this is not comparable.
We are talking about an escalation to a state of warā¦ something that the President cannot do on his own.
Jack is a well known liar.
are you unaware that Chinese military and America military talk quite a lot.
Its pretty standard to warm before an attack on a populated area.
like when Trump bombed that Syrian military base both Syria and Russia were warned.
expect the people having a fit over it was China, he was simply correcting them.
China intelligence was reporting that America was going to make an attack on China, he correct them by saying such attack wouldnāt happen.
with how much America and China bump into each-other in the South China Sea it was a smart move because China could have done something stupid like attack a U.S Navy vessel.
Wrong thread.
Are you unaware that people in the state department talk to Russians?
I remember no escalation to a state of war at that time. And if I did, I would realize that I myself had no statutory authority to be making agreements or promises to communist Chine, any more than this General did.
Did Milley have the legal authority to make such a commitment on his own. I suppose thatās the ultimate question in this.
I have no issue with that.
the Russian probe was people from the Campaign talking with Russian state officials.
and the Ukraine thing was about the personal lawyer of the President talking with state officials.
I donāt think he cared about legal authority. It sounds like he truly believed that Trump was capable of doing something to save his job that would not be in the best interest of the U.Sā¦ And he would have been privy to comments made by Trump that were not made public.
1 Like
Stop making senseā¦Youāll ruin everythingā¦
1 Like
It is sticky, for sure.
We know that Trump could not go war on his own, but what if the Chinese donāt see it that way?
As @CanadianJudo has noted, there is a point of friction in the South China Sea. Suppose that China does think some sort of attack is likely, and goes to their equivalent of Defcon one. Then a Chinese commander down there does something provocative, like firing over the bow of our, or one of our allies ships.
Doing what Milley did, whether or not he actually intended to follow through, could defuse this whole situation before it kicks off, and thus avoid a potentially catastrophic war confrontation.
So to answer your question: was it legal? Probably not. But was it right? I donāt know.
1 Like
I believe that in the theater of public opinion Milley wins.
2 Likes
Like I say, itās sticky. Iām not a huge fan of generals dealing behind a Presidentās back.
1 Like
I donāt think truly believing Trump might do something to hurt the country would be much of a justification unless he had objective proof of the same, with specific dangers.
A lot of people, including in this forum, would have thought Trump would make a deal with the devil without any problem.
Others think the same of Biden.
Just thinking it isnāt a justification of anything.
Probably with half the country or maybe a little more. And that half now controls the Presidency, Congress and the Department of Justice. I suspect he is safe.
