It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


If Russia/US Nuclear War Breaks Where Do We Go?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 09:50 PM
The International space station?

Really though as mentioned Australia, with sober Aboriginal People.

IMHO if any nuclear exchange i.e. more than one device on each side, well that pretty much means, unfortunately that most nuclear weapons would end up being used.

Even if not immediately, after a first limited exchange, and humanity would be lucky to not all be doomed by the next morning, but if we were lucky enough to survive that, the precedent is set, as the world would then fall into chaos socially, economically, medically, the rest would be sure to be used then.

After that initial event, the exchange of Nuclear Weapons in the modern world, and even I am wrong above, and you don't die directly from a nuclear bomb, you might find yourself starving to death, murdered, just not able to get any meds many people take.

Civilization as we know it would collapse!

Scary yep, but scary as we all know deep down that its true!

Live the life we have now, especially now! don't plan for a future that could be worse than dissapearing in blaze of light!

Its scary too that we are talking about it in the first place!

Kind Regards,


posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 11:40 PM
I will head to the Tibetan Monasteries. Simple.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:35 AM
I'm thinking Southeast Alaska, sailing or both. A post nuclear apocolyptic life will be possible only with subsistance, shelter, protection and a community filled with like minded people. Any population over 10,000 and your going to have mean elements pop up looking for control of said area. 10,000 is just my opinion on the max population for a controlled society idea it just seems like a manageable number for community survival.

The Undertaker

[edit on 16-8-2008 by The Undertaker]

[edit on 16-8-2008 by The Undertaker]

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:08 AM
People keep mentioning going to other countries after the nukes fly.
I have a question. How the hell do you plan on getting there?
If any countries end up having a nuclear war, then travel will be very limited, if at all.
And getting out of any country will be nearly impossible!
The whole world will be in chaos.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:41 AM
while i dont feel the whole world will be chaos after a nuke exchange between two countries i do feel that staying put for the time being is in the best interest. Other countries would be flooded with refugees as is and borders to canada (haha what border) and mexico will be closed. They will not allow a mass migration out of our country into theirs. I do think that other countries will act quickly (around two weeks) with aid and such, but i dont see waiting on them as a viable means of survival.

Plan to be somewhere other than your big city within one hour of a detonation in your area. All of the major nuke targets in my city are at MINIMUM 25 miles away. We do however have the southwest largest nuclear power facility which poses an even bigger threat to my survival. Its assured that this will be a target during a country to country attack as we provide power to several other states including southern California. The radioactive fallout from any attack even non nuclear would be immense and the plans in place by the power company are severely lacking. Fortunately yet unfortunately enough i live 80 miles east of it in the direction of the wind. I can be on a smaller highway in less than 1 mile however and on my way north away from the winds within 20 min (assuming im at home).

Have 2-3 locations that you can go. Having only one place you plan to go limits your options (obviously) for adaptation. Since we dont know WHAT will happen we cannot accurately predict the WHERE to go. I have one location North east of me, one location West of me (hardest to get to but I have like minded family there) and one location south of me. All have shelter, water, food sources and protection from anyone coming to look for the same who might not have the best of intentions community wise. So to answer your question... plan for all of your scenarios and choose the best based on what happens. Put your plan on paper for your family to learn from, inform your family on where you will go when x happens in x location and drill your bug out.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:52 AM
reply to post by SHNIPE
And another thing is if you can't guarantee you'll be home then have a second bug out bag with what you'll need in your car.
And having multiple locations is a very good idea.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:52 AM
Personally, if this kind of war breaks, I believe it is pointless to try to go anywhere, frankly it will be chaos, where would you go?

If an all out war with Russia does happen, we may only have an hour or two at best... Of course that will depend on your location, what would you do with so little time?

Then it is also possible that if ICBMs are launched, along with launched missiles from subs offshore of the USA there will be NO warning, why would they bother to warn anyone? They'd be too busy trying to save themselves.

By the time you realize that a nuclear war with Russia has begun, it will likely be too late to do anything.

Of course I already posted my thoughts and other stuff on this here:

There is NO possible way to survive a U.S. Russian Nuclear war!

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 10:56 AM
I would go with anon i think .. australia or new zealand . I will have to get used to the fosters lager , i like australians as well, id go there )

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:01 AM
reply to post by The_Alarmist2012
You basically said what i was saying.
Sub launched nukes would arrive at their designated targets in about twenty minutes. And china has already proven they have nuclear attack subs that our destroyers can't detect. And they stole the scematics for the Aegis 2 computer systems so with the satelite uplinks developed into our warships, they could theoretically shut down all their guidance systems.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:54 AM
reply to posts by The_Alarmist2012 and Annubis

Im not sure what you mean by no way to survive. As a whole? or yourself because im sure there are hundreds of thousands that will survive. I do not think there will be enough bombs in nonstrategic locations to kill every last american. Even if they did try there would still be some left in small pockets.

The USA is 9.8 MILLION square kilometers. How many nukes would it take to cover that entire area? Fallout isnt going to kill everyone either. There will always be someone left after a nuke attack. There was a survivor in a basement not far from ground zero in Hiroshima.

I agree that there will be LITTLE to no warning but one would see incoming missiles or even missiles of our own being launched back. That enough is a warning for me. I remember several years ago while at work I noticed a missile going up from the west (California it seemed as it was far away) I didnt stop to ask questions. I jumped on my cell to my girlfriend and headed to a small basement without thinking twice. Luckily Im supposed to walk the property so me sitting in the basement for the next 30 minutes didnt cause a stir. But that was plenty enough warning for me to react.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:16 PM
reply to post by SHNIPE

A lot of people tend to think of nuclear war in terms of what happened in Japan and the world's first use of the atomic bomb.

