Higher authority question..
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 14 of 23

Thread:
Higher authority question..

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Newbury Park, Ca/Mohave Valley, Az
    Posts
    8,169

    Default Higher authority question..

    OK, hypothetical question... (for some one much smarter than me on the subject)....

    We have a Naval Captain in Command of a huge battleship sailing along towards San Francisco... For whatever reason he loses it, he goes off the deep end, he goes berserk..and commands his ship to turn broadside to the Golden gate bridge, and using the huge guns orders his crew to blow it up...Destroy it, bring it down, cars, people and all.... Somewhere in the Navy regs there is a provision where a Jr. officer can judge him incompetent, unfit for command, and take charge of the ship ordering the crew to put the Captain under arrest confined to quarters until the ship docks in the SF bay.... There is such a Navy regulation, right?? Just as an Army/Marine Sgt. in a combat situation, could relieve an Officer if he determined the officer was unfit for command due to inexperience, mental illness, basic incompetence, and a danger to his men...

    Both of these examples would be subject to review by a higher authority at a later date, and those taking over could be subject to severe punishment, even mutiny in the case of the Navy, I'm not sure what the Army/Marine term is, but they could be severely punished, right??

    So with all the wisdom of the Armed forces to foresee such an event needing immediate action, why is it impossible to relieve the Commander in Chief on the spot if it becomes evident he is not acting in the best interest of United States??

    Say obama was about to add several field Generals to an enemy of the US, and someone in Congress, or the Senate Majority leader realized it, why can't the POTUS be immediately relieved of authority?? Placed under arrest and confined to quarters until a further review could be scheduled... Impeachment would take too long, there has to be an immediate action for the good of the Country...

    Then remember the 5 Field Generals obama traded for the deserter. Wouldn't that qualify? Aide and comfort to the enemy, isn't that treason??

    Just some ramblings.....
    Ray
    Last edited by Moneypit; 01-08-2016 at 04:02 AM.
    LOUD BOATS SAVE LIVES

  2. Remove Advertisements
    PerformanceBoats.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member Mr. Travels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Fontana, CA
    Posts
    473

    Default

    I'm sorry not in higher authority here, but sounds like a movie made for TV.

  4. #3
    83 Crusader - 468 BBC SNiC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moneypit View Post
    OK, hypothetical question... (for some one much smarter than me on the subject)....

    We have a Naval Captain in Command of a huge battleship sailing along towards San Francisco... For whatever reason he loses it, he goes off the deep end, he goes berserk..and commands his ship to turn broadside to the Golden gate bridge, and using the huge guns orders his crew to blow it up...Destroy it, bring it down, cars, people and all.... Somewhere in the Navy regs there is a provision where a Jr. officer can judge him incompetent, unfit for command, and take charge of the ship ordering the crew to put the Captain under arrest confined to quarters until the ship docks in the SF bay.... There is such a Navy regulation, right?? Just as an Army/Marine Sgt. in a combat situation, could relieve an Officer if he determined the officer was unfit for command due to inexperience, mental illness, basic incompetence, and a danger to his men...

    Both of these examples would be subject to review by a higher authority at a later date, and those taking over could be subject to severe punishment, even mutiny in the case of the Navy, I'm not sure what the Army/Marine term is, but they could be severely punished, right??

    So with all the wisdom of the Armed forces to foresee such an event needing immediate action, why is it impossible to relieve the Commander in Chief on the spot if it becomes evident he is not acting in the best interest of United States??

    Say obama was about to add several field Generals to an enemy of the US, and someone in Congress, or the Senate Majority leader realized it, why can't the POTUS be immediately relieved of authority?? Placed under arrest and confined to quarters until a further review could be scheduled... Impeachment would take too long, there has to be an immediate action for the good of the Country...

    Then remember the 5 Field Generals obama traded for the deserter. Wouldn't that qualify? Aide and comfort to the enemy, isn't that treason??

