So what will realistically happen in total nuclear exchange scenario between all nuclear powers in the world.

So what will realistically happen in total nuclear exchange scenario between all nuclear powers in the world. What would the world look like? Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All survivors will frick ya mudda.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not if I frick their faddas foist

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    My brother in power armor... a full nuclear exchange would delete the human population. There is no surviving it. It's really that simple.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      moron, we hardly have enough to hit every major city in the northern hemisphere. Peak cold war nuclear stockpiles were massively larger than current stockpiles.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What about when all the nuclear powerplants get cracked and start leaking? Imagine chernobyl but in hundreds of places. You also have all the biological weapon sites, corona, typhoid, black death, ebola, etc, all set loose. Add to that the mass starvation of the survivor populations, even in places like switzerland that has bunkers for everyone, fighting over the last can of beans etc. It wont be nice.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >What about when all the nuclear powerplants get cracked and start leaking?
          Most danger is not even reactors themselves but near reactor ponds that store spent fuel rods. Practically all nuclear fuel US reactors used during decades of their service is stored on site in such ponds. It is estimated that there are about 130000 tons of such fuel stored there. There are concerns that even conventional minimal terrorists attacks can lead to massive contamination from these sources.
          https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/radiological-terrorism-sabotage-spent-fuel-pools
          Ground nuke bursts in these facilities turn all this fuel into dust and throw them to 30km altitude. It would radiological catastrophe.
          Live boomer reaction who build such nuclear plants:

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >we hardly have enough to hit every major city in the northern hemisphere
        Ah yes because the government is telling the full truth about their nuclear strategic capabilities. Just airing it out to the world. You're insane if you believe what the government is telling you and doubly insane if you believe things about their """limited"""" capabilities.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Ah yes because the government is telling the full truth about their nuclear strategic capabilities
          True, though not in way you mean.
          Because you are insane if you think government would spend money maintaining weapons that "never will be used". Aspecially without corruption and useless middlemen eating grand majority of any assigned budget.
          Personally I would bet that there is less than 100 ready-to-fire nukes available across the world.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          This. The US government actually has 17000 of the planetbusters from Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri. Why do you think the ayy’s haven’t invaded?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, eh?
          >It was to be announced at the Party Congress on Monday. As you know, the Premier loves surprises.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >nobody outside major cities exists

      [...]
      The post was more of a thought experiment but Roger is right cities are traditionally more ecclectic than the rural areas, no, the problem is what H0ser pointed out, rural america and other similar places depend on subsidies from the cities, hence you will end up not just with a lot of craters, but widespread banditry from empoverished farmers killing each other for months to come before whatever is left of the government manages to re-stablish a measure of control.

      >here's how we can win /misc/bros...
      >we just need to end the world and we can farm the irradiated, depleted dirt with no access to agricultural chemicals, electricity, oil, medicine, etc

      >farming was literally impossible before government subsidies

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >farming was literally impossible before government subsidies
        not what I said you smooth brain. I'm saying a very long time of farming intensive crops and heavy industry have already fricked up the soil and water supply. That is BEFORE we take into account it all being irradiated. Idk why I even bother arguing with people this moronic

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The soil is still yielding and can continue to yield. The water is primarily getting dumped with phosphorus/nitrogen. Which impacts life but not the safety of water to drink

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Radiation

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Oh no I cant grow corn in the city.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >would delete the human population
      That’s impossible. Humans are extremely resilient

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Even with cold war era stockpiles, most humans would die after the exchange from secondary causes such as famine and disease. Nuclear winter is a laughable myth that is essentially just propaganda with no real basis. Radiation is a joke because most nukes are thermonuclear with tiny fission detonations to kickstart the fusion while also being air bursted for maximum damage with results in minimal to nonexistent fallout i.e. if you're close enough for a dangerous dose of radiation, you're close enough to get buttfricked by the blastwave.

      If most major cities are targeted and hit, then a couple billion people die as a direct result, leaving billions more to survive, mostly followed by maybe a couple more billion dying due to said breaking down of infrastructure and order. That would still leave a few billion humans left to either hold on to whatever's left of their societies or to start new ones. Would probably unironically be some neo feudal shit with corn based ethanol warlords becoming kings fueling their hotwired Abrams tanks and F150's to do battle against rival warlords across the wastes.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Would probably unironically be some neo feudal shit with corn based ethanol warlords becoming kings fueling their hotwired Abrams tanks and F150's to do battle against rival warlords across the wastes.
        I NEED this

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Expectation
          >Fallout like future where even after 200 years, everyone is still living in shanty towns and just barely clinging on
          Reality
          >Tank knights

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Radiation is a joke because most nukes are thermonuclear with tiny fission detonations to kickstart the fusion while also being air bursted for maximum damage with results in minimal to nonexistent fallout
        For the ten-thousandth time, when targeting silos they're going to saturate the entire area and it won't be air bursts.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >silos are spread all over the US
          Most of the US would be fine from radiation and even the places that get fricked are mostly rural with low population densities and the radiation would return to ambient in a week.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The fear mongering has no basis in reality.
      A small earthquake or a volcano eruption releases a billion times more energy than all of the nukes in the world combined.
      Once the first nuclear wars happen people will see that it's nothing and wars will be as common and normal as they were before WW2 and nukes will be just regular bullets until one power, most likely the US, takes over the world and becomes a permanent global tyranny.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Hopefully Israel will survive

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >So what will realistically happen in total nuclear excha-ACK!

