DEFCON 5 Level Change Discussion

[Torch]

mostly due to alert fatigue, in the DWS sense.

We do not consider alert fatigue when determining the DEFCON level. DEFCON levels are solely based on the potential threat.

 

[Spyglass]

I have seen different explainations from different staff on this. It was basically explained to me that if we were at say, DEFCON 4 for more than a year, then it would be accepted as a new "normal" and then people would become desensitized, or going to DEFCON 3 would have less impact. By backing down to 5 every so often, it keeps things "fresh".

That is the way I remember one staff member explaining it, this was years ago.

We do not consider alert fatigue when determining the DEFCON level. DEFCON levels are solely based on the potential threat.

 

[DarkNoon]

Late to the party…but I do think DEFCON5 is the right move right now, mostly due to alert fatigue, in the DWS sense.

I think you may have misinterpreted what I meant many years ago. It is not alert fatigue. It is something I explained again recently.

The long term risk is greater, but the alert level does not represent long term risks. It represents only immediate risks. Iran is no longer anywhere near being an imminent nuclear threat. However, the long term risk has increased.

But again, long term risks, much like those associated with the war between Ukraine and Russia, are not necessarily reflected in an alert level intended to represent an imminent threat.

I hope that makes sense. Sorry I was so unclear when I was staff and we had those private conversations.

Hence why I agree and maybe likely why alert level at 5. Long term risk increased, likly dramatically. However immediate risk is non existent at current time IMHO.

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

The long term nuclear instability has definitely increased now that Iran is going to be more interested in pursuing nuclear weapons.