The Russian president says it would "significantly change" the nature of the Ukraine conflict and amount to "nothing less than direct involvement of NATO countries".
This whole "we will make appropriate decisions based on this" open ended answer Putin always gives makes libs consistently think he will always back off when they press him. So far they've been right but eventually they won't be.
Serious question though where do I run to if nuclear war does break out. Western world will be seriously fucked over, my thinking is steal a boat and go somewhere but I dunno. South america? Where's going to have the most food security in the event of a serious war?
Yeah I don't want to rely on that, the food situation will be so bad that there will be an impossible amount of death to deal with. Tens of millions will starve.
I'm just not equipped to deal with that, I'm not sticking around for it. I'm getting out before calorie deficit makes it harder and harder to get out. The longer anyone delays the decision to get away the less likely they'll be able to, in the aftermath of bombs being dropped nobody is going to care that I stole a small yacht and they're incredibly easy to just take.
I don't think I would last a long boat trip in a resource collapse situation, I can't stand fish, I don't even like meat. I don't even know where I would get meds from, long term, especially in remote locations.
I don't look forward to what the nuclear war will be like, would be cool if our politicians stopped chasing after it.
I'd be taking 2-3 weeks worth of food too so the supplies situation would be ok. Need to get to the destination in that amount of time though.
Can probably stretch out supplies to double that if absolutely necessary. 7500km at 10 knots is a 17day trip. Biggest problem here seems to be fuel though, 1500km on a full tank seems to be max range, that only gets me to Portugal. Assuming I can refill there (big assumption) I could then get to Tenerife, then St Louis, then Cabo Verde, then the hardest part of the way to Brazil.
Probably try to figure out a way to get considerably more fuel on-board at the earliest point possible in order to skip any of these stops and the danger of not being able to refuel.
Boat seems best option here, I don't think any airports will still exist after nukes drop. My main concern is whether or not the ports with the boats will still exist or whether they all get hit because they're ports which seems like a valid target to me. This entire plan is fucked if that happens. There will be no escape. I'd have to cross the channel and cross a nuclear irradiated Europe, I don't think that's going to work. I doubt I'd even be able to cross the channel due to radiation.
If it does work, can sell the boat at the other end of the journey which should help with surviving there long enough to find work.
Keep in mind there are nuclear weapons now that intentionally make tsunami, so even boats (in port) might get wasted, not to be negative- this is making me want to consider hijacking some big ship like a tanker or bulk carrier.
I haven't really thought about big ships. Not sure where to even start with that. Surely the ports with the big tanker ships would absolutely be targeted?
Dealing with crew would be a nightmare too without guns and I don't know anything about managing a large ship? You'd need the crew. Supplies would be a nightmare. Also the crew of surviving tanker ships are probably going to be pretty well aware of the usefulness of their ships.
Regions in green mean food consumption can support the current physical activity in that country; regions in yellow are calorie intake that would cause people to lose weight, and only sedentary physical activity would be supported; and regions in red indicate that daily calorie intake would be less than needed to maintain a basal metabolic rate (also called resting energy expenditure) and thus would lead to death after an individual exhausted their body energy reserves in stored fat and expendable muscle.
Tg refers to the teragrams of soot injected into the atmosphere modelled
It wouldn't surprise me if this were in fact true, but if you or @yogthos@lemmy.ml can point me to where you saw this, I would really appreciate being able to read about it. Regardless of what heinous crimes against humanity and all life on earth that the US would actually perpetrate in a large scale nuclear war scenario, I was under the impression that their nuclear posture and targeting strategies are "highly classified" and even though they don't have any NFU policy, they still at least pretend it's about deterrence.
Devil's advocate: Some military plans might be more of a thought experiment or training exercise or black swan event prepping than a serious we totally gonna do this. For example, there are plans to invade Canada, plans for zombie invasions, etc..
Now to unadvocate for the devil, the "Zombie" plan can be recycled to apply for reacting to a US citizen led communist revolution, or mass rioting against Imperial interests, the "Nuke everyone but the US" plan might be useful if the US suddenly finds itself to be the last non-socialist country, etc..
Trying to find articles on this on Yandex and DuckDuckGo and not finding anything although my search terms are probably subpar. Some stuff about how it'd only take 100 nukes to destroy almost all human civilization though.
I don't think they'd have enough, China and Russia are very large and globally there are at least 10,000 cities (with at least 50,000 inhabitants at an average population density of 1,500 people per square kilometer)
This whole "we will make appropriate decisions based on this" open ended answer Putin always gives makes libs consistently think he will always back off when they press him. So far they've been right but eventually they won't be.
Serious question though where do I run to if nuclear war does break out. Western world will be seriously fucked over, my thinking is steal a boat and go somewhere but I dunno. South america? Where's going to have the most food security in the event of a serious war?
