this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
911 points (89.4% liked)

Political Memes

5615 readers
1232 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 128 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

There was someone who worked in Washington who made a proposal that the nuclear launch codes should be printed on a little capsule that was surgically implanted inside a man who would travel around with the president, in kind of the same way that the briefcase or whatever-it-is travels around with him under the current system.

The deal was, if the president wanted to launch a nuclear strike, he had to take a big knife and kill the man to cut him open to get to the capsule. Kind of come to grips on an individual level with what he was dealing with, and what it meant on at least some level, instead of just pushing some buttons in an air conditioned office.

I don't think this was ever meant as a serious proposal. The person who invented it was just trying to make a point. But it did get relayed to at least one person who worked in the Pentagon who got very upset at the idea and started arguing against it. What if, he said, the president looks at what's in front of him and can't do it. That would be terrible.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What if, he said, the president looks at what's in front of him and can't do it. That would be terrible.

If the president can't kill one single man without a guilty conscience, he/she probably shouldn't be obliterating the entirety of our species.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Putin would gut a fellow comrade for something to do while the launch codes were being retrieved from the briefcase.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

So would lots of Republicans, what's your point?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

How many nuclear bombs has Putin dropped since this war started?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I get the idea, but what if the kill-guy fights back and at the last minute decides he doesn’t want to be a sacrificial lamb? I can imagine that as some sort of 70s tv series about a guy on the run from the government and a president who wants all-out war.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago

I would unironically watch this show

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

And they’re running out of time!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

PLEASE LET THIS BECOME A REAL SHOW

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I need to watch this.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

That's fine. But also the guy could be handcuffed to a secret service agent or something. It's not like there aren't a bunch of buff dudes around the president at all times. The purpose of the exercise would probably be enhanced if the guy didn't want to die.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The deal was, if the president wanted to launch a nuclear strike, he had to take a big knife and kill the man to cut him open to get to the capsule.

There are too many Presidents in history who would have done that gleefully for me to believe it would function as a deterrent.

What if, he said, the president looks at what’s in front of him and can’t do it. That would be terrible.

I'm less worried about the President who hesitates than I am the President who doesn't.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This requirement is also the plot of the 2020 Hugo Award for Best Short Story, As the Last I May Know

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I didn't read the story but that's a cool mag. I'm digging the vibe and articles.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I dunno I mean it's a pretty different proposal to logically come to the idea of like. oh something that's an existential threat needs to be nuked, whether that be like, godzilla, which is NOT a good idea, or like, just ensuring MAD because fuck it, I guess, or like, north korea or something, right, there's a difference between that, which should probably be a pretty cold and calculated decision, and like, killing someone, presumably that you know quite well after travelling with them for you know, at most, eight years, and then rooting through their corpse to find a little code with what's probably a time critical objective. I think probably, as another commenter pointed out, you would want to elect the president that can't kill a person. That's a better president, than the one that can, probably.

Bigger hole than all that, though: the president would probably just ask the secret service to do it, and the secret service would probably comply.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like a plot element from Metal Gear Solid.

However: I think this would weaken nuclear deterrence, wouldn't it?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

MAD is a bad thing

Play Peace Walker

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

How about a nice game of chess?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Chess sucks. You don't even get to kill the king.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Thank you Joshua, I'd like that very much

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Lol, that's were I learned about it.

Yes, it might be bad from a moral standpoint. But foreign policy relies on it too much.