With WW3 looking inevitable, steps to take to prepare.

originally posted by: DAZ21
There's some good advice here for Europe and the US. Can I just add, as a UK citizen that if you live in the UK unless you're near the coast and have a ship you're doomed (in regards to nuclear war).

Don't forget deep salt mines,If you could get into one of those post nuke attack,with a truck load of dried food,maybe you could survive a good while in the UK.
Would not be fun when you emerge back to the surface years later though.

a reply to: here4this

You have no firearms? And lots of ammo?

That is #3 on my list behind food and water.

And take the time to practice and become proficient with them.

Survival will favor the most ruthless, cold, predatory, intelligent and mobile individuals and gangs; Not those that choose to hunker down in fear. It will be a mind **** that's for sure.

With that being said...It won't be outside forces that will be your ultimate enemy...It will be the constant living in fear of the unknown that will drive you insane, until you eventually say "enough" and blow your brains out.

and the never ending dysentery....

a reply to: stosh64

Will not say. Country boy and ex military (air rescue)..still helps to keep in practice though

a reply to: here4this

Nuff said

you in the UK?

When the SHTF it won't be pretty. Being that I live in a major city, I'm pretty much screwed if something happens all of a sudden. I have some bug out bags, but really don't have anywhere to bug out to...

I've contemplated packing up and just moving way out in the middle of nowhere. Being off the grid kind of appeals to me for other reasons. I'd love to simplify my life and get away from the rate race of materialism. However, with a wife and kid, it isn't happening anytime soon. My wife is a city girl.

a reply to: stosh64

Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on my mood at the time ) no...

I think a civil war might come first regarding all these stoopid people who think it is okay to attack the police and then riot over the outcome. But yes ww3 is also eminent in the foreseable future.

ID

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: liteonit6969

If there is a nuclear exchange.

First and for most, one must not breath irradiated air, eat irradiated food or drink irradiated water.

Any radioactive dust on the skin can be washed off no problem.

But if it gets in you, you are dead.

It will slowly poison you from the inside.

Nothing can be done to save you.

So always wear a mask outside, always.

And if you go outside in an environment that has even low levels of radiation, one must shower and discard the clothing you wore.

Never bring that stuff inside your bunker, it will be what kills you, not starving or dehydration or disease.

If there is a nuclear exchange, one would have to have around a 10year stock of food water and medical supplies.

That is the requisite time for most if the low radiation areas to become livable once more by most projections.

Don't look at the fireball / hide under a desk. You'll be safe

While I cannot claim that being prepared for any eventuality is a bad idea, the notion that WWIII is inevitable is ridiculous. The people making such claims, even those in the media, have no understanding of the military aspect of such a hypothesis. If they did possess such an understanding they would realize exactly why such an idea is ridiculous. The notion that a world war on par with World Wars I and II is even possible, is incorrect mainly because the advent of nuclear weapons has entirely altered the options on the battlefield. Now there are two main ways one can look at the situation in this respect. First, it could be claimed that a massive war between nuclear superpowers will never be allowed to escalate to that point in the first place. It could be argued that because one nation knows the other possesses the means to annihilate their entire nation, the first nation will not initiate any attack, conventional or nuclear, because of this fear. This is the whole point behind the theory of mutually assured destruction.

Another way of analyzing the situation, and in my opinion the correct way, is to state that the nuclear age has not made conventional warfare obsolete, even between two nuclear superpowers, but nuclear weapons have altered and even limited the military options available. I emphatically state that conventional war will NOT lead to nuclear war between two nuclear nations, for the following reasons: a nuclear first-strike is off the table, even for purposes of a preventive war, because modern military theory dictates that the only plausible way for a nuclear first-strike to be feasible is if the attacking nation could ensure the elimination of the enemy's nuclear arsenal on the ground, before it becomes airborne. This is virtually impossible, not only because of the protected nature of underground nuclear launch facilities, but also because a portion of most nuclear superpowers' nuclear arsenals are located on ballistic missile submarines, all of which could never be accounted for, much less eliminated before they had an opportunity to launch their own missiles. Another potential option that could theoretically make a nuclear first-strike feasible is the destruction of an enemy's command and control system, the elimination of which would essentially decapitate and paralyze a nation's ability to make military decisions and launch a retaliatory strike. But for large nations like the US and Russia this is impossible, especially considering "dead hand" type systems.