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    are you naturally moronic or did your mother make you that way?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years
    Yeah radiation decays very rapidly unless you salt your nukes (nobody does), basically everywhere on earth that isn't a nuclear crater will be back to normal within a year
    >What would the world look like
    Almost entirely the same besides every city being a crater with collapsed ruble around it
    Nuclear winter is not a thing

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      my favourite tin foil theory is that "nuclear witner" was a made up by scientists to scare the world into not using nukes

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        honestly, good. Threads should be played to all politicians lol

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Technically, it was made up in order to encourage the West to unilaterally disarm, after which ??? and PEACE!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Yeah radiation decays very rapidly unless you salt your nukes (nobody does)
      Akshually Trident missiles warheads are salted nukes.... It's 3 stage desing with most wield coming from fission, it's extremely dirty warhead with fallout been 1000 time more than notorious cobalt bomb, (but reduced half life accordingly). And this is not a bug, it's a feature. This warheads are specifically designed to inflict maximum population casualties via short term fallout.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Akshually Trident missiles warheads are salted nukes.... It's 3 stage desing with most wield coming from fission, it's extremely dirty warhead with fallout been 1000 time more than notorious cobalt bomb, (but reduced half life accordingly).

        I seriously doubt that, as they would need an outer layer of suitable basic elements that are easily transmuted into short lived isotopes, increasing warhead weight, which is a big no-no for a warhead meant to go on top of a low throw weight sub launched missile that is supposed to carry several warheads. Perhaps you confused this with a ground burst, which produces lots of local fallout.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >I seriously doubt that, as they would need an outer layer of suitable basic elements that are easily transmuted into short lived isotopes
          And they have that, territary U-235 fission stage driven by neutrons from secondary fision stage. Most power output comes from territary fission stage, and again it's not a bug, it's a feature.

          >Initially, gamma radiation from the fission products of an equivalent size fission-fusion-fission bomb are much more intense than Co-60: 15,000 times more intense at 1 hour; 35 times more intense at 1 week; 5 times more intense at 1 month; and about equal at 6 months. Thereafter fission product fallout radiation levels drop off rapidly, so that Co-60 fallout is 8 times more intense than fission at 1 year and 150 times more intense at 5 years. The very long-lived isotopes produced by fission would overtake the 60Co again after about 75 years.[14]
          More dead chinks.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >wasting space on an ICBM to just send a meaningless frick you to nobody since it will not matter after the exchange instead of putting another regular warhead in the ICBM to insure PK on targets that actually matter

            salted bombs are insanely dumb.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              That not wasting space this case produces additional yield, and uranium case is much denser than fusion fuel so it's more compact.
              Uranium case produces another perk: it serves as physical armor that protects nuclear device from mechanical damage, damage from SAMs warhead fragments, you need much larger fragments to destroy nuclear warhead. Soviet anit anti-aircraft S-300P used 2.5 grams fragments, ballistic defense S-300V used 50 grams fragments.

              So such design is killing 3 birds with one stone: smaller device, more fallout, more resistant to damage warhead.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/HBb1CzV.jpeg

      The big problem being that all the smartest white people move to the cities. Global devastation with a strong urban bias in destruction would damn near eliminate the intellectual elite everywhere. I'm not talking about the gender studies tenured profs that the poster of that tweet loathe, I mean physicists, engineers, everyone integral for fhe progress and maintenance of technological modernity. White people would go from averaging 102-106 to probably centring well below 100 like Ireland or Russia. The losses at the right tail of the distribution would halt research, give people with geniuses to spare due to sheer volume, like the Chinese, a huge advantage on the geopolitical stage.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >noooooooooooo if the scary black pipo get holocausted I can marry a trad farmer qt wife and everything will be just PERFECT
        Anyone thinking that nuking their nation's 50 most productive concentrations would be other than utter ruin and hell on earth is going to be in a for an extremely rude, if not short-lived, awakening.
        I have to imagine that NEETs with literally no reason to live are the only people desperate enough to push this moronic narrative.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >all the smartest white people move to the cities

        lol Anon. Quite the projection there. I hope you enjoy being a wisp of radioactive steam.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Rednecks possess practical knowledge anon. Like farming, hunting, fishing, construction, firearms, wild plants/mushrooms and mechanics. That fricking business degree won't mean shit in the post apocalypse. Also the most successful college students are using ChatGPT derrivitives to do their homework. Honestly can't think anyone else that would stand a better chance of surviving and rebuilding in any apocalypse better than rednecks. City slickers would be practically useless.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Anon I know several rednecks and they are oilfield babies. Barely any of them have no idea how to farm

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Barely any of them have no idea how to farm
            So most of them can farm?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Sorry miss worded that. None of them have any farming skills or knowledge. Their parents would but even that is stretching it

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Barely any of them have no idea how to farm
            So you're telling me almost all of them have *some* idea on how to farm?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Smartest White People move to cities
        Patently false. "White Flight" and "Suburban Tax" is very real. People are perfectly content making 2 hour commutes and selling their souls for a mortgage to avoid urban areas

