Swiss government issuing potassium iodide tablets to population

originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: Gothmog

I’m surprised they don’t have a vaccine for those by now. 🤔

Already there and awaiting the right time for mandate.

a reply to: deltaalphanovember

It's not my intention to fear monger,

Not you at all.
Media.
Fear sells.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: network dude

Iran doesnt have nukes, yet.... as far as we know....

It's worth investigating any earthquakes in Iran in recent years. Could they indicate underground testing? I do not know enough on the subject. There was one yesterday, a 5.5 in Hormazogan province.

originally posted by: MetalChickAmy

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: network dude

Iran doesnt have nukes, yet.... as far as we know....

It's worth investigating any earthquakes in Iran in recent years. Could they indicate underground testing? I do not know enough on the subject. There was one yesterday, a 5.5 in Hormazogan province.

An underground nuclear rest explosion has a very specific, un-disguisable, "fingerprint".


Given the geopolitical implications of Iran possessing a working nuclear weapon, if seismic monitors located around the world, detected such a "fingerprint" in data generated in or near Iran....


Alarm bells would go off loudly, and publicly, around the world.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: network dude

Iran doesnt have nukes, yet.... as far as we know....

Pakistan does though ,why wouldn't they give a couple to a fellow muslim nation?

a reply to: MetalChickAmy

radiation detection but im not well informed on this either.

a reply to: SprocketUK

MAD isnt a couple of nukes.

If Iran launched some borrowed nukes they would cease to exist.

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: network dude

Iran doesnt have nukes, yet.... as far as we know....

Pakistan does though ,why wouldn't they give a couple to a fellow muslim nation?

Because nuclear weapons are actually weapons systems, far more complicated than just the device itself.


Not like simply sharing a bag of crisps.


Even if Pakistan gave Iran a warhead, Iran would have no way to successfully deliver and detonate it.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: nugget1

This is all true, but I don't believe they have MAD capability, and we do.

If that is any reassurance at all. Small chance.

I think you're wrong, but pray you're right.

Twelve tablets sure is not going to protect the household very long. You would think they would send them maybe thirty or more.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: SprocketUK

MAD isnt a couple of nukes.

If Iran launched some borrowed nukes they would cease to exist.

of course they would, though you do have to wonder if the US/UK and or France will risk destruction on behalf of a bu
nch of already dead Israelis

a reply to: SprocketUK
Will Russia/China risk destruction on behalf of a bunch of already dead Iranians?

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: SprocketUK

MAD isnt a couple of nukes.

If Iran launched some borrowed nukes they would cease to exist.

to be honest we had MAD in the 1930s it didn't stop ww2 infact it encouraged it through tech advances

when you get to a point where one side thinks it can intercept the bombs of the other, it makes war winnable again, winnable to the demented.

look at how well iron dome is doing or the various anti missile systems that are around many are now anti ballistic missile shelds..

those who feel safe behind such shields can risk war..

Putin was never threatened by us missiles but by the various other missile shields being deployed alongside us missile sheilds.

the next step is then using the defensive shields for offensive operations.. which is the territory we are entering now.. mad is long gone bye bye..

a reply to: nickyw

no. we did not have MAD until the cold war awhile after ww2.

Are you certain what it means?

a reply to: nickyw

What Coyote said.

Mad only applies to when 2 or more sides have enough city busting nukes to destroy each the others

originally posted by: deltaalphanovember
This is terrifying. My brother and his son live in Zurich, Switzerland (for the last 20 years). His son is a naturalized citizen, he is not.

He just posted an image of a package they each received today via mail. It contains a box of potassium iodide tables (12 tablets).

Labelling is in English and Swiss German (I think):
Kalii iodidum 65g
To be taken only by order of the appropriate authorities
Protects the thyroid gland from radioactive iodine
Antidote

Manufacturer is DRAC

So is the Swiss government just being cautious, or do they know something we dont? Is the Israel Hamas war about to get a whole lot worse?

False Alarm!!!

Although they can be used in the event of a conflict involving nuclear weapons this is something the Swiss Government is doing quite often.

People living within a 50km radius of Swiss nuclear power plants will receive a fresh stock of iodine tablets over the coming weeks and until next April.

www.swissinfo.ch...

