It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whats the Safest place when WW3 begins?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2003 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Tut tut tut.

The Kiwis have some cracking beers.

Steinlager and there is another one I used to drink out there but I enjoyed it so much I've forgotten the name.

Ausie beers are no match.IMO



posted on Nov, 1 2003 @ 09:38 AM
link   
OMg...are u serious?

Australia is the king of beers and beer making.

Seriously. VB...Carlton Cold, Carlton Crown ;P

OMG Carlton Crown are the #

They're awesome

Aussie made buddy.

Kiwi stuff dont compare. AT ALL



posted on Nov, 1 2003 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaRAGE
Well if not there then i would have to say in the outback of Australia..


Studies have shown that either Australia or Antarctica would be the safest places of refuge during a 3rd World War. Partly because they're so far away from where it would all be happening, and partly because it's not likey they'd be targeted in the first place - especially Antarcitica!



posted on Nov, 1 2003 @ 09:54 AM
link   
yeah but antarctica is damn cold. and all u have to eat tehre is meat. You can grow crops in Australia.



posted on Nov, 1 2003 @ 09:54 AM
link   
How about Cheyenne Mountain or Mount Weather...just minus all the politicians or whoever it is thats going there.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 12:27 AM
link   
The safest place on earth to be when WW3 starts is in a graveyard. Because within 5 minutes WW3 begin, the world will end anyway, so why not die believing that your later generations will have a better future.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 12:35 AM
link   
I beleive Anartica would be the safest place during a nuclear holocost.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 12:40 AM
link   
But, wouldn't you freeze to dealth. You are screwed any way, buddy.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 01:13 AM
link   
You sure about antarctica?

Isn't neu schwabenland (sp?) supposed to be there?



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
You sure about antarctica?

Isn't neu schwabenland (sp?) supposed to be there?


Ha ha.

You will run out of supplies or go mad. It is just the matter of which comes first.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 03:54 AM
link   
I would have to go with some puny little island in the South Pacific. That would be likely to far from most heavy fallout, and not likely a target.

Antarctica is too cold and lacks resources. You could not live there without outside help. If you are talking purely from an avoiding the blast standpoint then probably one of the best places to be would be on board a nuclear submarine. They would be underwater during the attacks, then you could take the sub to whatever land looks good.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 04:00 AM
link   
death will be the safest 'place'.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cyrus

Originally posted by Nans DESMICHELS
The white house...


that;s the LAST place i wanna be at when a nuky warefare breaks out

where do u think they'll be aiming at? florida right??



Yes, I should say, the white house bunker.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I would have to say my own house, stocked with food, supplies and weapons. No one in or out. All bets would be off. Survival of the fittest. No point in going anywhere. You are better in your own place, familiar surroundings, and with your own supplies. But thats just me.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Good info energy_wave. Thanks! Actually there have been over 2000 nuclear tests since the 1950's in this country and elsewhere (!!!). Think about that for a moment. We have basically already had a nuclear war fallout-wise.

www.cnn.com...


Originally posted by energy_wave
We all remember this don't we!!!




posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 05:04 PM
link   
i always thought the safest place would be on the front line as nuking your own troops seems a bad tactical decision to me.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 05:17 PM
link   
The safest place in North America would be in the company of the Michigan Militia. They seem to be prepared for anything.



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Text Black

[Edited on 2-11-2003 by Morphious]



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I would have to say that somewhere in mexico, perhaps the mayan ruins. Because, who really has any millitary bases there?

Speaking of military bases, Area 51 would be safe too. They go all the way into the ground with that #



posted on Nov, 2 2003 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysteriousbob
Speaking of military bases, Area 51 would be safe too. They go all the way into the ground with that #


I beg to differ, we have nukes that are a thousand times powerful than the ones that exploded in Japan. Even if Area 51 or military bases are capable to withstand nukes exist they will filled with politicians and rich people who will try to buy their life.
Civilians like me will have virtually no chance against a nuclear war.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join