Much attention has recently been paid to an article by Max Tegmark, in which he gives the odds of nuclear armageddon arising from the Russia-Ukraine war as one in six. It’s a highly reductive analysis (of the sort one might expect from someone with a mathematical background), which might explain both its apparent appeal and the trenchant criticism it has received.
Tegmark doesn’t document his chain of reasoning in any serious way – he just pulls probabilities out of thin air – so while it’s difficult to infer his prior assumptions, many who consider the risk of nuclear war to be high seem to make a few false assumptions:
- That the use by Putin of tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) would turn around the situation on the battlefield, absent a military response from the West.
- That the non-military consequences of the use of TNW wouldn’t be that dangerous for Putin.
- That increased support for Ukraine by the West would increase the risk of full-scale nuclear war, and decreased support would decrease the risk.
I’ll address each of these in turn.
Tactical nukes don’t smell like victory
There’s no clear way to define a TNW, but roughly speaking it’s a relatively short range, low-yield weapon – anything up to 30 kilotons, or perhaps as high as 100 kilotons. Regardless of the precise definition, everyone agrees that Russia has the world’s largest and most varied arsenal of TNW, with many Russian systems (such as the Iskander surface-to-surface missile) having been designed for both conventional and nuclear use. It’s debatable whether their doctrine on the use of TNW would really allow them to be deployed in the event of, say, the Ukrainian Army entering Crimea (would that amount to a threat to the “very existence of the state”?), or whether the Russian state apparatus – those who would have to sign off on it – would back Putin if he decided to use them. It’s also debatable whether individual officers would obey a launch order, knowing that the retaliation from the West could be personally fatal; but nevertheless, they do have the weaponry.
As discussed recently by Justin Bronk and also by William Alberque there are, broadly speaking, three possible scenarios for the use of TNW.
First, a “demonstrative” test in an unpopulated area (say, the Black Sea or the Novaya Zemlya Test Site). This would be tantamount to breaking the long-held “nuclear taboo” without any result except to strengthen Western support for Ukraine, and being extremely damaging for Russia and its interests around the world. This therefore seems very unlikely.
The next scenario would involve a strike against a Ukrainian population centre, which would definitely break the “nuclear taboo”. Again, the military value would likely be small, but the political fallout would be huge, not just from other countries but also from the Russian population – many of whom have relatives in Ukraine. Thus it would not only turn the world against Putin and the Russian political elite, it would make them vulnerable internally. The idea that such a strike would demoralise the Ukrainian military and population, rather than make them ever-more-implacably opposed to, and even more fiercely determined to defeat Russia, is at best questionable: the moral effect could, instead, be the complete collapse of the Russian will to fight. Again, this scenario is very unlikely.
This leaves the third scenario: battlefield use of TNW. The first problem here is that these weapons aren’t as devastating as people tend to think. For example, a simulation of a large (30kt) TNW airburst over Mariupol gives a result with significantly fewer casualties than what Russia “achieved” with conventional weaponry, and leaves the majority of buildings still standing. A simulated 10kt detonation wouldn’t really be life-threatening to humans much beyond a mile.
Such an attack wouldn’t necessarily confer any real military advantage unless there were large concentrations of Ukrainian forces in the blast/radiation zone – but this doesn’t match the Ukrainian disposition of forces. While Russia would have been able to destroy Azovstal and its defenders with a single TNW, other such concentrations of forces would be hard to find, let alone target in such a way that Russian forces wouldn’t also be in the danger zone (impossible on the front lines), meaning Russia would have to expend large numbers (dozens, or even hundreds) of nukes in order to destroy enough of the Ukrainian forces to achieve a strategic effect – and this would of course raise the risk of a Western military response very greatly.