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >radiation decays very rapidly
      moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >What is this "relative" you guys keep talking about?
        A few years is not a long time. A few decades is not a long time. A few centuries is not a long time. A few millenia is not a long time. Humanity will exist long into the future.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >muh ebil cityslickers with their gucci education
      I don't think you're cut out for an agrarian society that lack of the cities would create.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        there would be a lot of obvious long term downsides but goddamn deleting all of the major cities and the turbohomosexuals who have flocked to them would probably make the world extremely pleasant for a while.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Enjoy dying of stepping on a rusty nail I guess.
          I don't think you know what cities create, or why they are necessary for a great many goods and services.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        there would be a lot of obvious long term downsides but goddamn deleting all of the major cities and the turbohomosexuals who have flocked to them would probably make the world extremely pleasant for a while.

        The post was more of a thought experiment but Roger is right cities are traditionally more ecclectic than the rural areas, no, the problem is what H0ser pointed out, rural america and other similar places depend on subsidies from the cities, hence you will end up not just with a lot of craters, but widespread banditry from empoverished farmers killing each other for months to come before whatever is left of the government manages to re-stablish a measure of control.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >You need the government for everything.
          >You cant grow food without the government!

          Jesus fricking Christ.

          https://i.imgur.com/tispQ6R.jpeg

          So what will realistically happen in total nuclear exchange scenario between all nuclear powers in the world. What would the world look like? Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years?

          Cities are gone (which is good) ~50 years for new societies to pop back up.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          homie, the government gives farmers subsidies because we literally make too much food. The government just comes in and buys it to give to Africans so that their farmers get fricked up so that we can keep mining cobalt on the cheap.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >here's how we can win /misc/bros...
        >we just need to end the world and we can farm the irradiated, depleted dirt with no access to agricultural chemicals, electricity, oil, medicine, etc

        [...]
        The big problem being that all the smartest white people move to the cities. Global devastation with a strong urban bias in destruction would damn near eliminate the intellectual elite everywhere. I'm not talking about the gender studies tenured profs that the poster of that tweet loathe, I mean physicists, engineers, everyone integral for fhe progress and maintenance of technological modernity. White people would go from averaging 102-106 to probably centring well below 100 like Ireland or Russia. The losses at the right tail of the distribution would halt research, give people with geniuses to spare due to sheer volume, like the Chinese, a huge advantage on the geopolitical stage.

        >we have to genocide millions of whites to save thousands of whites

        Post gun seething urbanoids.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >gun violence in all of vermont plus anywhere in maine
          Lol

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If anything that just solidifies his point that gun violence is largely confined to a few small parts of the country. Even some blue areas can be violence-free, but it's mostly confined to California around the coast and places like Illinois. If those two places were turned into ash, American gun violence would drop to European levels. Civilized Europe, not the East or the Balkans.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >violence is where the most people are
          wew

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            We shouldn't have guns anymore now that people aren't forced to work

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But anon I thought more guns = more crime so which one is it?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          might aswell be a population density map

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >here's how we can win /misc/bros...
      >we just need to end the world and we can farm the irradiated, depleted dirt with no access to agricultural chemicals, electricity, oil, medicine, etc

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >we have to genocide millions of whites to save thousands of whites

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nothing that lives within a day's walk of a city is human.

        [...]

        You are not meant for modern earth.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >that pic
          >no minorities = no budget deficit
          False, who makes this dumb shit?
          Social security and medicare are the biggest "entitlement" programs moron, and everyone gets them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >False
            Seethe.

            Based. Pay for my beans wagie.

            >decrease whites every year
            >only survive because of whites
            >the resources will just keep coming cuz muh dreams

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Work wagie. That's not my problem right now.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >That's not my problem right now.
                Starve, noguns

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Based. Pay for my beans wagie.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          what about asians, where are they on that chart?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Sounds beautiful if catastrophic.

      Might be for the best.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >here's how we can win /misc/bros...
      >we just need to end the world and we can farm the irradiated, depleted dirt with no access to agricultural chemicals, electricity, oil, medicine, etc

      >we have to genocide millions of whites to save thousands of whites

      The Turner Diaries unironically uses the same logic

      >Food became critically scarce everywhere during the winter of 1993-1994. The Blacks lapsed into cannibalism, just as they had in California, while hundreds of thousands of starving Whites, who earlier had ignored the Organization's call for a rising against the System, began appearing at the borders of the various liberated zones begging for food. The Organization was only able to feed the White populations already under its control by imposing the severest rationing, and it was necessary to turn many of the latecomers away
      >Those who were admitted-and that meant only children, women of childbearing age, and able-bodied men willing to fight in the Organization's ranks-were subjected to much more severe racial screening than had been used to separate Whites from non-Whites in California. It was no longer sufficient to be merely White; in order to eat one had to be judged the bearer of especially valuable genes
      >In Detroit the practice was first established of providing any able-bodied White male who sought admittance to the Organization's enclave with a hot meal and a bayonet or other edged weapon. His forehead was then marked with an indelible dye, and he was turned out and could be readmitted permanently only by bringing back the head of a freshly killed Black or other non-White. This practice assured that precious food would not be wasted on those who would not or could not add to the Organization's fighting strength, but it took a terrible toll of the weaker and more decadent White elements
      >Tens of millions perished during the first half of 1994, and the total White population of the country reached a low point of approximately 50 million by August of that year. By then, however, nearly half the remaining Whites were in Organization enclaves, and food production and distribution in the enclaves had grown until it was barely sufficient to prevent further losses from starvation

