https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
“Israel could “bring down the pillars of the world (attack Moscow and European capitals for instance)” as well as the “holy places of Islam.” and that the “abandonment of proportionality is the essence” of the Samson Option.” - Ron Rosenbaum
”For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away—have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?” - David Perlmutter
https://www.theinteldrop.org/2025/06/17/new-leak-reveals-israels-samson-option-includes-american-cities-on-nuclear-target-list/
According to security analysts who have reviewed the leaked documents, cities identified in the alleged target list include New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and the NORAD command center in Colorado. Also named are Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Arab forces were overwhelming Israeli forces and Prime Minister Golda Meir authorized a nuclear alert and ordered 13 atomic bombs be readied for use by missiles and aircraft. The Israeli Ambassador informed President Richard Nixon that “very serious conclusions” may occur if the United States did not airlift supplies. Nixon complied. This is seen by some commentators on the subject as the first threat of the use of the Samson Option.
Here is a map showing countries that are within Israel’s nuclear targeting range:
Well russians got same idea, what’s the point of the world if russia is not in it ;D not surprised at all, they’re just old mad wankers
Whataboutism
Ok so no this is completely wrong.
Russia’s “Dead Hand” is a “guaranteed second-strike” that activates only if their nuclear C&C is destroyed. This system is precisely designed to reinforce the logic of MAD and is thus counter-escalatory.
This from the Zionist entity is the complete and total opposite in every possible way. They talk about it as though it is defensive but this is a nuclear first-strike. They don’t just target their enemies but their allies too. This is the most grotesque and despicable extortion leveled against the whole world
They target “allies” if they’re not "ally"ing hard enough. Threatening the world to get what they want
They’re two sides of the same coin and not functionally much different. In a world with nuclear weapons everyone must have a “last resort” strategy like this: the perception of the destruction of the state triggers nuclear annihilation (against anyone/everyone; you plan for all options). The only other theorized response is to voluntarily roll over and die so humanity can live, and nobody with nukes is going to admit to that.
In a real scenario you could never verify if the first launch was from a credible threat retaliation or not. Even if you could, first strike vs retaliatory is cold comfort when everyone is starving in a nuclear winter. It’s not worth getting upset over a wikipedia article with a bunch of journalist quotes and opinion pieces. We’ve known about MAD since 1962.
So your whole argument is that in a nuclear exchange it could be hard in practice to identify the initial aggressor, therefore there is no meaningful difference between a nuclear first strike and a nuclear second strike? Is that what you are saying?
Yes it would be damn near impossible because basically all communication would be dead as fast as it happens and any belligerents wouldn’t be in any shape to give convincing evidence (assuming they survive and it doesn’t trigger a worldwide exchange).
If two countries are at the brink anything can happen: a radar blip, a failed first launch, fog of war, equipment malfunction, etc… Nobody’s official policy is “we’ll nuke anyone for any reason”, they always claim self preservation/retaliation. If a conventional war with Iran goes poorly it would be a rapid flurry of Israel maybe launches or threatens to launch => China (or whoever) retaliates => USA (or whoever) counters => comms are disrupted or locked down => troops are mobilized etc…
The same events could be true of a purported dead man switch system: can anyone prove that the switch was improperly triggered? Does it matter now that most people involved are ashes?
It would be over in about an hour or two and would take decades to properly reconstruct, if ever. Every state would jump at the chance to frame the tragedy in their favorite light and you personally will never ever know the truth.
In that light it doesn’t make any sense to worry about speculation or opinion pieces or rumors. There never will be a way to prove or disprove theoretical apocalyptic policies. There are a billion reasons to criticize Israel and hate Zionists but this isn’t much better than a puff piece.
So I definitely agree that one a nuclear exchange happens things get extremely complicated.
I do NOT agree that makes any sort of equivalency between this Zionist first-use doctrine (if it exists) and Dead Hand.
I view it as a philosophical difference more than anything. Only an absolute lunatic would actually push the button without an extreme amount of pressure; it’s just not a rational action of self preservation. A Solomon plan, as in the parable, is a choice that will kill you. Say what you will about the people pulling Israel’s strings but they have enough sanity and power lust to not throw it all away.
All nuclear players are handling loaded guns. Any bluster or rhetoric is hot air because you don’t know what they’re made of until they pull the trigger. And that is the most unique decision in human history in the hands of a tiny group of people. Nobody should ever have been given the personal power to vaporize entire cities, you can’t generalize that failing to a state policy level.
Complicated dead man switches don’t solve the problem or absolve the decision maker, it’s just a layer of abstraction. You still have to choose to enable it and accept the consequences of killing millions of people. Telling the world it’s enabled is just indicating your current line in the sand (a nuclear event). That’s no different than setting a line in the sand for a conventional threat to your capital city. Either may be an understandable and high pressure threat to the individual decision makers: both are reactions to the other belligerent, both end with the button pusher dead.
And both sides always have the option to renege on their promise and launch first before that line. Even if they hold to their promise, saying “I warned you” doesn’t make a mass revenge holocaust or suicidal holocaust more ethical than the other. The only humane choice is total disarmament and deterrence with an empty gun, which will never happen of course.
unfortunately I think the only way we’ll regress to sticks and stones is long after just such an apocalypse and all the leftovers get used up. because we’re certainly not intelligent enough to recognize the danger.
just the US alone… the idea that Trump’s insanity is next to the football 24/7 should make anyone sick if they can read and have half a brain.
ironically climate change will take a few decades to really start slaughtering people and we see it coming, but are ignoring the problem, just like nuclear weapons.
fuck my species, they’re too clever and too fucking dumb all at the same time.