But this brings us to the next problem, which is the effect on Russian forces. Regardless of what TNW could do to Ukrainian troops, there would also be the very considerable risk that Russian troops (already severely demoralised and prone to desertion) would be so stressed by witnessing the use of TNW that they might flee. They obviously don’t have hazmat suits and almost certainly no potassium iodide on hand, and while some of them may have been stupid enough to dig trenches near the Chernobyl NPP earlier in the war, I doubt they’re unaware of the possibility that deadly radioactive fallout could easily land on them. They might also believe that even being in sight of such a blast would make them vulnerable to radiation sickness or later cancers – and depending on the distance, that could well be true. It would take a brave officer to order an advance through an area recently hit by a nuclear bomb, with any assertions (however accurate they might be) that the post-blast risk would be minimal being scarcely credible.
But there’s another problem. As William Alberque notes:
Ukraine does not operate with a large enough concentration of forces to justify a 10–100 kiloton blast. Smaller nuclear weapons would be of even less use, as below 10 kilotons, their effects are overtaken by those of high-end precision mass-effect artillery, such as the Tornado-G and -S and the TOS-1M/1A and TOS-2, especially when using thermobaric warheads.
In short, not only could battlefield use of TNW in Ukraine be massively counter-productive for Russia, in the end it might only barely be more effective than conventional systems.
This is of course to assume Russian TNW systems actually exploded as intended, that the Ukrainian Army (with a roughly 50% kill rate) didn’t shoot down the missiles, and that they weren’t destroyed using HIMARS or other systems while being transported and prepared for use. Russia stores its nuclear warheads in a few well-known locations, and uses special troops and transport methods for nuclear warheads that would likely (though not definitely) be observed in advance. In addition, any build-up to the use of TNW would require Russia to ramp up its overall nuclear preparedness, which would be obvious to the West (and therefore Ukraine). Essentially, Ukraine would have advanced notice and could prepare accordingly.
Putin would also have to consider that the nuclear fallout could disperse over hundreds of miles and pose a serious risk to the civilian population not just in Ukraine, but also potentially in Russia. That’s unlikely to be popular. And the annihilation of significant parts of the territory that Russia seeks to conquer, while leaving behind a lot of irradiated material that could make certain areas uninhabitable (or at least agriculturally unproductive), would vitiate the purpose of the invasion to such a degree that Putin could hardly claim much of a victory.
Tactical nukes are no Wunderwaffe, and indeed Putin does seem to be aware that their value to him lies in having them, not using them – which is why he takes the greatest possible advantage by (implausibly) threatening their use every other week.
There would be a non-military response
There is of course the likelihood that Russian forces in Ukraine would be targeted and severely degraded by NATO following any use of TNW (thus losing Putin the war much more quickly), but less attention has been paid to the non-military ramifications of breaking the long-held “nuclear taboo”. This is presumably because the near-inevitable military response is far more exciting to consider, but what else might happen in the event that Russia used TNW in Ukraine?
One likely outcome is that Russia would find itself cut off not just by Western nations but also by China, India, Brazil, Hungary and other fence-sitters. In being cut off by China – on which it now depends very heavily – it could potentially lose not only a major hydrocarbon market but also the ability to import many goods, especially high-tech goods – without which it couldn’t rebuild its already heavily depleted military, not to mention the wider economy. And while this wouldn’t happen overnight, it could result in a total collapse of the Russian economy. The first against the wall would be Putin, but he might hope to survive as a puppet of Beijing – although that would depend on internal Russian politics, and partly on the Western non-military response. In short, walking away from Ukraine ought to be preferable to Putin than to lose Ukraine and his few remaining friends.
Breaking the nuclear taboo could also cost the support of usually-reliable countries like Iran and North Korea. Leaving aside the dubious fatwa against the use of nuclear weapons, Iran would have to consider that accepting the use of TNW could be to invite Israel to deploy them against Iranian nuclear facilities, some of which are buried deep underground to protect against conventional “bunker-buster” bombs; but in any event, it would greatly increase the odds of Israel launching strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities in the near term. Given this, it may not be an entirely unconnected fact that Iran has not accepted the results of the sham referenda in the occupied parts of Ukraine, which some consider might be a precursor to the use of TNW.