    Just some ramblings.....
    Ray
    Your "ramblings" raise some interesting questions and I have often wondered the same No doubt Obama has crossed Constitutional lines and blatantly ignored the laws HE SUPPORTED which declared the POTUS is to give Congress a 30 day notice of any intentions to release GITMO prisoners. IMO, the IRAN agreement, has given IRAN "nukes" is just another example of treason as he once again circumvented Congress and the voices of the people. To me, your analagy of turning guns on the Golden Gate relates to this treasonous action..... the "guns are turning", but they are awaiting to loaded and fired....

    I am certainly not of a "higher authority" and I am definitely make no claims of being "smarter than you" but I did come across these tidbits... but it involves waking up Uncle Joe ....

    FWIW, The code of Federal law which applies to the US military is the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which lists persons subject to the UCMJ. You will note the President of the United States is not one such person.

    Section 4, of the 25th Amendment has a provision which allows for the cabinet and the Vice President to declare that the President is unable to discharge the duties of his office per Section 4 of the 25th Amendment.

    Section 4.


    Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

    Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
    Last edited by SNiC; 01-08-2016 at 09:12 AM.



  5. #4
    Marine Organism Forkin' Crazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mound, Louisiana
    Posts
    12,743

    Default

    Section 4, of the 25th Amendment has a provision which allows for the cabinet and the Vice President to declare that the President is unable to discharge the duties of his office per Section 4 of the 25th Amendment.
    Well, that will never happen. That authority should be placed with congress IMO.
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life"

    - - Robert A. Heinlein

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,844

    Default

    It's called Impeachment.

  7. #6
    83 Crusader - 468 BBC SNiC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forkin' Crazy View Post
    Well, that will never happen. That authority should be placed with congress IMO.
    As you know, Congress does hold impeachment powers, but that lengthy process does not satisfy Moneypit's scenario "why can't the POTUS be immediately relieved of authority???". But in all honesty, if the powers for "immediate removal" was placed solely on Congress, we would have a new POTUS each time a particular party controlled both Houses.

    I guess we will have to wake up Uncle Joe



  8. #7
    Marine Organism Forkin' Crazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mound, Louisiana
    Posts
    12,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SNiC View Post
    As you know, Congress does hold impeachment powers, but that lengthy process does not satisfy Moneypit's scenario "why can't the POTUS be immediately relieved of authority???". But in all honesty, if the powers for "immediate removal" was placed solely on Congress, we would have a new POTUS each time a particular party controlled both Houses.

    I guess we will have to wake up Uncle Joe
    Yea you are right, I am sure... There is not a smelling salt made that will awake the likes of Uncle Joe!!!
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life"

    - - Robert A. Heinlein

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SNiC View Post
    As you know, Congress does hold impeachment powers, but that lengthy process does not satisfy Moneypit's scenario "why can't the POTUS be immediately relieved of authority???". But in all honesty, if the powers for "immediate removal" was placed solely on Congress, we would have a new POTUS each time a particular party controlled both Houses.

    I guess we will have to wake up Uncle Joe
    Correct you are. Good point.

  10. #9
    Bah... HST4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forkin' Crazy View Post
    Yea you are right, I am sure... There is not a smelling salt made that will awake the likes of Uncle Joe!!!
    Joe wasn't all there to begin with, and his sons death made even more of a broken man.

  11. #10
    Senior Member Ripple Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nv
    Posts
    425

    Default

    Let's face it, the first black president will never be impeached. No matter how much he shits on the constitution.

  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ripple Rider View Post
    Let's face it, the first black president will never be impeached. No matter how much he shits on the constitution.
    His color has nothing to do with that, it's a long standing tradition by all.
    So, what makes you think his color has to do with anything.

    Dare I say, this sounds a bit racist?

  13. #12
    83 Crusader - 468 BBC SNiC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimsplace View Post
    His color has nothing to do with that, it's a long standing tradition by all.
    So, what makes you think his color has to do with anything.

    Dare I say, this sounds a bit racist?
    So sad...... but so true.
    It is a shame that we the people have allowed the political class to collectively shit on our constitution and plot us against each other only for their self serving political gains. They have no doubt forgotten the objectives of their elected positions and "sworn duties". As our moral fabric dissolves by unconscious design, the abusive political curve against our constitution has been climbing for decades, but recently this curve has taken a strong upward course at the hands of a constitutional educated liberal POTUS.