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The future is total global Rhodesification.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >remove white educated people
      >so that Cletus and Billy Bob can have their daughter-fricking white utopia

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No more fruit by the foot

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    you will die and the world will be a better place for it. Rest of human monkeys march on

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    who would profit from total nuclear annihilation? at least in fallout vault tech greedy oligarchs wanting to restart civilizations in their own image kinda makes sense but we have no intention of using them atm plus we're not logistically prepared to launch them all at once. "they" would much rather enslave us than turn us to glass.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >who would profit from total nuclear annihilation?

      >schadenfreude, the emotional experience of pleasure in response to another's misfortune. Schadenfreude is a German word that combines Schaden, which means “damage,” and Freude, which means “joy.” The concept is common to people across cultures, but some languages do have comparable words.
      Russia Ukraine war is solely driven by Russians seeking schadenfreude.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Ukraine War is entirely driven by Moscows inability to accept they've been completely outmaneuvered by NATO economically, culturally, demographically, and militarily

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >at least in fallout vault tech greedy oligarchs wanting to restart civilizations in their own image
      In Fallout universe nuclear war was started by China who lost US-China conventional war fought for remaining recourses (see Canada annexation by US to get control over Canadian oil) and losing China threw a hissy fit.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Sorry honey, that's been retconned (and was never solidly confirmed in the first place, the strongest canon answer for who shot first prior to the Fallout show was "aliens did it", China shot first was always loose implications and fan canon)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Chinese puppet Bezos whose business is selling Chinese made dildos through his online store retconnes US-Chinese war
          You are not tricking anyone, Winnie Pooh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Winnie-the-Pooh_in_China

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Shut the frick up bugman, we'll do it for real too and we'll win. The future is American chads stomping on Chinese faces forever, get used to it or jump into one of your many deathtrap appliances in despair at the end of your pathetic race.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          ??? Even Hodd Toward depicted the Chinese troops landing in Alaska, it's 100% confirmed and set in stone. https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Sino-American_War

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Oh no the new Fallout TV show made it so that the Nukes were dropped because White people are evil and it was the White people who ran Vault Tech who decided to destroy the world so that it would be easy for them to gather all of the resources. China was innocent it was evil white people.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >The evil person was a black woman
              kek, go leave moron.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Don't forget the niggress

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          DIA glowBlack person terminals in Fallout 4 shows the bugmen preparing their nuclear subs off the west coast one day before the bombs fell and scrambling their bombers hours to minutes before the exchange began. Chinks started it. Die mad about in a mushroom cloud with a side of sweet and sour chicken and fried rice with an extra fortune cookie.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Chinese shooting first was HEAVILY implied by US Army power infantry surrounding Beijing just prior to the nuke exchange

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Not to mention
            >Nuclear sub just off of Boston in the harbor and ShiTown in San Fran
            >the fact that chinese bombers managed to make it across the continent
            >the rapid spread of nuclear attack from Cali to DC meant it was a pretty coordinated simultaneous attack

            The US was practically caught flatfooted. If anything, there may have been some weird rapid spiral of escalation that occurred so fast that no one realized what the other side was doing, and so both sides may have the leeway to go "we didn't shoot first" in the fog of war.

            All we know is that Vegas managed to survive even as DC got raped from the sky, which would tell me that the government truly was caught off-balance (or the chinese threw an absolute absurd amount of effort at taking it out and what survived is because like 1/10th of the bombs made it to their destination).

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Tim cain confirmed china shot first because of the US fricking around with fev.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The chinamen fear the chad Big Green (sterile) wiener

            Honestly it'd be pretty great to hear at least one in-universe story about a prototype platoon of super mutants showing up in the night to raid a chinese base, only to have them shrugging off things like AK fire, causing the Chinese to flip the frick out when they realize the first few batches of super mutants are going to be interned Chinese people dipped in the tanks.

            >Behold, the greatest threat to 5,000 years of Chinese civilization

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >because of the US fricking around with fev.
            what. changs were pissed they could not steal it to copy it?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              "Prease, STAWP deveroping bio-weapon, is against the rules!"
              >"Okay, buddy."
              >Moves it somewhere else the Chinks don't know about yet.
              "You invade mainrand China! Beijing being captured!"
              >Fortunate Son.mp3
              "You keep making bio-weapon! We all die together then, BANZAI!!!!"
              >FFW 200 years
              >"To the town of Agua Fria rode a stranger one fine day [...] For the stranger there among them had a big iron on his hip"

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It actually bothers me that they didn't just paint the pre-war US as hopelessly immoral and deserving of Chinese nukes if they wanted to please the Chinese audiences.
            >yes, China nuked America first, but they DESERVED it!
            Isn't that basically how their propaganda paints things anyways? Just like with the internment camps.
            All that the decision to blame it on Vault Tec of all people (a corporation that shouldn't even have had access to nuclear weapons in the first place) tells me that Bethesdrones are so universally low-IQ that even literal communist propaganda that's specifically designed to appeal to moronic insect people is too complicated for them to understand.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You'll have to link that, I don't recall it from the Fallout Bible, so I'm guessing he said it in an interview or on his youtube channel? I doubt FEV was the last straw, because New Plague was a Chinese bioweapon and FEV was ineffective as a counter to it. I'm interested, though.