Even North Korea would likely have to condemn the use of TNW, not just due to pressure from Beijing, but also because it knows that a world in which nuclear weapons are actually used (rather than merely developed shoddily) would put itself at risk of a pre-emptive conventional or TNW strike from the US, which it most fears.
Further, there could be severe direct impacts on Russian elites resulting from the near-inevitable confiscation of all Russian-held assets in the West, and the possibility of serious divisions and political instability inside Russia that could be stoked by Western intelligence services, which (so far as is publicly known) have not attempted to meddle in post-Soviet Russian internal affairs. Besides information warfare and on-the-ground subversion of Russian politics, it’s even possible that more gung-ho outfits like the CIA might get into the already-popular Russian defenestration game.
In sum, Putin and his inner circle would have to consider that using TNW would be to paint a massive target on their own back, even in the absence of a Western military response.
“De-escalation” doesn’t mean weakness
As noted by Tegmark in response to some of his critics, the term “de-escalation” is often misunderstood. It doesn’t mean appeasement, capitulation or even necessarily some form of compromise.
In a hostage situation where armed police are surrounding a building and a negotiator is called upon to persuade the hostage-taker to give himself up, the means of de-escalation is to persuade the hostage-taker – from a position of strength, and in a calm and reasonable manner – that any of his escalatory options, such as shooting at the police or killing the hostage, will leave him worse off in the end. In short, “we have a bigger stick”.
Such it is with Ukraine. Reducing support for Ukraine in the face of Putin’s nuclear blackmail would only be the “first sip of the bitterest cup”, condemning Ukrainians to slavery and emboldening Putin (and others) to repeat the trick, greatly increasing the chances of facing a nuclear conflict of some kind further down the road, and leaving all countries not under a “nuclear umbrella” even more vulnerable to exploitation by the mad and the bad. It would also greatly incentivise non-nuclear states to develop nuclear weapons, and greatly decrease the credibility of a number of security guarantees (particularly the U.S. nuclear umbrella), causing a seismic shift in international relations and creating a much more dangerous world for us and future generations.
The correct means of de-escalation in this current environment is to communicate to Putin (and his inner circle) that nothing – including the use of nuclear weapons of any sort – will help his cause. Given that he may not yet have realised that he will lose this war, the best means of communicating that fact would be to increase Ukraine’s fighting strength, since if this is a dangerous moment for the world then it’s because the support so far provided has not been of the overwhelming kind. Providing modern tanks, jets and longer-range missiles would be truly decisive – and obviously so to the Russian population. This is Putin’s off-ramp in the face of a restless populace: “Don’t blame me, it was NATO wot dunnit.”
And thus can we purchase peace in our time for Europe.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Finally a picture on DS that doesn’t make me feel nauseous.
Don’t those elephants just look so happy and free? Contrast it with the picture below in the article about Austria with those disgusting, menacing, repressive stormtroopers harassing citizens for nothing more than going about their daily lives.
…
One lives more in one day than the other its entire life.
Lions are the very icon of freedom & living life to the fullest, even if they are lazy bastards.
Don’t worry I’m sure DS can come up with a picture of Bojo mounting a lion..
A pig surely? Spit roast with Cameron perhaps?
Oh god sorry, that’s just too much
“Of course, any new variant should be treated with extreme caution, “
I’m so tired of all this NIMBYism. Too many people are happy to swallow all of this crap – until it’s their problem. Yes of course it’s tragic that this stigma will hit Botswana hard but that’s because it’s all nonsense not because it’s an unfortunate truth.
“Of course, any new variant should be treated with extreme caution,“
They feel obliged to parrot this nonsense or they won’t be taken seriously. This is compliance bordering on complicity.