My fallback plan is to become high warlord of the wasteland, preferably with some sort of armored train. I just need to work on my cult of warboys
Yeah I don't want to rely on that, the food situation will be so bad that there will be an impossible amount of death to deal with. Tens of millions will starve.
I'm just not equipped to deal with that, I'm not sticking around for it. I'm getting out before calorie deficit makes it harder and harder to get out. The longer anyone delays the decision to get away the less likely they'll be able to, in the aftermath of bombs being dropped nobody is going to care that I stole a small yacht and they're incredibly easy to just take.
I don't think I would last a long boat trip in a resource collapse situation, I can't stand fish, I don't even like meat. I don't even know where I would get meds from, long term, especially in remote locations.
I don't look forward to what the nuclear war will be like, would be cool if our politicians stopped chasing after it.
I'd be taking 2-3 weeks worth of food too so the supplies situation would be ok. Need to get to the destination in that amount of time though.
Can probably stretch out supplies to double that if absolutely necessary. 7500km at 10 knots is a 17day trip. Biggest problem here seems to be fuel though, 1500km on a full tank seems to be max range, that only gets me to Portugal. Assuming I can refill there (big assumption) I could then get to Tenerife, then St Louis, then Cabo Verde, then the hardest part of the way to Brazil.
Probably try to figure out a way to get considerably more fuel on-board at the earliest point possible in order to skip any of these stops and the danger of not being able to refuel.
Boat seems best option here, I don't think any airports will still exist after nukes drop. My main concern is whether or not the ports with the boats will still exist or whether they all get hit because they're ports which seems like a valid target to me. This entire plan is fucked if that happens. There will be no escape. I'd have to cross the channel and cross a nuclear irradiated Europe, I don't think that's going to work. I doubt I'd even be able to cross the channel due to radiation.
If it does work, can sell the boat at the other end of the journey which should help with surviving there long enough to find work.
Keep in mind there are nuclear weapons now that intentionally make tsunami, so even boats (in port) might get wasted, not to be negative- this is making me want to consider hijacking some big ship like a tanker or bulk carrier.
I haven't really thought about big ships. Not sure where to even start with that. Surely the ports with the big tanker ships would absolutely be targeted?
Dealing with crew would be a nightmare too without guns and I don't know anything about managing a large ship? You'd need the crew. Supplies would be a nightmare. Also the crew of surviving tanker ships are probably going to be pretty well aware of the usefulness of their ships.
You can get pretty far with mushrooms
South America and Australia/NZ
Tg refers to the teragrams of soot injected into the atmosphere modelled
Australia and NZ are going to be involved in the war. Australia will 100%. I find it hard to believe NZ won't get hit too.
South America seems best bet. Unlikely to get nuked. If NZ doesn't get nuked I'd probably pick that just because I'd be able to adapt there quicker.
I recall reading how the US has nuked primed to hit the Global South in case of a nuclear war just so that they don't make it.
Yeah wasn't it something like, they want the US to be the center of rebuilt civilisation, so they'd nuke everything else, including their allies..
It wouldn't surprise me if this were in fact true, but if you or @yogthos@lemmy.ml can point me to where you saw this, I would really appreciate being able to read about it. Regardless of what heinous crimes against humanity and all life on earth that the US would actually perpetrate in a large scale nuclear war scenario, I was under the impression that their nuclear posture and targeting strategies are "highly classified" and even though they don't have any NFU policy, they still at least pretend it's about deterrence.
It was an article someone posted in a comment on here, It'll be somewhere in my saved so I'll try to find it.
In the meantime I'll just blindly believe it because it sounds like something that they would do.
Devil's advocate: Some military plans might be more of a thought experiment or training exercise or black swan event prepping than a serious we totally gonna do this. For example, there are plans to invade Canada, plans for zombie invasions, etc..
Now to unadvocate for the devil, the "Zombie" plan can be recycled to apply for reacting to a US citizen led communist revolution, or mass rioting against Imperial interests, the "Nuke everyone but the US" plan might be useful if the US suddenly finds itself to be the last non-socialist country, etc..
Trying to find articles on this on Yandex and DuckDuckGo and not finding anything although my search terms are probably subpar. Some stuff about how it'd only take 100 nukes to destroy almost all human civilization though.
We must not allow a mineshaft gap!
Wtf
All of us who are saying WTF have seriously underestimated American depravity.
I don't think they'd have enough, China and Russia are very large and globally there are at least 10,000 cities (with at least 50,000 inhabitants at an average population density of 1,500 people per square kilometer)
You don't have to hit the cities, you just have to destroy food production capacity.
Only way we're ever going to get rid of Pine Gap
We must not allow a
missilepine gapbrazilians sitting smug rn