Honestly this is a question that has entirely too many variables and requires too much clarification to give a blanket answer.
Things like. Where Am I when it occurs. Am I where I am now? Am I where I will be on the day it happens? Is this a slip of the nuke attack, or intentional full out M.A.D assault? What are the domestic targets? What would be the method of delivery? ICBM? Long range aerial bombardment? Internally co-ordinates attacks from within? How many targets? How many can the military intercept before they hit targets? How many will have to land before the opposition is either depleted or is rendered incapable of launching more salvos? etc etc etc.
I mean just hypothesizing what is usually considered considered as the "default" would be ICBM volleying. It is suggested that with strategically placed targets, you could achieve complete eradication with about 200 successful impacts. How many would need to be launched in unison that could not be intercepted by things like drones and kamikaze martyrs determined to cause impact mid flight over the Atlantic/pacific?
I mean just hypothesizing what is usually considered considered as the "default" would be ICBM volleying. It is suggested that with strategically placed targets, you could achieve complete eradication with about 200 successful impacts. How many would need to be launched in unison that could not be intercepted by things like drones and kamikaze martyrs determined to cause impact mid flight over the Atlantic/pacific?
Lets say for arguments sake, 50 successful hits across the US. We know where the bulk of these will occur. To effectively nullify the US, you would want to eliminate the largest bulk of population center distribution to put down as many people as you can to prevent further resistance beyond the initial assault, while trying to salvage the greatest degree of territory that would be left to take over.
So effectively you would see a " U " Shaped pattern starting in the north eastern seaboard, working its way down the coast to hit major pop centers like NYC, Washington, Philadelphia, Savannah, Most of Florida, with larger nearby inland targets selected such as Buffalo, possibly Cleveland, Charlotte, Atlanta, etc.
Then the pattern would run through the gulf states for targets like Mobile, New Orleans, Houston, Dallas headed westward to California. This also would help to obliterate much of the domestic oil production and infrastructure from any would be resistance forces that would form.
From here you would see some focus on more western targets a bit more northern. Well known military installations such as in Colorado aiming for things like NORAD and multiple military installations mostly in a straight line up the state hitting bases and population centers like Boulder, Colorado Springs, Boulder, Denver, Etc.
Also more in land along the southern border of obliteration population center targets in the deserts like Albuquerque, Tuscon, Phoenix, The hoover dam, Las Vegas for the final push to California.
When targeting California, starting from the south in San Diego, San Jose, Los Angeles, Then working its way up the coast for targets like Sacramento, San Francisco, Oakland. In this area also double back to likely make Reno/Carson city a target. Logically hits for coastal and population centers for Portland, Vancouver, SEA-TAC. Although Washington could possibly be spared as a potential "foothold" Navy port into the country with only limited population and limited military resistance.
Then the pattern would run through the gulf states for targets like Mobile, New Orleans, Houston, Dallas headed westward to California. This also would help to obliterate much of the domestic oil production and infrastructure from any would be resistance forces that would form.
From here you would see some focus on more western targets a bit more northern. Well known military installations such as in Colorado aiming for things like NORAD and multiple military installations mostly in a straight line up the state hitting bases and population centers like Boulder, Colorado Springs, Boulder, Denver, Etc.
Also more in land along the southern border of obliteration population center targets in the deserts like Albuquerque, Tuscon, Phoenix, The hoover dam, Las Vegas for the final push to California.
When targeting California, starting from the south in San Diego, San Jose, Los Angeles, Then working its way up the coast for targets like Sacramento, San Francisco, Oakland. In this area also double back to likely make Reno/Carson city a target. Logically hits for coastal and population centers for Portland, Vancouver, SEA-TAC. Although Washington could possibly be spared as a potential "foothold" Navy port into the country with only limited population and limited military resistance.
So with this U shaped pattern what this effectively does is lays down dispersal pattern to nail the bulk of population. You must consider that nukes have differing "effective ranges" You have the initial pillar of fire that has a blast radii of about 5-10 miles, The cataclysmic shock wave that will effectively obliterate things 10-50 mile radii, Radiation zone that will quickly kill off living things approx 100-200 miles radii and the disruptive EMP that dependent on geography & topography that is suggested can push outwards up to 3-5 hundred miles all dependent on age and yield of devices.