Nuclear weapons today are far more advanced and in some cases much more powerful.

If unleashed in full on the USA from subs, and ICBMs the Russians have an estimated 1,500Mt to 2,000Mt of nuclear weapons. It is likely that they have much more, and the USA the same.

That is equivalent to between one BILLION five hundred MILLION and two BILLION metric tonnes of TNT.

Leave the radiation out of the equation and think of the explosive destructive potential of the above alone.

Then the radiation.... and all of the other effects that would certainly come from such a disastrous war on both sides... Really, survival for all but a very few will be impossible.

Now realize that threats have been made publicly, we don't know what kind of exchanges have happened between the leaders of the USA and Russia behind the scenes. It is more likely that the missile defense shield in Poland will be the issue we should watch most closely for now, and potentially a US, Israeli conflict with Iran in which the Russians vowed to help defend Iran.

There is potential for war with Russia, and no one wants that to happen, MAD was meant to prevent that from happening, and that is our best hope that we have now.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by The_Alarmist2012]

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:18 PM
reply to post by SHNIPE
We never said it would kill everyone, but it would drop the population by about half. Primary targets are big cities and over half of the population lives in them.

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:38 PM
reply to post by The_Alarmist2012

I agree and am glad you brought up the point about the nuclear warheads being much more powerful. I am aware of the newer capabilities ( as far as info on the net goes ). I still do not think that they will hit even the small podunk towns throughout the US.

1500-3000 MT explosion still only encompasses at about 20 miles from ground zero for LIGHT damage and only 1psi overpressure. (light being relative of course damage, death and fires are still killers at this distance) Any country willing and wanting to attack the US knows that it must not kill every citizen to bing about the downfall of the us. In fact i would think that a country would rather cripple our government and military forces with acceptable civilian losses rather than face international suicide for complete annihilation. It would serve no purpose and there for not be a goal. Crippling MAJOR cities and military installations would be. What goal other than genocide would launching even a 150 KT warhead at say Wikieup, AZ. One could not assume that even in a nuclear war a country wouldnt assume it could be won. If it is in fact won then theres political fallout which is worse sometimes than nuclear fallout.

Im not completely closed off to the idea of complete annihilation. I do believe it is possible. I just dont think that its as probable as surviving. Could just be my glass half full mentality.

EDIT: Quick math (if my brain works) shows that over 65000 warheads of at least 1500 MT would be needed to encompass all of the US area in at least 1psi overpressure. Figure youd have to double that to get enough area covered to at least raise that to the more destructive 2-5 psi range where death is more prevailant. for complete annihilation what would that take. how many large yield warheads?

[edit on 16-8-2008 by SHNIPE]

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 09:58 PM
In a nuclear exchange between the US and Russia, most of the targets will be located in the northern hemisphere. Just relocate to south of the equator, and you'll not notice a thing until all communication from the northern hemisphere has stopped.

There is also the slight "nuclear winter" theory to worry about, but that can be marked down as cold war propaganda. Yes, a lot of dust will be thrown in the air, along with smoke for the disputed firestorms that may or may not happen, but it most likely won't be enough to cause any major climate shift.

Alternatively, there are large expanses of the USA that probably won't feel much. Targets are Military, Industrial, Infrastructure and large population centers, so avoid those. All you then have to worry about is the fall out. If you have time to relocate, you also have time to build a decent fall out shelter, and stock it with supplies. I'm not so lucky, as Britain is a small island, and I'm surrounded by military and industrial targets.

One of the best things to do is research the effects of nuclear weapons, and equate that to your local area, and then decide if its worth moving. Remember, Hollywood does not portray nuclear weapons correctly, it often overstates what happens. If you require some interesting links, send me a u2u and I'll forward them on to you.

On a plus note, I can't see the current Georgian situation leading to a nuclear exchange between the US/NATO and Russia.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 09:31 AM
if you lived by water i would learn how to sail. AFter a nuclear exchange I would get a boat and head out into the ocean.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 10:01 AM

C. Switzerland. For some reason Switzerland never gets hit in all the wars and part of that reason is because that is where all the money and power of the world play.

Good luck going to Switzerland. They wouldn't let you in. Switzerland has some of the strictest immigration laws in Europe.

Even though I think the SWiss may be realtively unscathed in a full out exchange, they wouldn't be for long. They are surrounded by countries which would be hit afterall.

The Swiss do have a very good civil defense program - FOR THEIR CITIZENS.

Thankfully I have a Swiss passport. *grins*

It is our plan to go on a vacation in Switzerland should world events make me or my partner think that a global exchange were imminent.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 12:44 PM
Well, if this is any indication as to where where are heading, you might want to start packing for wherever it is you plan to go.

Russia says response to U.S. missile shield development will go beyond diplomacy.

No real news on it yet, but Putin generally doesnt make idle threats.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 08:27 PM
Only cowards will flee the country.
I will stay right here in idaho, where i'm safe. If your all so worried then get out of the cities.

posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 08:35 PM
If we go to war with russia then every one whos got the chance to get to the mountains should do it. Do like the maiden song says and run to the hills and run for your life.

I myself will be in RAYMOND, CA starting a citizens militia..... i'm only gonna leave that last line up for a little bit... probably edit it out soon... but all are welcome to seek me out in raymond if tshtf. nuclear war is a scary thought.

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 05:46 AM
I have 6 old gold mines close to where i live that we mapped for civil defence when i was on a mine search and rescue team years ago.
The best mine is where all the team members planed to go and that is where i will be.

We found out that civil defence planed to disarm everyone that came to there shelters.
So we found a back door in so that we could bring in our guns without them knowing and never told them about it.

i will have about 3 hour till any radiation reaches where i live as the nearest target is about a hours drive away.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in