About the Nuclear Football


This is the Nuclear Football

It is an attache case with America’s nuclear launch codes, and accompanies the President of the United States everywhere he or she goes. It stands ready to execute the unthinkable at a moment of extreme need. 


We go about our daily activities thinking little about this menacing object. It is entrusted to the country’s highest officers, and is carefully monitored.

The one potential weakness in the system is the level of authority and responsibility entrusted to any sitting President.

Needless to say that,

of all the most important attributes,
the president must possess…

the most critically important is…




12 responses to “About the Nuclear Football

  1. EXACTLY!!!! And WE (American Gov’t) don’t want ANYONE ELSE in the World to have Nukes? Pretty one sided of us,isn’t it?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. One problem is, they DO have nukes. Most other countries don’t have this sort of protocol, either. I’m not even sure we still have it. It was part of the ICBM program. That has largely been superseded.

    We have submarines and airplanes and missiles. It is at least somewhat integrated, but not like it was in the 1950’s when this “football” idea came out. That was done to placate the average American that they took this seriously.

    Over time I think they’ve mentally lost a lot of revulsion to using nukes. That’s not a good thing. We have some countries who are truly “wild cards” in this mix. I don’t trust the military to use common sense here.

    There have been tactical nukes used recently. For now that is not common knowledge. We and the Russians (at least) track this. It is quite easy for them to spot them when they are used. There is an underground that provides nukes that are past their shelf life to the highest bidder.

    Sibel Edmonds has written some on this subject and I believe what she says. Cheney and Rum-filled and their Israeli buddies were up to their necks in this. That’s how we see these “truck bombs” that have tremendous payloads, much too big for conventional explosives.

    Anyway, you can’t put that genie back in the bottle. As time goes by people become less and less worried about the consequences.


  3. Until the 1960s (and perhaps later….), the attache case was always in the custody of an Army warrant officer, who would always be near the president, if needed. Apparently, the responsibility for it has increased in importance, as now it is a commissioned officer of field grade (O-4 or O-5) who carries it. (Depictions of both on film/TV. “Seven Days In May”, and the pilot episode of “NCIS”)
    Two presidents in recent history, with inclinations to ‘horndog it’ (that would be JFK and Slick Willie) have ‘gone missing’ for hours at a time without access to the ‘football’ …. which indicates, to me at least, that both lacked the maturity and integrity to hold the nation’s highest office.
    The fact that both represented the democrat party is probably just a coincidence…… probably.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yeah, I understand. I haven’t kept up with this one. You’re right about how it used to work. In handling nukes there are multiple protocols to eliminate the “lone nut” scenario. Just like what is alleged on 9-11, supposedly Rum-filled had issued new orders that he was the only one who could implement certain protocols and no one could find him.

      Now, I don’t believe that, but that’s not the point. What you say is true. For that to work the president would need to be available 24/7 365. In Obongo’s case he would need to put a buddy seat on his golf cart.

      I’m not sure how much of this isn’t pure theater. It was easier to visualize when we were talking about ICBM’s in underground bunkers. We also had the SAC Command with B-52’s flying around loaded with bombs. We don’t do that anymore.

      So, I’m thinking that the President must need to be consulted before any sort of nuke strike. I would further assume that there is always a designated backup. Even with that it seems more than a little inefficient.


  4. I don’t know what the big deal is. I’m all for using the most powerful weapon known to man when it comes to defeating islam/terrorism/the enemy.. The point of war is not to be fair or nice. It is to win. Ask Japan. The goal is to bring the enemy to their knees. To have them beg for mercy. To beg us to stop. to surrender unconditionally. I am sick to death of having mercy on the people that would behead us, kill us, torture us. demand that we accept their perverted rule. Either get with the program or join their side. They show us no mercy. Let’s do the same. Sorry if this sounds harsh. But war, and this is war, is harsh.


  5. Pingback: About the Nuclear Football — Fellowship of the Minds | kommonsentsjane

  6. The problem is that…in the past, “super powers” ( very limited…like…the USA and USSR) had control of the “nuclear launch button.” Today, Third World Rogue States have buttons……

    I keep having persistant dreams that North Korea, for instance, blows itself up with a nuclear mishap…….this is NOT wishful thinking…this is an omnipresent foreboding……I have NO idea what would happen to the rest of us in the world if this would come to pass…surely something bad!….but…I do know that as I taught my OWN boys as they were growing up: “Accidents happen when you are messing around.” And….N. Korea is surely/as a fact “messing around” with nuclear materials/weapons. I must have a waking fear of this situation to have it come into my night thoughts…….

    Liked by 1 person

    • I agree. It’s easy to get all “macho” when discussing nukes. They aren’t so easy to contain. Once that genie is out of the bottle it means a lot of innocent people will die.

      We used to have this concept called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) that was supposed to keep the lid on everyone. As insane as that was, it sort of worked.

      Now we have small nations and rogue groups who have purchased micro-nukes, as well as larger countries like India and Pakistan who have them. Israel, always a wild card, has had them for years but doesn’t openly admit it.

      While everyone points at Russia they aren’t the ones to worry about. They’ll use them if necessary, but they are more sensible. They have a lot to lose and they don’t want to lose it.

      I’ve always suspected that the destruction will come from the Middle East. At least that’s where it will start. That is one of those problems they didn’t consider. When you ain’t got nothin’, you got nothin’ to lose.

      Liked by 1 person

      • “I’ve always suspected that the destruction will come from the Middle East. ” Interesting you’d say that-I’ve always thought the Leaders of all the World’s most powerful Countries would prefer almost ANYTHING to nuclear annihilation,and most smaller powers would rightly realize that,to push the big red button was to guarantee their Country’s total destruction. Therefore,the leader to push the button would be the Leader of some small pi$$ant Country with about ONE nuclear missile to its name and an absolute nutcase in control,figuring if HE launched on US,WE’D think it was Russia or China and launch on THEM,,and in one swoop HE would “own” the World. (This kind of madness has NOTHING to do with logic.).


        • Yeah, that’s how I see it. As long as the nukes were confined to the larger (hopefully more responsible) countries, we didn’t have much to worry about. They had too much to lose.

          The problem began when Israel and some others began selling nukes to other customers. Coupled with that, the collapse of the USSR left several devices in remote places that were stolen and sold on the black market.

          Since the Middle East has always been a place of chaos, it is logical to look there for a triggering event. Others might be Pakistan or India. North Korea is another. These places tend to let their emotions run amok. That’s OK when the most you can do is hack each other up. It’s another matter when you can poison the world.


  7. Funny I imagined the nuclear football to be a bit more technologically sophisticated than this device looks, although about the same size.
    With the US and NATO in violation of our agreement with Russia after the fall of the Soviet empire not to move east, surrounding the borders of Russia with military bases and hostile threats in the Ukraine, Baltics and especially Syria we may be more near a nuclear war than everhttp://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/08/16/putin-warns-of-war-infowar-interview-with-pcr/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s