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:
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’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.
They target “allies” if they’re not "ally"ing hard enough. Threatening the world to get what they want