My main point is that nuclear war is not going to occur. But I've only analyzed the first-strike option up until this point, in an effort to show why no nation would secretly launch their nuclear arsenals at another nation. It would virtually sign their own death warrant. I mean why do you think the Cold War never went "hot?" What other time might a nation use nuclear weapons against another nuclear nation? The most feasible scenario would be if one nation had their backs to the wall during a conventional, or non-nuclear war, and it was clear that their entire nation would be overrun and lost to the enemy. Feeling there is nothing to lose they could launch a nuclear strike. But even this is not feasible. What is much more plausible is that the losing side would use their nuclear arsenal as a political bargaining chip. Meaning they would, through diplomatic channels, make it clear that they had nothing to lose, and would launch a nuclear strike unless certain concessions were made to end the war in a favorable manner. One might ask why this option, the threat of a nuclear strike, wouldn't be used at an earlier stage? Mainly because a nation would not adopt such a position, knowing they would be annihilated even if they annihilated the enemy, unless there were no other options on the table. They could still make the threat at the start of hostilities, but another nation could not realistically think that their enemy would actually resort to nuclear measures at such a time, since it makes no military or political sense. Then there is the possibility of unintentionally setting in motion a chain of events that worsens the entire situation. Obviously a nation fights for something. They wish to gain territory or some other political-strategic objective, and are not fighting simply to destroy their enemy. That is not the point of war, especially when so much is at stake in the modern nuclear age.

I do not understand what people think Russia is going to do to start a nuclear war...? If one checks my recent post history they will find a few different analyses I've done of why Russia is not likely to start a war. I do not really wish to get into that here, as it would take too long. But let's throw the odds out and say Russia did something like invaded Ukraine. They would realize that there was not much other nations could do about it. The US and her allies are not really in a position to want to get involved in such a conflict. They would likely let Russia slide. It would be so expensive to move the necessary materiel, which includes the massive amount of troops and military hardware, into position, establish logistical networks, etc. The movement alone would cost a large amount. That is not even considering the number of troops that would die, even in a conventional war, at a time when the political situation on the US home front would not be willing to accept such losses. While Russia's grand political-military strategy would involve multiple objectives, they could adopt a psychological strategy aimed at reducing the American will to fight. Not the US military's will to fight, but the civilian will to support such a conflict. This could easily be done by establishing defensive positions and exacting a heavy toll on US and allied troops if they attempted to strike the Russian military, and combined with other methods this would likely be an effective strategy.

There are just so many variables of a similar nature that the US would have to consider before going to war with Russia, and in my opinion they would not submit to a ground war. An air war is a tool often used by the US, but it is unlikely to be successful. A tactical air war is not feasible mainly because without the support of ground troops such a strategy makes no sense. A strategic or operational air war also does not make much sense against such a formidable enemy, but this will depend on how good the Russian air defense network happens to be. Such a defensive system includes fighter aircraft that can intercept bombers, anti-air guns and AA missiles, early-warning systems, etc... US strategy would likely include attempting to eliminate the Russian ability to wage a counter-air war, which would mean striking at Russian air targets while those targets are still on the ground. But it is not like we would be fighting easy enemies with no great military forces. The US could not rely on the more high-tech bombers, like stealth bombers, because they are too few in number since the enemy is so large and the territory so great. It would take the use of bombers more susceptible to anti-air systems. Even the superiority of US fighters that would give protection to bombers is not sufficient for such a large-scale war. Knowing all of this, it is unlikely the US would go to war with Russia. No nuclear war, and no conventional war, unless it was of an extremely limited nature. Not a total war like WWI or II.

If a nuclear exchange occurs, no amount of food or water in a hidey hole will be enough.
Besides the blasts and fallout, dont forget about all of the pretty little reactors dotting the countrysides by bodies of water. Now imagine they all blow bigger than Chernobyl. All of them.
If they would be dumb enough to push the buttons, it's goodnight for nearly all life on earth.

It's extremely arrogant for any prepper to assume they'd survive a WW3 style attack.

When faced with armed forces of a foreign power, most people, even gun nuts, really wouldn't stand up to them, even if they did survive.

a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Exactly, a radioactive planet is useless to God/the Gods. That is why there will be no war.
God/the Gods have used other methods to cull/punish the world's population and hide secrets before. To avoid a radioactive world, God/the Gods, will be forced to use those methods again.

Putin was gone for a couple of weeks and he isn't saying where he was. Maybe he was conferring with his allies to discuss something. They have a lot of very good people working for them over there that could get him where he wanted to go.

The strategy is to get the people of both sides to fear the other so they strengthen their ties with their governing bodies. It is a game of Risk with a psychological aspect to it.