In France everyone is so absolutely petrified of the Omacron variant they’re breaking out the best Bordeaux for petit-déjeuner..
If an opponent can successfully stick “Omicron” to “O Macron” then Macron will lose the election, because being perceived as a great big pile of Dangerous Lergy is a terrible look for a campaigning politician, but there’s a long way to go. He hasn’t even started campaigning yet.
To right..
Never mind about Botswana – the tourist industry in Brentwood and Nottingham will be devastated!!
“Of course, any new variant should be treated with extreme caution”
Why? And why should the gunk be any less useless than it is?
How much more of this con game can the public absorb without twigging it’s a myth about a virus of no high consequence.
“Wearing masks here is compulsory and all shops/offices/banks have sanitising spray at the door and a guard to remind forgetful patrons.”
Sorry that you bought into the narrative. Now that they’ve spun your country into the fear campaign, you are stuck dealing with consequences. Maybe you should just pitch your tourism industry to the skeptics. I can promise that nobody on this site buys the story about this variant being created in Botswana anyway.
Certainly nobody here is going to be buying the hype and the panic responses.
Apart from “raye” and the few other trolls, who get paid to stalk this site.
Appears we have the Dr Jekyll “rayc” today:
“rayc
30 minutes ago
Well, the last part of the postcard sounds like the author is fully subscribed to the official agenda and more than happy to be fucked some more. Until this sort of Stockholm syndrome virus is eradicated from the brain of everyone on the planet, the pandemic will never end.”
I’d love to go to Botswana, but I’m not going until they allow me to go with a plain uncluttered face for all to see.
amanuensis, made a comment in another thread about what if there was a real threat from a novel highly infectious killer disease, (put to one side covid, we all know now it’s not as billed) but have a grown up debate.
21st century air travel is the best way to spread infectious disease around the planet within a few hours! That’s a fact, (if you accept the principles of germ theory).
Quarantine has been a tried & tested method for preventing transmission of disease for decades, I don’t find it unreasonable as a public health measure to limit travel & impose restrictions such as quarantine.
International air travel isn’t a human right, flying people around the world to protect the tourist sector of a country isn’t reason enough to spread disease, discuss as a grown up?
OK back to conspiracy theory, it’s too bloody late to stop covid now, even if you’re a believer, so let it rip.
I doubt it matters. 10%+ IFR rate, society completely collapses and the preppers take over, ‘elites’ go into their bunker and the army try and lock everything down, until they realise it’s hopeless and their families are dying also, at which point it’s everyman for himself.
I’m almost swayed by this response. Given the hysteria from covid I’d say an actual pandemic would result in anarchy, no matter how wonderful the plans were, and how many preparatory exercises were undertaken.
We probably shouldn’t worry so much about it and should just try to be happy.
But it was the media & psychologists that created that hysteria!
It doesn’t take much to close boarders, though the Tories make it look difficult, I admit.
Yours & Paul B’s, prognosis makes it look decidedly dystopian, which wasn’t the direction or context my post was meant to take FFS.
But don’t worry i’m in a better position than most to cope with the worst case scenario,
The problem with that argument (which is certainly internally coherent) is that if you allow governments powers to act in an “emergency”, you will inevitably soon face an “emergency”.
As in this case, once you concede the point you make, the powers you allow will be abused in response to fatuous non-threats like a new “variant” of a globally endemic cold virus (or indeed covid generally).
Best imo to make it as hard as possible for them to exercise such powers, except in specific, localised and defined cases.
I doubt many people would want to live in my ideal world, because we wouldn’t have government, or international air travel.
In reality, it’s too late, government assumed parental responsibility over its citizens long ago.
My post was made purely in practical terms, excluding Hollywood scenarios, e.g. Paul B.
“I doubt many people would want to live in my ideal world, because we wouldn’t have government, or international air travel.”
