>>70629134
I think it's implied most population centres are wiped out so infrastructure is completely destroyed.

>>70629134
>Were they nuked as well?

If they could spare three nukes for Sheffield, it's pretty likely they dropped many times that amount on London and one on any other major urban population center and military targets.

>Why didn't they migrate to other countries like mudslimes do?
How are you going to do that when you can barely survive in the sheer amounts of radiation

>Were all cities in the world nuked?
Not every city but probably every single important enemy city

>meanwhile in Afrika all the niggers be having a good ol' time.

Without any sort of Western aid, it's pretty likely they'd go downhill too.

I have a feeling South America might be okay.

>>70629134
The the main point is to scare you about nuclear war. Food is so scarce that all other forms of currency lose value... etc

>>70629244

But it's also implied that everything works like a network and so in a large scale, if something were to break then something else takes up the task.

>>70629337
I think that it's implied that when the network breaks down, it completely unravels. Hence the title.

>>70629548

But it is implied that the network you're talking about is at a city level.
I'm talking national or global level.

I really liked it wish there were more films with this style and setting.

>>70629710
If it were just a city level or even national level event then I'm sure other countries would have sent aid. It's fairly heavily implied that it's global.

dunno lol

>>70629905
Europe is fucked, Russia is fucked, North America is fucked (Mexico may be ok relatively in that they probably weren't targeted outside Mex City), Australia is fucked. large swaths of Asia are fucked. Africa probably didn't get hit outside Egypt, Libya and South Africa but now there's no aid so they go to hell in a different way.

South America probably becomes the world power but you ain't getting there from the ruins of England