I feel sorry for all the people who will losing their retirement in the stock market if something happens, that will drop like a rock if any conflict between us and Russia happens. This will make the crash of 2008 look like a minor correction. Our government will be off the hook as all the nonreal money dissolves. Think about it, a crash of the market means that a lot of unreal value disappears. That would correct the monetary system and everyone would be poor again. Russia does not have to fire one nuke to hurt the people of this country. I actually think there is a world wide plan to get everyone broke again, including many millionaires who are blinded by their greed.

If ww3 fully breaks out, I'm gonna go buy as much lobster, steak and crab legs I can, sit and watch a bunch of hilarious movies and keep my mind zombified by doing copious amounts of drugs.

I'm not one that looks forward to living after the fact.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: here4this
1) find some nice cheap land with running water for fishing that is viable as good farming land. (as far away from military bases or major cities as possible)
2) buy or build a dwelling large enough (nothing fancy) that will house who you need to house
3) build a watermill in the running fresh water to pump water to the dwelling
4) install solar panels and/or generators
5) purchase throw away cell phones with phone cards just in case and radios
6) have dried foods and rations available for at least a year
7) plan on what to take to the location (only the very basics)
Use cash for all transactions

So far , I have planned as thorough as possible and all this has cost slightly more than 30,000 over the 6 years. That is about 5000 a year. I am still improving. Not only does this cover most scenarios but it is actually a nice retirement or vacation spot

You forgot somthing that is often overlooked.

You need to keep all emergency electronics in a Faraday cage.

In case of EMP.

Most of us have one in our houses already.

A standard microwave oven is a Faraday cage, this is why the microwaves can't get out.

I recommend storing all emergency electronics in an old one you don't use anymore.

Make sure it is unplugged so no accidents happen.

That's a good small tidbit to know. I didn't know that. If TSHTF, I'll remember to put my electronic devices (the ones that will fit) in the microwave! I'll be sure to not turn it on, however.

I grew up in the 60's, started the first grade in 64 just after the Cuban missile crises. My first memory's of an organized exorcise was duck and cover, and the older kids said "kiss your ass goodby." All of that Cold War living helped to shape the man I grew into. Our son is a grown man and has four beautiful children age seven to thirteen, so suicide is out for me. I have seen this coming for most of my life so a bright flash on the horizon would be of little shock.
My wife and I started planing in earnest three years ago. She doesn't like to talk about a war but we both see the real need to protect the children. We like where we live and work near by, so relocating is out. Even thou we are only about fifteen miles from a primary target, the Y-12 nuclear weapons storage facility. I know if we have no warning our chances are small, but giving up just isn't our way.

We have an escape plan, complete with an underground shelter here at home, 4 wheel drive vehicles, a bug out trailer, and a small retreat location about eighty miles up wind of Oak Ridge.
The retreat has a small solar powered cabin with a clean water spring and caves in the area. In the cave it's 56 degrees even in the coldest winter so it's and option, and keeping your options open is the way to survive. If we can make it to the retreat, maybe I'll make a little white lighting to keep me warm, and to keep up the spirits of my wife and our neighbors. I promise to toast you fellows with the first batch.

In the event we lose every thing, early on, we have located supplies to help us walk away with only the clothes on our backs.
My first of many caches was a burial tube with spare glasses, weapons, clothing, a good knife, compass, first aid supply's and medicine, a baseball, and a bible. All vacuum packed and well marked only to us. My brother asked about the bible because I am not a very religious man, my answer was, " Brother whoever diggs this thing up will probably have just lost most of their family, maybe they can find a little peace in the book.

I encourage you now, don't quit, don't give up, and don't give the pricks the satisfaction.

Our children and grand children are all we have to leave here on earth. I hope mine are stronger, smarter, better people than I am. I have been teaching my son how to fish and get by in the woods since he was a little fellow. We joked about it, but by fifteen, I think we could have dropped him naked, into a foreign country with a knife and a single match, and in six months he would be mayor of the province. He has been passing the teaching on to the kids. Both grand daughters are black belts in karate and hell on wheels with a .22 rifle and the boys are learning.

Surviving a war in the homeland will be no picnic, people will die, probable me, as I am 57 today. I do this for my family and because I just never quit.

originally posted by: stayinglowkey
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Exactly, a radioactive planet is useless to God/the Gods. That is why there will be no war.
God/the Gods have used other methods to cull/punish the world's population and hide secrets before. To avoid a radioactive world, God/the Gods, will be forced to use those methods again.

I honestly believe we have been at this level of tech several times before.

When we reach space faring status god/the gods come back and restart us.

They have some goal for us, but we aren't evolved enough yet.