Now, with that manner of intended target pattern what it does is creates a border land of devastation that kills off the population in the hundreds of millions, leaving the largest bulk of the land outside of devastated areas left with only a small remnant of remaining metropolises and amply dispersed rural populations. Just as a rough estimate such an action could cut a population of 330 million effectively down to about 50 to 100 million people (largely thanks to metros like Chicago, Minnesota, Wisconsin that are right on the edge or inside of the "corn belt" that the radiation and fallout would end up doing too much damage to what was perhaps the most valuable asset in arable lands.
This leaves the "heartland" and "breadbasket" areas of the country as the initial takeover targets until nuclear wastelands would become habitable again. Large parts of Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, Minn, Wisc, Mich, The great lakes, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Tennessee, Kentucky, Most of Ohio and West Virginia, maybe parts of Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Arkansas.
This leaves the "heartland" and "breadbasket" areas of the country as the initial takeover targets until nuclear wastelands would become habitable again. Large parts of Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, Minn, Wisc, Mich, The great lakes, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Tennessee, Kentucky, Most of Ohio and West Virginia, maybe parts of Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Arkansas.
One other effect this would have is that it leave Canada generally unaffected as well and in much the same condition as the remaining areas of the US, Canada would likely be seen as not worth provoking initially so as to focus invasion on one opponent rather than two. Likely Canada WOULD see it as a threat, but lack the military power on their own to do anything, and more likely would be more prone to act as a staging ground for resistance forces should the international community actually attempt to put a stop to the invasion.
Now if this "IS" the scenario, and operating on the assumption I live where I live now, I would likely be moderately safe initially. Living in West Virginia has three major advantages regarding warfare and specifically nuclear warfare.
First is having insignificant population and woefully deficient infrastructure, So it is of little tactical or strategic value.
The second is the ONLY viable values the state has in consideration of conquest is its coal, and timber. So anyone trying to conquer the US would not view WV as worth wasting a nuke on, and would actually be preferable to keep relatively radiation free in order to exploit the natural resources.
Lastly the nature of the Appalachian mountains would act as natural topographical resistance toward blast radii. Given there are effectively no major metropolitan population centers in the state AND within a 2-5 hundred miles of most of the state (excluding of course the panhandles which would suffer because of Baltimore MD, likely Pittsburg PA (though due to its production infrastructure might be strategically spared) and absolutely Washington DC. However the Mountains effectively create the rounded Eastern border of the state and are incredibly unpopulated. In fact due to the NRAO Telescope in Greenbank Wv, there is a radio silent zone that effectively has pushed most of the local population away from the area and those areas have long since dried up as viable mining communities. So Most likely the Western and Southern parts of the state in proximity to the Huntington, Charleston, Parkersburg, Beckley Interstate corridors would be mostly unaffected thanks largely to being "behind" the mountain. Jet streams would generally push drifting fallout Eastward into the ocean rather than Westward up the mountain anyway.
First is having insignificant population and woefully deficient infrastructure, So it is of little tactical or strategic value.
The second is the ONLY viable values the state has in consideration of conquest is its coal, and timber. So anyone trying to conquer the US would not view WV as worth wasting a nuke on, and would actually be preferable to keep relatively radiation free in order to exploit the natural resources.
Lastly the nature of the Appalachian mountains would act as natural topographical resistance toward blast radii. Given there are effectively no major metropolitan population centers in the state AND within a 2-5 hundred miles of most of the state (excluding of course the panhandles which would suffer because of Baltimore MD, likely Pittsburg PA (though due to its production infrastructure might be strategically spared) and absolutely Washington DC. However the Mountains effectively create the rounded Eastern border of the state and are incredibly unpopulated. In fact due to the NRAO Telescope in Greenbank Wv, there is a radio silent zone that effectively has pushed most of the local population away from the area and those areas have long since dried up as viable mining communities. So Most likely the Western and Southern parts of the state in proximity to the Huntington, Charleston, Parkersburg, Beckley Interstate corridors would be mostly unaffected thanks largely to being "behind" the mountain. Jet streams would generally push drifting fallout Eastward into the ocean rather than Westward up the mountain anyway.