I can’t imagine how a world would manage without a government of sorts – even ants have organisation. And international air travel is great – I certainly intend to make up for lost flying with all this money I’ve save up since March 2020! Ryanair Stansted to Helsinki £4 cheapest.
The problem with that argument is that it implies that the spread of disease is a bad thing.
Actually the spread of viruses and bacteria is a really good thing. I am sure that thanks to all the mixing and travelling the human immune system as a whole has never been more exercised or in better shape.
I agree.
Indeed, in an ecological sense pathogens have an important function, remove emotive societal moralistic arguments, you’re left with a natural process.
Buy a new car and have it stand in your drive for 20 years. Don’t drive it. After 20 years it is not fit to drive any more – all rubber pipes gone hard, the chemicals in electric components decomposed, brake fluid has absorbed water and the pistons have rusted solid. A car needs to be run and maintained, as does the human body – bacteria and viruses to keep us trained and topped up and in condition to tackle the tough ones.
“Actually the spread of viruses and bacteria is a really good thing. I am sure that thanks to all the mixing and travelling the human immune system as a whole has never been more exercised or in better shape.”
That’s true up to a point, mostly because we’ve long ago assimilated, and paid the blood price for doing so, all the really bad ones. A modern day equivalent of the Black Death or the diseases that the primitive societies of the New World were hit by when they were recontacted by the human mainstream after centuries of isolation would not be acceptable as just a route to immunity.
Hypothetically, such a new disease could arise, though covid obviously wasn’t it.
“21st century air travel is the best way to spread infectious disease around the planet within a few hours!”
Air travel is the only way to spread any physical stuff around the planet in a few hours.
It has the drawback that it can be stopped.
Regarding infectious disease, from a military point of view you might want to
The idea that the rulers are doing nothing more than watching their screens and finding out that X has happened, Y has happened, and so on, is in the running for the biggest lie of all during the current period.
I said as much earlier in another thread.
“deposit your stuff in various places around the planet first”
Like the Chinese ‘students’ in all of the UK universities and colleges? Like the Boys From Brazil!
Nothing is a right.
The only rights you or I or anyone have are those which we are capable of defending. If you are incapable of defending your bodily autonomy and the state forces you to take a medical treatment, then you have no right to bodily autonomy. At best you have a claim you are impotent to defend.
So I claim a right to travel internationally. And I denounce nation states that by means of violence and intimidation have given themselves the right to the land and to withhold it from anyone who the self appointed rulers of the land consider not of that land.
Fat lot of good my claim does, but I claim it nonetheless.
How do you enforce your right to get on someone else’s plane? It’s a great philosophical debating point which I would enjoy having & actually mostly agree with, but it’s not a practical relevant debating point in industrial civilization, where we’re all slaves.
I don’t claim a right to get on someone else’s plane.
I claim a right to freely reach an agreement with someone who has a plane to take me where I want to go.
And I claim the right to go wherever I like, however I might get there.
Unfortunately I have no means to defend my claims. So I don’t have those rights. But I believe I should have them.
Thanks for the mention.
I’d say that the important bit is to tell the truth to the public.
In the case of covid, the right thing to have done is to have said around May 2020 ‘thanks for the response — it was very important that you locked down because we didn’t know, but thankfully we escaped lightly this time‘.
Instead they have perpetuated the over-reaction, with continued threats and warnings. Given then everyone now knows that covid isn’t a massive danger (not benign, sure, but also not killing everyone) they’re adapting themselves to the constant message of doom coming from authorities around the world.
Ie, people now regard governments telling them of terrible risks and getting them to live under restrictions as ‘normal’ — what will they say/do to get people to change behaviours if an actual deadly pandemic comes?
I think it is too late. If we did get a problem pandemic it would kill huge numbers before people changed behaviours. If we’re lucky this we won’t get another pandemic in the next 10 years or so.
That’s the problem with modern society, i.e. socialism, people won’t take responsibility for their own lives & politicians are governed by polls, so yes no authority would likely act quicken enough in a real scenario!