            It actually bothers me that they didn't just paint the pre-war US as hopelessly immoral and deserving of Chinese nukes if they wanted to please the Chinese audiences.
            >yes, China nuked America first, but they DESERVED it!
            Isn't that basically how their propaganda paints things anyways? Just like with the internment camps.
            All that the decision to blame it on Vault Tec of all people (a corporation that shouldn't even have had access to nuclear weapons in the first place) tells me that Bethesdrones are so universally low-IQ that even literal communist propaganda that's specifically designed to appeal to moronic insect people is too complicated for them to understand.

            This has nothing to do with pleasing the Chinese market, which did not exist in the 90s. The devs of Fallout 1 - who set up the Chinese foe - had no fond feelings for communism, either. China was chosen because post-collapse Russia was considered a total joke.

            None of the 3 "real" games (1, 2, NV) or the canceled van Buren specifies who shot first. If it was the Chinese, it seems more likely to be a spite move taken because they had effectively lost the war by that point. China had no fuel left, had been decisively defeated in Alaska, and had a large American army ashore. New Plague had failed to provoke an American collapse. All that was left was nukes. They didn't know how desperately unstable the US was by this point. The devs aren't making out the Fallout America to be a good entity, either, and this only got more emphatic with each entry in the series.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >who would profit from total nuclear annihilation?
      schadenfreude

      >Yeah radiation decays very rapidly unless you salt your nukes (nobody does)
      Akshually Trident missiles warheads are salted nukes.... It's 3 stage desing with most wield coming from fission, it's extremely dirty warhead with fallout been 1000 time more than notorious cobalt bomb, (but reduced half life accordingly). And this is not a bug, it's a feature. This warheads are specifically designed to inflict maximum population casualties via short term fallout.

      >Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years
      Yeah radiation decays very rapidly unless you salt your nukes (nobody does), basically everywhere on earth that isn't a nuclear crater will be back to normal within a year
      >What would the world look like
      Almost entirely the same besides every city being a crater with collapsed ruble around it
      Nuclear winter is not a thing

      instead of kveching ass over urbanite fallout, as most strategic carpet bombing of cities are air bursts anyway, what would actually be concerning is existing nook plants getting bullseyed. Like chernobyl is supposed to be this big scaremongering nightmare but at the end of the day only one reactor blew up. One out of four. Near pidorsburg alone to this day same project plant operates that has like eight reactors alone in its modular blocks

      now those will be places of true salted earth where the tribalized descendants of the survivors warn their kids not to go anywhere close as "evil spirits haunt the land and kill anybody trespassing on it"

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Im not really sure what your point about Chernobyl is - After one year Chernobyl's radiation levels were down to less than 1%, Chernobyl had one of the most thriving wildlife populations in all of Europe before Russias invasion
        Effectively Chernobyl and any other nuclear power facility that might get nuked is just another nuclear crater, don't go down and lick the elephant foot at the bottom of Core 4 and you'll be good

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/7UV8xC0.jpeg

          >this is the average person's perception of radiation

          well go and dig trenches in the red forest to see what happens in the nothinburger exclusion zone

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Go stick your dick in a radioactive waste barrel and see what happens
            Thanks moron great point

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >don't go down and lick the elephant foot at the bottom of Core 4 and you'll be good
          Those radiation big shots can't tell me what to do!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >this is the average person's perception of radiation

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/k2dg7i9.png

        Im not really sure what your point about Chernobyl is - After one year Chernobyl's radiation levels were down to less than 1%, Chernobyl had one of the most thriving wildlife populations in all of Europe before Russias invasion
        Effectively Chernobyl and any other nuclear power facility that might get nuked is just another nuclear crater, don't go down and lick the elephant foot at the bottom of Core 4 and you'll be good

        https://i.imgur.com/7UV8xC0.jpeg

        >this is the average person's perception of radiation

        Nah, he's right. Radioactive fallout originating from attacks on nuclear facilities has a far longer lifespan than fallout from the weapons themselves and could be a serious problem both locally and globally in any full-scale nuclear war.

        The Medical Implications of Nuclear War from Lawrence Livermore has a good chapter on it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Medical Implications of Nuclear War from Lawrence Livermore

          I just browsed the chapter on superfires. There’s a metric assload of assumptions and outdated guesswork in there. Looking at the table of contents, there’s a lot of worst case scenario doom mongering. I don’t doubt that the medical science is solid, but the extrapolations of the nonmedical aspects have a lot of handwaving and leaps of faith.

          Still gonna download it though.

