In the event of nuclear war, what would you do?

[Ryleh]

This subject came up at my work a few years ago, and one of the simple girls said that she would simply go and hide in a submarine until the war blew over. When asked where she would get a submarine in New Zealand she said she would build one. When we asked how, she replied "Just, ah, get the community together".

 

[Thaluikhain]

Now, I've been doing some research over the last couple of days and what I've found is that nuclear war isn't quite as deadly as many imagine. Yes, millions would certainly die but millions more could survive... under the right circumstances. Here's a video from the Fifties which is maybe a little outdated but I feel it's advice is actually fairly sound:

Spoiler: Duck and Cover

Obviously, ducking and covering yourself won't protect you if you're unlucky enough to be right under where the bomb lands. If you're a few kilometres away however, shelter behind a wall or in a building could make the difference between third degree burns across much of your body and walking away nearly unscathed. Particularly of note is the advice to keep away from windows in the event of seeing the flash of a nuclear explosion, for it will likely be followed in a few seconds by a shock wave that would shatter the glass and embed the shards in your face.

The other thing I would do in the event of nuclear war would be to stay in my house for at-least two days and up a fortnight ideally. Evacuation is a possibility but risky, since everyone-else and their dog will have the same idea and it's not like many other places are going to be much safer anyhow. The reason for staying inside is that after the heat wave of the bomb has dissipated, radiation would be the highest risk to human life but nevertheless would dissipate fairly quickly. Alpha and beta radiation would be halted by the walls of a house, gamma rays not so easily, any sort of concrete or covering would help to a degree. If one had to go outside, covering up all exposed skin would help protect against the worst of alpha and beta radiation, not something I would do unless there was no other choice though. Within two weeks, 99% of the radiation would have diminished and going outside would be more feasible again.

Very much this.

There is a lot of information around on what to do in case of a nuclear attack, and there are loads of simple things to do to improve your chances of survival.

Ducking and covering is a good idea, hiding inside a solid building is better. Shut the windows, close the blinds, and hide under the furniture. Can improve your chances by a surprisingly large amount.

Now, it's unlikely a nuclear attack will come out of nowhere, there are likely to be plenty of wanrings that things are getting really bad, time to improve your house. Paint the outside of the windows white. If you've got a basement, not a bad shelter, can be made better by putting loads of sandbags or something on top of it. The more mass you have between you and a radiation source, the better. Lead shielding is nice, but lots of dirt will do.

Hell, if things get bad...if you are reading this you have got internet access, go to youtube and look for documentaries and military training films to tell you what to do. A lot of the old stuff is also quite entertaining as well, much better than most stuff on TV currently.

For me, personally, I'm far from anything remotely worth targeting, though maybe I could get a new job closer to targets before war breaks out.

 

[Someone Depressing]

...Psshh, attack Embra? We're the world's biggest export for disgusting alcohol, chavs and broken windows! We're vital to the eastern economy!

...Yeah, kiss my ass godbye.

 

[Unsilenced]

Unless for some reason abandoned shopping carts and boosted bicycles are for some reason declared a vital resource, I think I'll be fine. My city is far enough from anything worth nuking that even a Tsar bomb wouldn't hit me with any great effect.

Fuck all worth nuking where I live. Back in the 60's it was not far from a V-bomber base, so that would have been shit.

Still, even back at the time when the plans were basically "nuke everything, just in case, then nuke it again" the general consensus was that casualties from the bombs were only going to be a fraction of the deaths from starvation, disease etc as society broke down afterwards.

As usual I recommend watching threads:


[snipped threads]

EDIT: Why the uploader stuck some boobs in a gas mask on the still image I don't know, it is a very poor representation of the film within. Also, probably best to watch it on youtube rather than the embed, it's in 720p.

Jesus christ I may never be happy again. I think I need to go watch gifs of cats falling off of stuff for a few hours now.