In fact, I think the neoliberal obsession with eradicating disease is an erroneous one doomed to failure.
But that wasn’t my point I was merely addressing practical mitigation measures, which you seem to appear to be rowing back on, ya pain in the ****! (sarc).
Well Mr Gates has been muttering about Smallpox – Marburg for quite a while.. so nothing would surprise now. These creeps will have to keep doubling down to achieve their goals, and at the end of the day we are regarded as ‘useless eaters’..
“In the case of covid, the right thing to have done is to have said around May 2020 ‘thanks for the response — it was very important that you locked down because we didn’t know, but thankfully we escaped lightly this time‘.”
Absolutely not!
The lockdowns were criminal overreactions that they only got away with by gross exaggeration and massive fear propaganda. We certainly knew enough by March 2020 to know that lockdowns weren’t needed. As a few sane countries proved.
We should have stuck to the flu pandemic preparedness plan we had worked on for years, and which the UK regime set out to follow. It was perfectly sufficient. Unsurprisingly, letting fear and panic rule over our reason didn’t end well.
“If we did get a problem pandemic it would kill huge numbers before people changed behaviours. If we’re lucky this we won’t get another pandemic in the next 10 years or so.”
The “crying wolf” point is fair enough, but since we have not had a “problem pandemic” in many decades (and arguably one is hugely unlikely to arise in the modern world at all), and seem to have pandemics similar to this one (ie best responded to by keeping calm and carrying on) every few decades, maybe it’s a good thing if people learn to ignore the panic-mongers.
“I’d say that the important bit is to tell the truth to the public.“
Absolutely, but our culture long ago accepted that it was far too dangerous to tell people the truth. Instead we accept a managerial “controlling panic” rationalisation for paternalist lying.
“International air travel isn’t a human right”
Then it could be argued that walking from your home to the shops isn’t a human right. There are no ‘rights’ – we are all lucky in what we are allowed to do by those who have the big sticks, guns, and nuclear weapons and money.
OK stop with the stupid shit, if you’ve got your own plane then fine, but if you’re using EasyJet you’re fucked. OK?
I knew expecting a grown-up debate on current practicalities was a mistake.
‘The game lodges in northern Botswana employ hundreds of local people and most have managed to scrabble through the last two years.’
Other board games were available
Not a lot of use complaining now. The time to tell these people to fuck off was in March 2020
And now they have the Monopoly with their very own mutant virus.
Which has put them all at Risk.
You can’t really complain if you then go on to demonstrate how far you have bought into the bullshit. You are complicit in maintaining the very nonsense that you say is affecting your economy so much.
BBC News website rugby sides Cardiff and Scarlets return from South Africa.
A new Covid variant circulating in South Africa has seen the country put on the UK red travel list.
The Welsh regions had travelled out there earlier this week for the resumption of the United Rugby Championship.
Answering a query from Newport West MP Ruth Jones in the House of Commons, Javid replied: “As for what can be done to try and get them back before this deadline… nothing.”
Helpful little cunt isn’t he
Botswana, the covid-infested, variant-ridden hellhole that had a total of just six, PCR scam enabled, supposed ‘covid’ deaths last week.
Yeah, but that’s 0.0000001% of their population…….
And…and… something something . EXPONENTIAL…something something! [excited hyperventilation]
But, they aren’t journalists, are they? Hacks at best, I’d say. And not even honest hacks.
Well, I blame TY’s propensity to lick clean the anus of the execrable Johnson and Tory gummint for not seeing this would happen.
the journalistic spheres inability to hold them to account for the last 2 years worth of cockups, and pushing the fear porn on their behalf will be remembered
I am filled with sympathy right up to the point at which I read how the country is slavishly following mask rules, hand sanitising rules and are essentially begging for the authorities to declare the jab is good against its “variant” so that the jabbed can be allowed to go there without hassle.
