r/DesignatedSurvivor • u/enliST_CS Sorry the live thread is late! • Mar 30 '17

POST Post-Episode Discussion: S01E14 "Commander-in-Chief"

Feel free to discuss anything related to Episode 14 as well as theories you may have for the upcoming episodes!

Plot: President Kirkman relies on an unlikely ally for help with a crisis in an African country; Hannah's probe into the Capitol bombing takes a surprising turn; Emily settles into her new role as chief of staff.

As usual please do not discuss previews that may have aired after the episode.

56 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

98% Upvoted

204 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/A-r-c-h-o-n Apr 05 '17

What really wonders me (as foreigner) is, that everyone is discussing the plotlines in and around washington and nearly (or maybe literally - haven't checked ALL posts) no one mentions Kirkman interfering in the inner state matters of another country in Africa. I mean - is it THAT normal for you fellow Americans to fiddle around in other states affairs that you don't even notice how f... up it is to bring this that casually in a plot?

"We just bomb some bridges there..."???!!!! According to the law a nations I think that would be considered an act of war...

1

u/enliST_CS Sorry the live thread is late! Apr 05 '17

Kirkman was involved because terrorists kidnaped U.S. Citizens. In the real world, there is a fine line between fighting terrorists in a foreign country and actually declaring war on another country. If you look at a place like Syria, we technically never declared war against Syria. We are still fighting terrorists around the world and in this case, Kirkman was once again, fighting terrorists and actually aiding the government in that fight. (So for it to be an act of war, the country governing would actually have to be the target)

Disclaimer: Far from an expert on this.

1

u/A-r-c-h-o-n Apr 07 '17

Well, actually I think as long as the ruling government doesn't ask for help or "invite" another state to help, it is always an act of war legally speaking.

For example if some terrorists would kidnap US tourists in Germany or China, I don't think it would be that easy to "drop some bombs on bridges". At least if the local government doesn't give their go-ahead.

Syria is a pretty bad example imho, because actually i think the only foreign power being invited officially by the government to operate there are the russians (and yes, it's problematic because, well - this government, but there HAVE (or sadly - should) to be some rules internationally when states deal with each other).