So they tinker with our DNA, restart our civilization and come back in tens of thousands of years to see if we are "done cooking" yet.

There is a documentary about growing food in the soil around Chernobyl
made by the Russians, I recommend getting it.

A scientist living in the exclusion zone did the research and eats the food.

Plants that uptake certain minerals will uptake cesium isotopes, so you
want to avoid those, they mention them in the show.

I'd recommend a geiger counter, but detecting alpha particles in food is
difficult and I'd say it would be better to just have a Mike Oehler style
greenhouse that is mostly underground, or bermed earth in design.

Trying to heat buildings will not really be feasible so Mike Oehler's
style of underground buildings are the best likely design.

No need for heat or AC, can save the scarce firewood for cooking.

Rose hips are a good source of vitamin C, might consider having the
full array of herbs that are medicinal as well.

Distillation can provide radioactive free water, but then a mineral
supplement is likely a good idea.

Due to the brutal nuclear winter a few sets of full winter gear would
be a very good idea.

Solar power will likely be worthless, some low power lights for the
greenhouse might be good to stockpile.

Long term stored cheap dry good in 55 gallon barrels or metal cans
would likely work best, there are lots of options, and varied opinions.

Some ppl like ammo cans, thou they are a tad pricey.

Some ppl just use 5 gal food grade buckets.

Have a few kits of organic heirloom seeds, know how to gather
more seeds, it is not straight forward for all plants, it varies.

Have multiple hard copies of all knowledge you need stored at
two locations, fire safe or equivalent is a good idea.

Have a "restart kit" in a large ammo can at a few locations
near your property in case you are "over run" so to speak
or burned out, etc etc... special forces call this caching.

In fact consider downloading and reading the manual on caching
and even expanding on its ideas.

You can make a slow sand filter with sand, cloth, and charcoal,
but I'd not be too sure on how well it would work on blocking
radioactive particles.

At that point it may just be distillation as the sure thing.

The container you use for cooking the contaminated water
will become progressively more radioactive, have a geiger counter
to check this, limit time of close physical proximity.

In the early phases you will need to worry about hostile humans,
after awhile most will likely be dead, the nuclear winter will
be like "the year without a summer" and it was also nicknamed
"1800 and froze to death".

Volcanic winter - year without a summer

5 - 10 years is likely for the duration of this event, and I suspect the
Northern Hemisphere to be MUCH worse then the southern one.

The best defense will be to not be noticed, the underground style
housing helps with this. Some nasty barrier plants that look natural
and not row planted such as briars, thorn hedge, etc etc....

No obvious trails in and out, no buildings or vehicles near the shelter.

Natural things to discourage visitors would likely help.

An early warning system such as passive infra red or motion sensor
would be good if you can 100% hide it so no one knows it is there.

DIY windmill with replacement parts, and low tech battery setup based
off cannibalizing car batteries which will be in plenty.

Inverters or schematics to make inverters, and the tools to do
so if you want to keep electricity going. 12vdc inverters will
be the most common to scavenge after the event.

Maybe base the charging unit off alternators as they will be
in plenty as well.

Solar will likely be worthless.

A few biolite devices might be worth having too.

Biolite - wood to electricity

Go as low tech as possible, but have some for something like checking
satellite TV if you get a clear day, or perhaps a Ham xceiver hooked up
to a stringer wire antenna.

HAM wire antenna

I'd not use that in transmit mode unless you want ppl knowing where you are thou.

If you can temporary set it up on a tall structure or tall hill, etc etc... you can get
better range.

The atmosphere will likely be a mess for the 1st few years thou so it may not
work worth a damn due to what will be going on in the atmosphere.

Extra digging tools is a good idea, and some kind forge to repurpose old steel
into new shapes, etc etc...

Full scope of hand tools is a good idea, though there may be plenty around from those
who have left this world at that time.

I think it will only be like "The Road" if it is a limited nuclear exchange.

If it is a all out wipe out, then think "year without a summer" on steroids.

That event was real, and a full exchange will be MUCH worse.

A wood burning stove might be a good idea, but it would likely end up
radioactive as well. If so limit your time near it, have a geiger counter,
and possibly a backup one or three.

Mankind lived thru Toba, so its possible to live thru this, but it will be ugly.

The Toba disaster

originally posted by: babybunnies
It's extremely arrogant for any prepper to assume they'd survive a WW3 style attack.

When faced with armed forces of a foreign power, most people, even gun nuts, really wouldn't stand up to them, even if they did survive.

Some good info on this, most ppl will survive unless you live near a base.

Most will survive doomsday

After the attacks the survival rate drops for those who do not know what to do.