          Side note: the National Academies Press has thousands of titles on similar topics. Looking for a pub on the effects of fallout on livestock? They have it. Dozens of books on small community resilience. All downloadable and free. It’s well worth a browse.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Sorry honey, that's been retconned (and was never solidly confirmed in the first place, the strongest canon answer for who shot first prior to the Fallout show was "aliens did it", China shot first was always loose implications and fan canon)

      A: The show does not explicitly say they DID the bombing, only that the black Vault Tech lady suggested they COULD drop the bomb first.

      B: It was literally the black ladies proposal

      The fact is that the games themselves from FO3 to NV to F4 to F76 are all ambiguous who dropped the bombs first, on purpose, because in the end it actually doesn't matter who started the fire--all humans were trapped in the burning house in the end. Did Vault Tech start it? I don't know. Did the Americans start with tactical nukes like the Mininuke, then China escalate in turn until it was a self-sustaining cycle out of control? No one knows. FO4 lets you talk to PAM, who was of the opinion that nuclear war was inevitable and we should nuke first. The flip side of that same game, is that we SEE the beginning of the atomic bombings.

      IF the United States government was going to begin atom-bombing people, you'd think they'd have the courtesy to tell their own people about the impending nuclear offensive (and inevitable counter attack). In contrast we can tell by Megaton that the bombs dropped also included conventional nuclear gravity bombs, so the Chinese must have had bombers too.

      There is sufficient evidence in game to suggest the Chinese caught the Americans at least partially by surprise. Even FO76 makes it clear that the Enclave was hurt a lot worse than they expected by the initial attack.

      The fact that the show has people blacked out in the background of the secret VaultTech meeting tells me that if anything the Enclave may have been present and floating the idea, but I don't think there's sufficient evidence for anything other than a possible conspiracy.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    In today's nuclear exchange when we talk about thousands warheads tops (not 40000 like in peak US vs USSR standoff in 80s) damage would be mostly limited to countries caught in nuclear exchanges, countries in other regions would do totally fine.
    As for countries specifics nuclear warhead fallout lingers for about 2 weeks, it may produce massive casualties immediately, but comes back to normal ayear after.

    But. If US nuclear plants are targets, they store 40000 tons of spent fuel in reactor ponds, these spend fuel vaporized by nuclear strikes can produce terrifying long lasting (decades) fallout that make possible close to Fallout universe scenario in US.
    Why does US store 90% of their used nuclear file in reactor ponds without care? Ask your boomer "not my problem" grand dad.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >close to Fallout universe scenario

      I wish. https://youtu.be/qf2p-tkn7cE

      https://pastebin.com/cWs6A7rR

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        best, most realistic depiction of long-term SHTF

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Ask your boomer "not my problem" grand dad.
      the boomers actually wanted to store that shit in Yucca Mountain where it would have been impervious to this. It was the Gen X-er and millenial voterbase that was instrumental in killing that project because muh neychure

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        WIPP was always a red herring

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No nuclear winter, massive (massive) MASSIVE deathoff by collapse in logistics, power, food, ect.

      Relating to your image, I feel like if our reality is a simulation and a story written by an author then you need to have the boomers end the world. Not saying they make humanity go extinct, just that the world as we knew it from +1945 is over before der boomer vanishes. It's far too on the nose, far too fitting in a storytelling point of view for the generation born after the apocalypse of WW2 to enjoy the fruits of the new world order and then promptly destroy it on their way out. So if the world's going to collapse I'd give it probably 4-8 more years, boomers are still in that power-controlling 60s-70s years of age period so they have that 8 or so year window to apres moi le deluge.
      .

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Massive destruction, billions of deaths and contamination from radiocative elements.

    Survival is ensured only by nuclear-powered deep bunkers housing thousands of people (10,000 is the actual MVP - Minimum Viable Population - to avoid inbreeding and genetic shit, along with disease tolerance). Realistically you'll need structures with 4 ft of tungsten and 15 ft of reinforced 10,000 psi concrete buried underground at 330 ft, away from cities as possible and other sensitive targets. Water reservoirs are essential an adult person uses 200 USG per day, which rounded to 400 days a year (margin), equal 80,000 USG per person per year. Estimates say land won't be farmable or productive for 10 - 20 years, so say you stay down 100 yrs. This means that for a 10k population x 100 yrs = 80B USG of water needed without counting water for production of food, etc.

    On the surface well... massive efforts to rebuild, etc. Perfect if you have a breeding kink lol, have 10 kids right away pal

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >10,000 is the actual MVP - Minimum Viable Population - to avoid inbreeding and genetic shit,
      Ok. I will have sex with 10,000 womis to repopulate the plan.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's 50/50

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Threat of Inbreeding is a tad overblown. you can easily bounce back the human population with 500. So long as first cousins and closer aren't mixing it's fine.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Reminder that it took sixteen straight generations of close inbreeding (after plenty of occasional inbreeding previously) to create that boot headed Hapsburg freak everyone uses as a gotcha image.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Perfect if you have a breeding kink lol
      That's called "not being a homosexual", you degenerate modernoid.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >10k
      it's 2k.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    nuclear winter. starvation of most in the northern hemisphere. australia, and south america might eke by but cut supply lines for meds and fertilizers will also kill most of them. any remaining military forces would probably also invade them. radiation and winter should mostly clear up after a century or so though. any survivors could rebuild.