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: nickyw

no. we did not have MAD until the cold war awhile after ww2.

Are you certain what it means?

we had MAD before the fears of WMDs then where different to those now, they feared mass chemical attacks by bombers, under the banner the bomber would always get through, their fears came from the chemical warfare of the trenches of ww1 while ours are derived from what happened to Japan..

you might not fear the chemical weapons but they most certainly did and that fear changed when the single engine interceptor could stop the multi engined bomber, it changed the fear of all out destruction to make wars winnable.

my argument is that MAD hinges on our fears and if we can intercept the incoming threats..

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: nickyw

What Coyote said.

Mad only applies to when 2 or more sides have enough city busting nukes to destroy each the others

Those that lived the chemical warfare of the trenches in ww1 feared the next one would be chemical warfare that was their mad, just because you fear something different doesn't mean their fears of what another war would bring are fake or lesser.

why on earth do you think everyone in Britain had gas masks it wasn't to protect from high explosive shrapnel or falling buildings. it was to protect from the feared use of chemical weapons.. the fear hinged on the bomber always getting through I'm not sure if you have seen a blitzed city but they where pretty f*cked when the bomber did get through, but their mad hinged on the tech and interceptors being slower than the bomber.. tech changes like the hurricane levelled it out a bit..

we went to war with Saddam because they feared he had wmds to drop on us those are the same wmds the Nazis actually had stockpiled but never used so that element of mad remained in place even while we levelled each others cities.

what i am saying is our fears are different but the same tech changes neutralise mad and make war possible.

at a personal level I'm more concerned about biological warfare than nukes.

originally posted by: nickyw

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: nickyw

What Coyote said.

Mad only applies to when 2 or more sides have enough city busting nukes to destroy each the others

Those that lived the chemical warfare of the trenches in ww1 feared the next one would be chemical warfare that was their mad, just because you fear something different doesn't mean their fears of what another war would bring are fake or lesser.

why on earth do you think everyone in Britain had gas masks it wasn't to protect from high explosive shrapnel or falling buildings. it was to protect from the feared use of chemical weapons.. the fear hinged on the bomber always getting through I'm not sure if you have seen a blitzed city but they where pretty f*cked when the bomber did get through, but their mad hinged on the tech and interceptors being slower than the bomber.. tech changes like the hurricane levelled it out a bit..

we went to war with Saddam because they feared he had wmds to drop on us those are the same wmds the Nazis actually had stockpiled but never used so that element of mad remained in place even while we levelled each others cities.

what i am saying is our fears are different but the same tech changes neutralise mad and make war possible.

at a personal level I'm more concerned about biological warfare than nukes.

You are not talking about MAD though.

The term "mutual assured destruction", commonly abbreviated "MAD", was coined by Donald Brennan, a strategist working in Herman Kahn's Hudson Institute in 1962

a reply to: SprocketUK

so your argument is the phrase didn't comer about until much later so nothing like it could have existed before

yet before then the accepted mutually assured destruction was under the basnner4 the bomber would always get through that if country a sent its multi engined bombers it would send country b back to the stone age..

that changed with the tech advances of interceptors and radar.. Baldwins speech in 32 could equally apply to constraints he wanted imposed on airpower are the ones we have on nukes, if we survive ww3 the next war we'll be fearing the weapons that ended ww3, the same we now fear those from ww2 and they feared those from ww1

they might even come up with a new phrase to describe the kind of national destruction each war brings

I think it is well also for the man in the street to realize that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed, whatever people may tell him. The bomber will always get through, and it is very easy to understand that if you realize the area of space. Take any large town you like on this island or on the Continent within reach of an aerodrome. For the defense of that town and its suburbs, you have to split up the air into sectors for defense. Calculate that the bombing aeroplanes will be at least 20,000 feet high in the air, and perhaps higher, and it is a matter of mathematical calculation that you will have sectors of from tens to hundreds of cubic miles.

Imagine 100 cubic miles covered with cloud and fog, and you can calculate how many aeroplanes you would have to throw into that to have much chance of catching odd aeroplanes as they fly through it. It cannot be done, and there is no expert in Europe who will say that it can. The only defense is in offense, which means that you have got to kill more women and children more quickly than the enemy if you want to save yourselves. …
www.airandspaceforces.com...