Should the general population have a basic understanding of how to survive a nuclear war? Should the government still invest in nuclear shelters/items for civilians around areas that are likely to get hit?
>>29318498
No since the cold war is over.
It's 2016 duh. Stop being in the past.
>It's not like things have gotten worse in the past 10 years right???
>>29318498
Yes. They should have the knowledge and be encouraged to be prepared to live after the exchange.
>>29318534
yeah, all nukes have magically disappeared and thermonuclear war is no longer possible.
>>29319282
Yeah sounds about right, now let us all hold our hands and sing "we shall overcome"
>>29318498
the cold war ended over 30 years ago
>>29319282
so basically, you don't know what the cold war was.
>>29318498
>Should the general population have a basic understanding of how to survive a nuclear war?\
Yes
>Should the government still invest in nuclear shelters/items for civilians around areas that are likely to get hit?
Yes.
>>29321398
Do you have a fallout shelter? Or in the event of an exchange does some government agency come swoop you up and take you into some mountain complex?
>>29321418
>Do you have a fallout shelter?
Nope.
>Or in the event of an exchange does some government agency come swoop you up and take you into some mountain complex?
No, I'm not important or vital in the least. In any case, I'd rather take my chances with the fallout.
This question lets me know just how old I am. When I was in school, we had nuclear bomb drills.
>>29318498
If you didn't get nuked during the Cold War it's hardly going to happen now.
Yes, but not in the context of global nuclear exchanges.
People need to know what to do if a non state actor or some batshit insane fat manlet dictator uses a small fission bomb or a radiological bomb.
>>29321448
Disagreement there.
Whilst the chance of a /all out nuclear war/ happening have decreased, the chances of being caught up in a nuclear terrorist attack have increased.
>>29321472
>nuclear terrorist attack
Waste of time IMO. Nuclear exchange at this point will almost definitely be the end of the world at this point unless NK or ISIS pull off some shenanigans with mini nukes.
>>29321472
How will telling school children to hide under their desks help in the incredibly unlikely chance that somebody explodes a dirty bomb and makes the local high street radioactive? You don't need shelters for that, you just GTFO.
>>29321492
Replying with memes even though Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey (US loaners)have access to nukes and have directly sponsored terrorism around the globe.
A nuke getting lit off in a western city is pretty much inevitable at this point.
>>29321448
While unlikely, the probability of a nuclear exchange in the next two decades is comparable to the overall risk during the cold war.
A terrorist attack using a nuclear weapon is also overall unlikely, but still a possibility.
>>29321524
With the decrease in the size of modern nuclear arsenals, the 'end of the world' is not going to happen.
>>29321645
On a long enough timeline, the probability of a nuclear exchange is 1.
>>29321547
No one has ever taught school children to hide under their desks. Desks become flying debris which could be fatal. No. Everyone is taught to line the cinder blocked hallways. If the blast is significant enough to displace cinder blocks then you're screwed, blued and tattooed anyway.
>>29321764
>No one has ever taught school children to hide under their desks.
The US did.
>Desks become flying debris which could be fatal.
Hiding under your desk is to shield you from flying debris and glass.
If you are close enough to the blast for the desks to become airborne, then nothing will help you anyway.
Yes.
>>29321830
What's your perspective on the Iranian nuclear deal?
Kind of an older topic now but it was hard to figure out which side was correct at the time it was first ratified.
I don't see any point in preparing for being at ground zero
If America is getting hit hard enough for it to be considered a full strike, here's my kit, pic related. Nothing good is following that. Nuclear WWIII= no hot water, fuel shortages, no video games or anime, maybe rad poisoning
fuck that
Most people would die of starvation and diseases anyway. We can only support the modern population thanks to industrialized farming and modern medicine.
>>29321430
>In any case, I'd rather take my chances with the fallout.
Why would you take a risk with the fallout instead of going into a private bunker? Seems like it couldn't hurt to stay in a bunker for the first 30-60 days of a limited nuclear exchange.
>>29318498
After the invention of the hydrogen bomb, nuclear survival tactics lost most of their relevance. While things like bomb shelters in the basement of buildings and "duck and cover" drills made sense with the relatively weak early atomic bombs, the more modern weapons are not realistically survivable if you're in the blast zone. You either live in a place that gets nuked and you die, or you live somewhere that doesn't get nuked and you live.
The best way to survive the nuclear exchange is to live 20+ miles away from the nearest city center or military installation.
>>29323601
Never post again.
>>29318498
>Should the general population have a basic understanding of how to survive a nuclear war?
What would that even entail?
No matter what level of survivalist you are, if your area gets nuked you're not gonna make it. Only people outside of the target zones have a chance.
>>29323633
Never, ever post again.
>>29323589
>30-60 days
>read it like 30-06
God damn it /k/ what have you done to me
>>29323589
It was a joke.
>>29323644
So what would it entail? What could you possibly do that would increase the odds of surviving a nuclear blast?
I mean, unless you have a lot of money and you can make your own underground bunker.
>>29323663
Ah, I feel like an idiot.
As per previous discussions with anon and Oppenheimer, in my case there is little to no point in preparing a fallout shelter. Even if a 5MT Dongfeng dropped on the only "strategic" or even counter value targets in Oregon it would never effect me
People should be taught how to farm and hunt in the old style: Without fancy technologies that makes both task trivial. That's more important than surviving the blast, because chances are industries that could feed you will be gone.
>>29318498
>Should the general population have a basic understanding of how to survive a nuclear war
I know it sounds extremely fedora, but the vast amount of the population is dumber than all absolute fuck and have no useful skills, and is not worth the effort of someone else saving them. It would almost have a culling effect on the amount of retards we have if they weren't prepared for it.