    We the people allowed ourselves to be put in this political mess and as we point our fingers of blame against each other, the constitutional abuse continues by both parties. There is no place in our nation for political correctness, the freedoms of speech is one of our greatest assets that made us who we are, to be free to express our views and build upon them. We MUST Stop this madness and We the People must put these silly differences behind us as we are the only ones who can set a new and corrective course for our republic. This is the greatest nation on earth, it is a shame to see it all pissed away simply because some have turned their backs on God the Father Almighty and we are afraid of hurting someones feelings.... even our enemies. Otherwise, we are ripe for the pickings....
    Last edited by SNiC; 01-08-2016 at 08:06 PM.



  14. #13
    Senior Member bville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glasgow, KY
    Posts
    1,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SNiC View Post
    So sad...... but so true.
    It is a shame that we the people have allowed the political class to collectively shit on our constitution and plot us against each other only for their self serving political gains. They have no doubt forgotten the objectives of their elected positions and "sworn duties". As our moral fabric dissolves by unconscious design, the abusive political curve against our constitution has been climbing for decades, but recently this curve has taken a strong upward course at the hands of a constitutional educated liberal POTUS.

    We the people allowed ourselves to be put in this political mess and as we point our fingers of blame against each other, the constitutional abuse continues by both parties. There is no place in our nation for political correctness, the freedoms of speech is one of our greatest assets that made us who we are, to be free to express our views and build upon them. We MUST Stop this madness and We the People must put these silly differences behind us as we are the only ones who can set a new and corrective course for our republic. This is the greatest nation on earth, it is a shame to see it all pissed away simply because some have turned their backs on God the Father Almighty and we are afraid of hurting someones feelings.... even our enemies. Otherwise, we are ripe for the pickings....
    No truer words were ever spoken,its our fault the people for the spot we are in today.We are all being played.

  15. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SNiC View Post
    So sad...... but so true.
    It is a shame that we the people have allowed the political class to collectively shit on our constitution and plot us against each other only for their self serving political gains. They have no doubt forgotten the objectives of their elected positions and "sworn duties". As our moral fabric dissolves by unconscious design, the abusive political curve against our constitution has been climbing for decades, but recently this curve has taken a strong upward course at the hands of a constitutional educated liberal POTUS.

    We the people allowed ourselves to be put in this political mess and as we point our fingers of blame against each other, the constitutional abuse continues by both parties. There is no place in our nation for political correctness, the freedoms of speech is one of our greatest assets that made us who we are, to be free to express our views and build upon them. We MUST Stop this madness and We the People must put these silly differences behind us as we are the only ones who can set a new and corrective course for our republic. This is the greatest nation on earth, it is a shame to see it all pissed away simply because some have turned their backs on God the Father Almighty and we are afraid of hurting someones feelings.... Even our enemies. Otherwise, we are ripe for the pickings....
    I do take exception to, "It taking the strong upturn" by, "constitutional educated liberal POTUS," sort of.
    I can't say that I recall how much the previous presidents used, "Executive Decision." But, I do recall Bush using it considerably more than I had remembered or noticed before.
    Not that I always agree, but Obama is attempting to do good for the public with the gun law reform and protecting women's rights.
    Bush on the other hand, used his for corporate gain and the oil companies. I remember when he exempted the oil and gas industry from The clean Air and Clean Water acts.
    I still find that unforgivable.

    Generally though, I agree with what SNIC wrote.
    I do wonder how much worse things really are now, as compared years ago.
    Is it really worse, or do "WE" the people have access to more information and know more about what's happening.

    I know a number dislike the media, but the media is how we are getting much of our information quickly, along with the "FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT," which came about largely due to the media.
    I'm sure many of the OLD FARTS remember seeing video and getting accurate stories from Vietnam at the time, which was never available in the past.
    It had always been sanitized by the military and politicians before the public ever saw it in the past.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Tags for this Thread

Digg This Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95