    unless remaining infrastructure is entiredly fricked and minerals/fuel reserves are inaccessible without them. then perma-middle ages.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I will die jerking off to livestreams of Moscow being vaporized

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >most stable NATO bot

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It would be underwhelming. Nuclear stockpiles have been vastly reduced. If you don't live near a government hub, a major military base, or nuclear silos life will go on.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It would be very bad for the economy.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years
    It's not the 1970s any more when there were 30,000+ megaton scale nukes per side. Russia and the US both have about 1500 ready nukes each, virtually all of which are in the 300-500kt range. Most are 'clean' designs compared to the old days and most will be airbursted.
    It'll be more like a Hiroshima scale of fallout. If you survive the first month radiation is no longer an issue.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Most are 'clean' designs compared to the old days
      >he doesn't know about W88

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I never understood WHY the buildup got so high. Redundancy amd the prevention of a counter force first strike, granted. But what the frick was the point of beung able to allocate 5 warheads to every outhouse in Siberia gonna do for us?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        PK%. Missiles fail, they miss, they get intercepted, they don't detonate, they don't detonate properly, etc. The buildup was to ensure that the enemies force and value targets were to be eliminated.

        I just think it's people not realizing it's an extinction level event where the goal is to wipe out all life on the planet.
        It's a game where you lose if you don't kill everyone over there and they lose if they don't kill everyone over here.
        I'm sure it has to do with "larp rot of the brain" as you call it too. Far too many people have unrealistic ideas and plans.

        >nuclear war is an extinction level event
        Not even fricking close, in fact; it wouldn't even be that absurd to think that some countries, even the nuclear powers still retain some, albeit heavily reduced, control and power post exchange. A cold war era full exchange wouldn't even come close to meh level asteroid impacts, let alone the big ones in Earths history. A lot of people would die, absolutely, but it wouldn't be like a 99.9% sort of thing. Even shit like just early warning and people unironically taking cover would drastically reduce the immediate casualty rate. I honestly believe part of the reason why civil protection was canned was because advancing the programs might've actually been such a threat that it could've prompted a launch for being too effective. Imagine every building in a metropolitan area have 5-10+ psi blast doors in their basements that can house hundreds of people to even thousands? Imagine extensive bunkers being made across and around major population centers that could evacuate large percentages of the said populations and disperse them into hard to kill structures? The amount of nukes you would need to get a high enough PK% would be astronomical even compared to the stockpiles the US and Soviets had at the height of the cold war. It would be impossible to actually afford such a stockpile, hence prompting a launch.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >The amount of nukes you would need to get a high enough PK% would be astronomical
          Wait do you think it's just going to be nukes? That after the exchange everyone is just going to call it a draw and pack things up? Nuclear war is an extinction level event because of the sum total of what happens during and after. Even the basic poisoned water supplies and salted earth tactics will be used. This isn't something the human race walks away from. It's not being to be a bubbajillion nukes that wipe out all humans it's going to be a decade possibly century long process that ultimately ends in our specials going bye bye.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >anon forgot to bring his iodine pills to pop them in before he takes a sip from his trusted canteen
            lol, lmao, top zoz even

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >salted bombs are used
            >end up irradiating former population centers like LA and NYC

            oh no...anyways

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It's not just major cities that get attacked, anon. Strategic targets would include objects and areas that have the highest chances of prolonged damaged and totality of casualties. Things like the great lakes are a prime example for not only being a fresh water reserve, but the largest inland shipping port in the world. You're under this impression that a little town out in the Wyoming is going to be fine when it's not. Total war is an extermination.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >nuking water
                If only water had the power to be really good at shielding itself from radiation, we wouldn't need to worry, oh well. It's a real shame how much water gets killed in nuclear powerplants just for shits and giggles. Those power companies are a bunch of fricking meanies for doing that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You're still caught up on nukes when that isn't the point. Nukes are only one facet of total war. I'll ask again do you think everyone packs up and goes home after the first nuclear exchange?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >first nuclear exchange
                homie there's only gonna be one. Primo targets are always going to be counterforce. If you launch, you launch them all.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                There is a hundred reasons as to why a 2nd or 3rd exchange would happen failures, survivals, or just dumb luck being some of them. You still haven't answered my question.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >the best deep water ports on the west and east coast are unusable for 50-100 years
              Short term gains for long term costs

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            the southern half of the world would likely be mostly intact...

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Imagine every building in a metropolitan area have 5-10+ psi blast doors in their basements that can house hundreds of people to even thousands?
          Most population casualties would be not from blast but from fallout. And yes relatively simple civil defense fallout shelters in direct vicinity of the houses can reduce fallout causalities by scale of 10-100. Nuclear weapons fallout is short lived, after week it would be safe to leave shelter for a short time (evacuate or something), after month it would be relatively safe to go back to business (cancer would be through the roof but whatever).
          Shelters designed for such small time frame can be very crowded, simple and therefore affordable.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >after week it would be safe to leave shelter for a short time
            Try after seven hours and you would be able to walk into the crater and only experience moderately elevated radiation levels above ambient.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            > after month it would be relatively safe to go back to business (cancer would be through the roof but whatever).