You're not supposed to survive mutually assured destruction
>>29323714
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cQNkIrg-Tk
It'd be worst in the cities. Even if they know how to live, you can't farm a concrete street or hunt in the park
>>29323678
>So what would it entail?
Well first of all it entails knowing anything about the current Russian stockpile rather random images on the internet with scary red dots on them.
As to what it entails, it depends entirely on how much effort you want to put into it.
It can be as simple that in periods of high tension keep your blinds closed and if they light up duck underneath something so that even if you're outside a 5psi radius from the blast you can still avoid getting a face full of glass.
And if you're outside a 5psi radius but inside the thermal pulse, you could also paint your house white and get shutters on the windows so your house won't get set on fire unless it's also going to get knocked over.
And if you're probably inside a 5psi circle in a likely attack scenario, you can read up on how to build field expedient shelters in a day that can give you 20psi+ protection.
The list goes on.
>>29318498
Chaos Despoiler or Desolator?
>>29323663
What kind of a person are you outside of these threads and your career? I imagine you're sligthly less antisocial than I would peg most people in your line of work as being, as you seem to enjoy talking to regular people on an Internet forum. What kind of shit do you do outside of nuke stuff?
>>29323554
The rad poisoning could be problematic, everything else is fixable or avoidable.
http://www.build-a-gasifier.com/fema-gasifier-plans/
Make your own fuel, then you can make your own hot water and run your own generator so you can watch all the anime you want. Probably won't be any new episodes available for a while, so you'll want to have a goodly library built up.
>>29321711
>On a long enough timeline, the probability of a nuclear exchange is 1.
1 out of...what?
>>29323796
Back to high school.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability
>Probability is quantified as a number between 0 and 1 (where 0 indicates impossibility and 1 indicates certainty).
>>29323796
Probability is unitless familia, as it's just a quotient of 2 like values
>>29323736
But you can farm in the park and hunt rats and pigeons. And the hogs will be there soon enough.
>>29323848
in an "I Am Legend" scenario, where you're the last man alive, sure.
But try to share the city park's pigeons with a thousand other guys trying to feed their families, and things will get hairy.
>>29323791
Watch TV. Go to movies.
I play video games, go out with friends.
I would say I'm pretty social.
>>29323715
They can work. They can move debris. They can move earth. Those are valuable traits during the recovery phase where petroleum products might be limited.
>>29323678
There were several survivors just a few hundred yards from the Hypocenter of Little Boy.
>>29321711
>On a long enough timeline, the probability of a nuclear exchange is 1.
t. my ass
>>29323895
It makes sense though. If you stretch out a timeline far enough then the chances of a nuclear device or exchange going off will increase
>>29323877
>I play video games
/k/ nuclear thread plays DEFCON when
also, do you think laser isotope separation is as big a deal as some panicky journalists say it is?
>>29323877
>There were several survivors just a few hundred yards from the Hypocenter of Little Boy.
Modern nukes are much, more powerful than that.
>Sees trip
But you already knew that.
>>29323988
Applying logic and mathematical dogma to the actions of humans is a fools errand.
>>29324067
The point is that you can survive a nuclear explosion, and the key is distance.
Will a larger weapon kill at a larger distance?
Of course.
>>29323855
Which is why you have a 60 day pantry. That gives you enough time to assess the situation and decide if you're going to bug out or stay. Meanwhile, most of the other residents are either leaving or killing each other. The trick is to not get caught up in that.
Urban farming and ranching is pretty much a last resort, if there's no better options available.
>>29324086
It's all about statistics and probabilities. It's a big universe, anything is possible.
>>29321398
>>29321711
>>29321830
>>29323663
>>29323877
>>29324110
Hey oppenheimer how are ya?
I saw a thread the other day in which /k/ommandos were discussing how the apocalyptic effects of a nuclear war are usually vastly overestimated in the media and everywhere else. I don't remember if you were in that thread or not but can you show me any info graphic or any article describing what i just wrote? you don't have to dump information here but you can show me a website or something?
>>29318498
It'd be nice, but since the cold war ended it's way down on the list of priorities in any country that matters.
Now in India/Pakistan, or any other less stable areas that have nuclear weapons, it's time to start translating protect-and-survive.
>>29319282
Nuclear war on the US or UK is so unlikely that preparing the population for it would be misuse of funds better allocated elsewhere.
dumb thought here.
If enough shelters were built underground, wouldn't someone just invest in ground-penetrating weapons? flatten the area with initial regular nuclear strikes, then detonate some weapons underground to fuck up some of the shelters.
>>29323714
This is a significantly better idea than teaching nuclear survival.
It's more applicable to other hypothetical disaster situations, and people can grow small amounts of food for fun in their garden to keep their skills sharp. (It could also theoretically save money if you wanted to stop subsidizing farmers while retaining sufficient domestic food sources.)
>>29318498
The basic gist of all nuclear survival tops is to see a bright flash and get incinerated
>>29328305
There is bunker buster conventional and nuclear bombs. I don't know too much about them but most are designed to go off after reaching a certain depth
>>29328756
Air Force Weapons troop here, I'm not aware of any non-conventional bunker busters (which isn't to say that they don't exist, I don't know, but they're certainly not in common usage or part of a major nuclear contingency plan)
As far as I know the BLU-109 bomb body is conventional only. The "Bunker Buster" in common use by the USAF is the GBU-24.
After the Cold War we had scuffles with PMCs harboring nukes and whatnot, but they got shut down, now we need to focus on the real enemies.
>>29321492
Who is this semen demon?