 

[Nomen Nescio]

Living in fourth of fifth biggest Polish city, I would die in a blast hopefully (if Russia would be so kind to remember how disobedient we always were). Which is good, as in no way I'm in any shape both physically and mentally, to endure the aftermath. To make it worse I can only dream about getting my hands on a gun. "The Road" scenario isn't appealing so I really hope that I'll die quickly and without a fear of my family being raped, eaten or tortured for lolz.
On a side note, don't want to crush your Falloutesque dreams, but I've read somewhere that at this point no country is prepared to cope with a loss of it's electricity infrastructure, as you can't produce new components or repair old ones without electricity itself. You can't get fossil fuels without it, or even dream about maintaining a food supply chain (cities would have to die out of starvation). Domino effect all over the place.
All this considered, I think only the meanest and most ruthless would survive. Of course also smart enough to realize he/they won't survive only by plundering - hello feudalism or even slavery.

 

[Thaluikhain]

On a side note, don't want to crush your Falloutesque dreams, but I've read somewhere that at this point no country is prepared to cope with a loss of it's electricity infrastructure, as you can't produce new components or repair old ones without electricity itself. You can't get fossil fuels without it, or even dream about maintaining a food supply chain (cities would have to die out of starvation). Domino effect all over the place.
All this considered, I think only the meanest and most ruthless would survive. Of course also smart enough to realize he/they won't survive only by plundering - hello feudalism or even slavery.

Well...yes, if the infrastructure can be destroyed.

In many nations that's going to take a lot of doing, with important parts scattered over wide areas.

Secondly, what about neighbouring nations? Plenty of reasons why a neighbouring country not so badly off would want to help.

As an aside, during (at least part of) the Cold War, the USSR had submarines that wouldn't take part in WW3, they'd wait a year, surface, launch spy satellites, find out what was being rebuilt and hit it again.

 

[Undomesticated Equine]

I would evaporate with dignity after that: Attack the enemy in form of radioactive fallout.

 

[proctorninja2]

I'm not sure how high boston is rated on American cites people want to nuke because all the bases are around it but if Boston was nuked well I think I would have to go off myself because the normal traffic is hard enough to get out of the city, in nuclear conditions you might as well just watch the fireworks. (yes I realize fireworks are still banned in this state)

 

[Nomen Nescio]

Well...yes, if the infrastructure can be destroyed.
In many nations that's going to take a lot of doing, with important parts scattered over wide areas.

Don't power stations and transformers tend to malfunction under stress coming from catastrophical power fluctuation in the energy grid?

Secondly, what about neighbouring nations? Plenty of reasons why a neighbouring country not so badly off would want to help.

In case of nuclear war Germany is going to be hit much harder than Poland, so I wouldn't expect any help from them. Quite the opposite if anything. East we have Belarus and Ukraine which will be either under Russian occupation by that time or battered just as badly as anyone else. Baltic Countries are just too small to be anything else than a target for despaired militias (self organized or not) and refugees. Czech Republic and Slovakia? Depending on how badly they would get hit.
All in all I simply don't believe that in the case of nuclear war, any country is going to focus it's survival efforts on helping foreign nations. But maybe I'm tad too cynical.

As an aside, during (at least part of) the Cold War, the USSR had submarines that wouldn't take part in WW3, they'd wait a year, surface, launch spy satellites, find out what was being rebuilt and hit it again.

If that's still a viable strategy, then there's not much to discuss anymore.

 

[EHKOS]

Hope the sorry state of Detroit made them think they already bombed it once. Then I'd start a small party of bandit adventurers, complete with awesome hat and ominous duster. Maybe some kind of automatic weapon hanging from a sling Omar Little style.

 

[ecoho]

not too worried at worst ill have to start hunting for food instead of fun and hell my climate up here wouldn't even change with nuclear winter so yeah sucks to be you guys

 

[lacktheknack]

After that, I lock all the doors, cover shattered windows with tarpaulin, crack out the Brita filters, put Aphex Twin's "Rhubarb" on repeat and wait for rescue.