So in essence they are complaining that they have been good boys, followed all the rules and are being punished unfairly.
At which point I think they are turning themselves into slaves of the bio-security super state just like everyone else and they can go and rot.
Sympathy from me: zero.
Let’s have a prediction then for 17:00, closest wins?
Lots to choose from in freedom bingo:
Masks
Lockdown
Pureblood lockdown
Circuit Breaker
Passports
Curfew
Levels 1-5
R0
Xmas lockdown
Flatten the sombrero
Heavy heart
No worse than Delta
No restrictions
Following the science
Monitoring closely
Get triple boosted jabbed to save granny at xmas?!
HOUSE!
Pepa Pig?
An admission that Jabid is his love child?
We are at war with Germany?
Susan Michie wants to finger your entrails.
The chocolate ration is increased?
Matt Hancock is Harrys dad?
Not sure I can face it. Have a stiff drink at hand, but suspect that won’t suffice.
Am I reading the Guardian?
Sob story from presumably quite wealthy expat , one of the worried well. How dreadful its happened when all the NPIs were being followed. Have you had your booster of those vaccines that are working so well?
I wouldn’t mind betting that the locals dispense of all the crap as soon as they head home, and that the majority of any illness/deaths in Botswana is within the ex-pat communities, just like the rest of sub-saharan africa.
Well, the last part of the postcard sounds like the author is fully subscribed to the official agenda and more than happy to be fucked some more. Until this sort of Stockholm syndrome virus is eradicated from the brain of everyone on the planet, the pandemic will never end.
Is this some sort of payback by our lords and masters against pesky non-covidian Africa, for simply refusing to be genuinely affected by it?
Criminal, literally creating poverty, because they can
” Bullingdon Club initiation ceremony claim: New members of David Cameron’s old club ‘burn £50 note in front of beggar’ “
Boris Johnson sounds ill – he is labouring when he inhales.
Stress, he knows what he is doing, he knows we know what he is doing
Agreed.. and to be honest I thought the Peppa Pig waffling incident was not what it at first seemed. It struck me as signalling. That was my initial gut reaction anyway, it seemed contrived on his part, and I’m as sceptical and against what’s going on as anyone on here..
He’s good at getting something for the media to focus on and they did
Codename Peppa = release the Botswana Variant!
So… ‘more transmissible and can evade jab based spread reduction….’
Well, more transmissible is good and they repeatedly tell us the jabs don’t stop spread – seriously wtf kind of clown world am I living in….?
First journalist out the gate “WHY AREN’T YOU LOCKING DOWN HARD NOW, IS ANYONE ON SAGE SAYING LOCK DOWN NOW AND IF NOT WHY NOT?!?!?”
“Botswana variant”? Isn’t that racist?
Bots are not a race. They are generated by computers
Just saw the latest announcements.
I increasingly think this will never end. Ever.
Two years of being goaded to live in fear.
That is already over 2 per cent of a normal human life span.
Yet another “variant” to frighten everyone with.
This can be perpetuated for ever.
And it is all based on unproven Germ Theory.
Nobody has ever shown experimentally that viruses make people ill.
If anyone on this site knows of a study that showed that then please say so.
Germ Theory is just medical dogma.
The journalists are mental, they all need to get out in the real world, we do not care.
OMICRON = MORONIC = yes apt and a laugh, but..
OMICRON = ONCOMIR = a much more sinister anagram. It’s microRNA associated with cancer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oncomir
And just by chance, Israel on Thursday held a “war game drill” OMEGA in case of an outbreak of a new lethal variant of Covid-19. Just a coincidence of course..
OMEGA goes live and then OMICRON appears worldwide a day later..
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/middle-east/article/3155763/israel-holds-war-game-case-lethal-new-coronavirus-strain
Yes thanks to many scientists willing to speak the truth we know this new variant is mild and marking the end of the road for COVID-19.