So, The question then becomes a matter of what the situation evolves into. Does the assault render both powerless to continue waging the fight? Or would there be a follow up invasion force to begin suppression of the remaining populous?
If it is a scenario of M.A.D. that neuters both sides and both sides are left to lick their wounds, then It would simply be a matter of rebuilding and surviving in a land that would have most of its infrastructure obliterated and forced to have to rebuild farming, manufacturing, distribution etc infrastructure. So thats the outcome that seems least relevant to the topic and as such elect to just ignore it.
If it is a scenario of M.A.D. that neuters both sides and both sides are left to lick their wounds, then It would simply be a matter of rebuilding and surviving in a land that would have most of its infrastructure obliterated and forced to have to rebuild farming, manufacturing, distribution etc infrastructure. So thats the outcome that seems least relevant to the topic and as such elect to just ignore it.
What seems relevant to the topic then would be the follow up invasion force. Now I wont lie, In such a situation if it becomes apparent that what I hypothesized is the actual scenario, I might have to be prepared to accept the countries defeat. At least if it looks as if it were to continue into air/ ground force offensive invasion was building on the devastation. If there was nothing to give any suggestion that the enemy had been even remotely has damaged as we were, then the logical course might well to be focus efforts in fleeing north to Canada to try to secure passage off the continent.
But for the sake of remaining relevant to the topic, go with the assumption that there was still some hope that there would either be something left to fight for, or that there would be a chance to repel an equally wounded enemy. Now living in WV, honestly the most logical thing to do would stick with the Vietnam approach. Dig in deep into these mountains, be quick with stick and move sabatoge attacks to repel any force pushing in. Keep in with guerrilla resistance staging ambushes and capture offensive units, supplies, hardware, etc. Despite its lack of strategic value, it is perhaps one of the most naturally defensible places in the country. Outside of the "towns" its mostly woodlands that would make quagmire jungles like in Vietnam, and Un-invade-able ranges like in Paki/Afghanistan look like orderly childs play training grounds by comparison. It is also likely that given this fact and the often theorized likelihood of secret underground government bunkers, that this would most likely become the center for unifying and organizing widespread national resistance and defense. So it would likely be best to stick with local resistance because it would almost certainly be what ends up building the point from which resistance would dominantly push outward to reconnect forces, rebuild infrastructure and arguably the point of greatest safety.
Now with all this... It is important to know, this is just ONE possible scenario out of any that could arise out of something with so many distinct variables that would radically alter the scenario and of course radically alter any sort of plan to adapt/compensate for the results.
However, If for what ever reason I am in a scenario where likely within that 20-150 mile radius of either quick death or slow death, I'm pretty sure what I would do is die. In fact, Even still there is a likely chance of slow death from effects of radiation. So much so that if there were enough warning and it became clear that I was say 70 miles away from a projected impact zone, and not anywhere within say another 75 miles to be expected to be reasonably unaffected, I would most likely use my time driving TOWARD the blast rather than trying to escape it. Trying to escape it and only getting on its outer fringe means a still very likely slow agonizing death. If I am going to die, I would much rather to be gone in a blink of an eye than to suffer half a decade of inhuman misery before finally wilting away. Who wants to go out like that?!
However, If for what ever reason I am in a scenario where likely within that 20-150 mile radius of either quick death or slow death, I'm pretty sure what I would do is die. In fact, Even still there is a likely chance of slow death from effects of radiation. So much so that if there were enough warning and it became clear that I was say 70 miles away from a projected impact zone, and not anywhere within say another 75 miles to be expected to be reasonably unaffected, I would most likely use my time driving TOWARD the blast rather than trying to escape it. Trying to escape it and only getting on its outer fringe means a still very likely slow agonizing death. If I am going to die, I would much rather to be gone in a blink of an eye than to suffer half a decade of inhuman misery before finally wilting away. Who wants to go out like that?!