I approve the choice of music, but there's a good chance your modern electronics will be toast and even the old transistor (which, you know, we all have) radio an absolute unsuable mess until the ionosphere calms down. Interesting point though that older analog electronics do better in unsheilded EMP exposure than new miniaturized digital stuff (apparently). Still vulnerable, but old analog circuits, vacuum tubes and telephone relays aren't as susceptible to instant-bricking. I wonder if that would work for vinyl records and passive speakers? Might wish to invest.

I have a manual option on my record player. I am READY for this.

Also, if I knew of impending attack, I'd drive south. That's where our 110 km/h highway is.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Well I don't see any reason for Canada to be nuked seeing as we don't have any nukes of our own so... apart from nuclear fallout coming from the US, I might actually be okay. Heck, even if Canada did get nuked, I couldn't see my home city getting targeted.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well I don't see any reason for Canada to be nuked seeing as we don't have any nukes of our own so... apart from nuclear fallout coming from the US, I might actually be okay. Heck, even if Canada did get nuked, I couldn't see my home city getting targeted.

During the Cold War, the Soviets had a doctrine of "Sharing the Pain".

Basically, Canada might not be a threat to anyone now, but after WW3, things will be different. Smaller powers would suddenly be comparatively powerful to what's left of the previous large powers, so they'd be targeted. This even applied to Soviet allies the USSR didn't trust.

Now, under that logic, it's important to make a mess out of Canada...this might "just" be a missile at the capital to muck up the infrastructure and government system, though, rather than a widespread attack.

 

[zerabp]

Die like everyone else, the current nuclear weaponry is far more advanced than what it was at the time that video was made.

 

[JoJo]

Die like everyone else, the current nuclear weaponry is far more advanced than what it was at the time that video was made.

Source please? Obviously, there's a lot of guesswork involved in an event that has never happened but from what I've read, even the most powerful nukes ever created only have a blast radius of a few kilometres. The closest survivor to one of the bombs dropped on Japan was less than 200 metres away from ground zero, while much less powerful than modern nukes that clearly shows they can be survived under the right circumstances (this individual was in a basement). Radiation is a problem but not every place is going to be near a bomb, some people would have effective shelters and some people would be plain lucky.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Die like everyone else, the current nuclear weaponry is far more advanced than what it was at the time that video was made.

Advanced doesn't mean more dangerous.

A lot of the advances were made in getting the devices where you want them to be. In the old days, they made really big weapons, so you could miss the target by a lot and still get it. However, it's much more efficient to make multiple small ones if your delivery system is reliable, which is the case now.

 

[anthony87]

I'd look up the dude who survived both bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and just copy him.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Well I don't see any reason for Canada to be nuked seeing as we don't have any nukes of our own so... apart from nuclear fallout coming from the US, I might actually be okay. Heck, even if Canada did get nuked, I couldn't see my home city getting targeted.

During the Cold War, the Soviets had a doctrine of "Sharing the Pain".

Basically, Canada might not be a threat to anyone now, but after WW3, things will be different. Smaller powers would suddenly be comparatively powerful to what's left of the previous large powers, so they'd be targeted. This even applied to Soviet allies the USSR didn't trust.

Now, under that logic, it's important to make a mess out of Canada...this might "just" be a missile at the capital to muck up the infrastructure and government system, though, rather than a widespread attack.

Well that's just mean... At least I live nowhere near our capital!

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

During the Cold War, the Soviets had a doctrine of "Sharing the Pain".

Basically, Canada might not be a threat to anyone now, but after WW3, things will be different. Smaller powers would suddenly be comparatively powerful to what's left of the previous large powers, so they'd be targeted. This even applied to Soviet allies the USSR didn't trust.

Now, under that logic, it's important to make a mess out of Canada...this might "just" be a missile at the capital to muck up the infrastructure and government system, though, rather than a widespread attack.

As a major US ally and member of NATO, right next to the US with alot of important strategic resources I'd guess it's more likely to get thoroughly plastered. Denial of strategic reources to the enemy was pretty high on the prorities of both the US and the soviets. Basically, if the other side might be able to use it in some way, expect it to get a very unwelcome present.

Jesus christ I may never be happy again. I think I need to go watch gifs of cats falling off of stuff for a few hours now.

My work here is done.