Talk:DEFCON

message: Minor error:
Original:
According to Air & Space/Smithsonian, , the U.S. DEFCON level has never been more severe than DEFCON 3. The DEFCON 2 levels in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and 1991 Gulf War applied only to the U.S.
Corrected:
According to Air & Space/Smithsonian, , the U.S. DEFCON level has never been more severe than DEFCON 3. The DEFCON 2 levels in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and 1991 Gulf War applied only to the U.S. Strategic Air Command (SAC). Marcus.karozis (talk) 05:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Why you add SAC, could you tell us your rationale? Lemonaka (talk) 06:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Lemonaka That's what is said in the source, it resolves the confusing "US didn't get to defcon 2 bc the defcon only applied to the US" Aaron Liu (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Aaron Liu (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2023 

message: The article contained the following listing in its instances of DEFCON being raised to 2 or 3, listed just under the Cuban Missile Crisis:
:On January 15, 1991, the Joint Chiefs of Staff declared DEFCON 2 in the opening phase of Operation Desert Storm during the Persian Gulf War.Meyers, Harold P. (1992) "Nighthawks over Iraq, a study a study of the F117-A stealth fighter in operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm ."  U.S. Air Force Office of History.
I've looked into this a bit:
# I have not found a reliable source other than the document cited which states this. Which is rather surprising, if the claim is actually important.
# I have found other sources (such as this) which say that the US did not raise its general DEFCON level higher than 3 between the Yom Kippur War and 9/11. 
I am very dubious of the idea that this document is saying what is implied by keeping this in the article. That is, I doubt that this document is referring to an order of either the overall military defense condition to 2 in 1991, or the nuclear defense condition to 2. Both of which is, I think, what including the above item in the list seems to me to imply. 
Rather, it is clear that DEFCON can be ordered on a per-unit basis. See for example this document which describes how the 3rd brigade was broad to DEFCON 2 readiness in 1965 as part of operations in the Dominican Republic, and that bringing it to DEFCON 2 was preparatory to using its units it combat. 
The document supporting the above claim is a unit history of the 37th Tactical Fighter Wing and its role in Operation Desert Storm. It indicates, I believe, that the wing was brought to DEFCON 2 just before being engaged in operations a few days later. I do not think it indicates, or intends to indicate, that the US military as a whole, nor its nuclear forces, were brought to DEFCON 2 in 1991. 
I acknowledge that this is an interpretation by me, based on a primary source, and could be argued to be WP:OR. However I think its inclusion suffers the same problem, though it is more subtle, for the reasons indicated. As such, I do not think it should be included in this article unless a source that substantiates the above to be an order on the same order of importance as the Cuban Missile Crisis can be found. I have looked for such a thing and found nothing. I think its inclusion is a misunderstanding. NuclearSecrets (talk) 20:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  1991 DEFCON 2 

message: DEFCON 2 was secretly enacted as the Soviets began moving nuclear missiles through Alexandria harbour. This was never publicised in order to avoid the mass panic of the Cuban Missile Crisis. (Aardi18 (talk) 14:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yom Kippur War 

message: Please add this.
https://www.defconlevel.com/current-level.php 77.210.51.15 (talk) 00:31, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  DEFCON-3 20231013