Nuke commanders say they can refuse illegal order

[ABNAK]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/11...e-refused.html

Okay, so let's say NK launches a nuke at us, whether it hits or not. Even if our ABM stuff knocks it down it still was an attempt. Analogy: if you're out and about and a shithead takes a swing at you, but you block it, do you wait for another or figure "It's on" and return the blow?

POTUS orders a retaliatory strike. The Nuke Gods say "No, but we can give you alternatives."

I have a fundamental problem with this, as what exactly constitues an "illegal" order? I can see if it was a pre-emptive move, as I don't think that would ever be justified. However, a return in kind is certainly justified but I get the impression that our top brass has become politically correct (witness Bergdahl and Manning). You HAVE to have the legitimate threat of being incinerated to deter using nukes in the first place.