Don't Panic...

[Darren Dirt]

...without familiarzing yourself in advance of the various icons/symbols to identify the exact nature of the panic-inducer!

http://www.emergencyalert.alberta.ca/content/about/alertdictionary.html
^ surprised to see bio/chemical/volcanic dangers, but no nuclear (!) ... also disappointed to see no "alien invasion" or "planet-shattering mega-quake" in the mix.

Our Program

Public Safety is everyone?s responsibility!

Disaster can occur anywhere, at anytime. It is your responsibility to ensure you are prepared if a disaster occurs. Alberta Emergency Alerts are issued to assist you?providing you with critical information about an immediate disaster, where it is occurring and what action you need to take.

Alerts are distributed to the public through various outlets including:

Radio and Television
Internet
RSS Feed
Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
Road Signage
Alberta Emergency Alert App

When disaster strikes, get more information and take appropriate action to protect yourself and your family.

Stop ● Listen ● Respond

...I somehow feel more paranoid now...

[Mr. Analog]

From what I understand this is actually a big problem in North America, after the Cold War both the Canadian and US Gov'ts slowly began dismantling the Emergency Broadcasting System (remember those?), this has left a gap in how large scale emergencies are handled on both National and Provincial levels

The theory goes that alerts could be issued by local media but that those systems could be compromised or not have correct information networks, government issued information, etc, so local governments are coming up with their own systems of "official" warning systems via multiple media outlets to try an address this gap standard media presents. There have been several systems in place over the last 60+ years for connecting information (starting with CONELRAD, which was designed first as a defense mechanism and then later as an official source of emergency information, eventually evolving into the EBS) run by the Federal and Provincial governments, but this system has since fallen into disrepair (even the lengthy cleanup of existing facilities is up in the air as both the Federal and Provincial gov'ts are unclear of ownership of the equipment / facilities)

If something like Yellowstone blew there would have to be more than just radio and television informing the public at large something big was happening, what steps to take, etc. So that's where this movement came from, to try and restore the EBS in some form or another.

Now, why Nuclear attack isn't listed there is an easy one; there are too few radar stations operational in what's left of NORAD to form a complete defense, radar range is strictly sight-to-sight so likely the northern most airports, military stations and remaining NORAD sites would detect an over the Pole missile attack. The other problem with a nuclear missile attack is the technology progressed to the point in the 70s where notification and verification of an attack was down to mere minutes, so even if a notification were given there is no real safety for the directly affected areas. You could still duck and cover I guess...

I just hope if there was a nuclear strike on the oil refinery complex here that I'm outside waiting for the bus, because I would be in the roughly 4 km immolation zone and I wouldn't know what hit me, if I'm downtown and near a window or outside I might get lucky and bite it quickly due to the shockwave / shrapnel, if I'm in the train tunnel my only hope is to gain super powers that somehow avoid radiation sickness and fly back to my home planet...

...not that I've been thinking of these scenarios since I saw "The Day After" when I was a kid or anything...

That said a nuclear strike against Canada is highly unlikely, since we are not a nuclear power (and haven't hosted nuclear weapons since 1984) we can "legally" be invaded by conventional forces, like Ukraine, so hooray for us

[Thorin]

Hazardous Material

An incident involving a hazardous material (chemical, biological, radiological, explosive, poisonous gas or other).

-----

These are about signs warning of unusual conditions, whereas the typical radiation sign is meant for places where radiation is a usual condition.

[Tom]

That "legal" made me think... So maybe by international law, some of the @%&# thats being pulled is "legal".. but could one country (or group of citizens) sue another for property damage, injury, suffering, and loss of life? hmm...

[Mr. Analog]

Yes, it's called "war reparations"

[Tom]

Yes, it's called "war reparations"

I thought only the winners got that.

I'm talking about the invadee suing the agressors for damage.

[Mr. Analog]

If you're invaded your government either collapses or you become a puppet state and have no position to sue

[Tom]

If you're invaded your government either collapses or you become a puppet state and have no position to sue

Not while it happens (or a long while after...).

I imagine that you could set up a bunch of lawers and people the moment you're invaded to go do a thing. Then you focus on the actual invaders.

[Mr. Analog]

Yup or some other State or governing body with authority can take the invaders to international court

[Thorin]

UN Charter, Chapter I, Article 2, item 4:

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

UN Charter, Chapter 7, Article 51:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

emphasis mine

It's not internationally legal to invade another country, unless you can find justification like protecting your nationals from attack.  Once invaded, you're allowed to defend yourself (but not counter-invade unless it's for a justified reason like dismantling the aggressor's nuclear strike capability before it ends the world).  It's not considered an invasion, though, if the government of the other country invites your troops in.

You can try suing whether you win or lose, but good luck collecting.  Any country willing to invade will only pay up when forced at the end of a gun.

[Tom]

Yup or some other State or governing body with authority can take the invaders to international court

Assuming the invader recognizes said court (*cough*USA*cough*ICC*cough*).

[Tom]

UN Charter, Chapter I, Article 2, item 4:

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

UN Charter, Chapter 7, Article 51:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

emphasis mine

It's not internationally legal to invade another country, unless you can find justification like protecting your nationals from attack.  Once invaded, you're allowed to defend yourself (but not counter-invade unless it's for a justified reason like dismantling the aggressor's nuclear strike capability before it ends the world).  It's not considered an invasion, though, if the government of the other country invites your troops in.

Of course the invader will always attempt to find loopholes.

You can try suing whether you win or lose, but good luck collecting.  Any country willing to invade will only pay up when forced at the end of a gun.

It would however affect that countries reputation even further. Look how well things are turning out for both the US and Russia right now, with pretty much the rest of the world not taking the US seriously in any matter, and Russia having very large money issues.

[Mr. Analog]

The key here is that you can't attack a country using nuclear weapons unless that county is similarly armed (mutually assured destruction)

Anyway back to the PowerPoint pits with me

[Thorin]

According to the UN Charter, you can't attack a country. Not with nuclear arms, not with conventional arms. Unless there is a specific UN resolution that says you can.

I'm not well-versed enough in the nuclear non-proliferation treaties to know the specific wording, but I'm under the impression that mutually assured destruction is something that was agreed between the original nuclear powers but has not been enshrined in international law.

[Darren Dirt]

According to the UN Charter, you can't attack a country. Not with nuclear arms, not with conventional arms. Unless there is a specific UN resolution that says you can.

I love how quickly this thread turned into ^ this ^ ... my guess is "Cold War: The Resurrection" is on the minds of a lot of people?