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it was still tiny compared to some real apocalypse like how many megatons chicxulub unleased. This nooks will kill us all is a combination of human monkey ego liking to think its way more powerful then it really is and fear porn turned to eleven by imagination

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You are now aware that the US military maintains underground bunkers full of armaments, including artillery and tanks, across the globe for use in a post-nuclear exchange

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I am sorry daddy MIC but I will NOT be fricking driving a tank across nuked out Eastern Europe to take Yamantau.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    cancer, cancer, more cancer. crop failures, infrastructure failure, etc. unless you live in the southern hemisphere then business as usual ig

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Where's Oppenheimer when you need him?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Matthew Nolan is Chris Nolan’s older brother and he went by a moniker Matt Oppenheimer when he tortured a man to death in Costa Rica in 2009.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Whatever happened to these mad lads? Last I heard half of em converted to Islam and killed another one of them

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They were a glowop from day 1. Their handlers probably lost interest now China is the new boogeyman.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    South America and Africa would be spared. Australia and Indonesia too

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The cities are gone. The rednecks rejoice. Then they die of lymphoma. Only Puerto Ricans remain.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not if I have anything to say about it!

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >/k/ unironically thinks humans survival a total nuclear war
    Is it just a case of LARP rot of the brain or something? Have people just spent too much time fantasizing about it that they don't understand how real life operates? At least the zombie people know they're talking make believe. People that think they are surviving nukes are delusional.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >r/heckinscience
      You fell for the propaganda anon.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I just think it's people not realizing it's an extinction level event where the goal is to wipe out all life on the planet.
      It's a game where you lose if you don't kill everyone over there and they lose if they don't kill everyone over here.
      I'm sure it has to do with "larp rot of the brain" as you call it too. Far too many people have unrealistic ideas and plans.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        even in worst case scenario with a nuclear winter, only the norther hemisphere is affected since that's where all the nuclear powers are. Countries like australia will remain completely normal.

        Sure billions will die but there will still be billions of people left on the planet. It's not an ELE.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          i doubt that billons would die. india would be largely intact imo (usa and russia wouldn't bomb it, china and pakistan don't have the warheads). china would likely be very affected, also europe and north america, but there would be A LOT of survivors everywhere in that continents too. also africa and most of asia would be out of it and that's where most of the population is.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's why I said worst case scenario. If Nuclear Winter is a real thing then most people in the northern hemisphere would starve to death. A few years to a decade of no sun would cause mass famine. Deaths from the bombs themselves would probably be around 100million in europe and the US but there would be nothing to feed the rest of the population for years.

            Every other nation in the world would probably go to war as a result too. Korea, pakistan, india, all of the middle east. Everyone that has a grudge would be set off.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >That's why I said worst case scenario. If Nuclear Winter is a real thing then most people in the northern hemisphere would starve to death.
              They'd be fine, most agricultural land would get no fallout but there would be no exports for sure and the third world, india, africa would see onions and grain prices hyperinflate and a few hundred million of them would starve. No one would care

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >If Nuclear Winter is a real thing
                It's not its a soviet propaganda lie seeded into western academia to be used to promote western nuclear disarmament. We've detonated 2500 nukes on land sea and air including much bigger ones than are in any nations current arsenal. Most fallout is harmless within a month. It's ridiculous that NATO keeps listening to Russia threatening to nuke western cities weekly, Moscow and St. Petersberg should already have been destroyed in retaliation, it's likely few of Russias nukes even work..

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I wouldn't put money on anything that isn't on a submarine being in good working order.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's not the fallout that causes nuclear winter, it's the soot from the firestorms caused by thousands of massive fires. They go into the atmosphere and block out the sun.

                Radiation from the actual bombs isn't that bad as you can see from nagasaki and hiroshima. It's like if ten thousand volcanos went off at the same time and filled the sky with ash. You wouldn't get sunlight for years.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Most of India would starve to death in a period in which the global market completely shit itself.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, in fact a lot of places would be left relatively unaffected even in more dire estimates.
      Knowing what we know now about the state of Russia's arsenal and some extrapolation about China's, I'm willing to say that the majority of the US would actually survive a nuclear war unscathed. Sure, we'd lose DC and a few other cities the enemy deems key areas, assuming they even have the working nukes for that. But even in that case, it's very doubtful that they could hit any more than DC and a few token cities. The history that's lost is enough to lament for, but we would only take a glancing hit compared to the annihilation we would dole out in response.

      I just think it's people not realizing it's an extinction level event where the goal is to wipe out all life on the planet.
      It's a game where you lose if you don't kill everyone over there and they lose if they don't kill everyone over here.
      I'm sure it has to do with "larp rot of the brain" as you call it too. Far too many people have unrealistic ideas and plans.

      People are the foundation of any economy. Wars are fought for the control of said people, the land they live on, and the resources they produce on that land. If the people and land are destroyed then you have fought for nothing and have fricked yourself. They'd hit areas of control, government and military centers, and after that they'd seek conquest over the fearful populace who are now largely without leaders or armies. Killing them makes no sense economically.

      >The amount of nukes you would need to get a high enough PK% would be astronomical
      Wait do you think it's just going to be nukes? That after the exchange everyone is just going to call it a draw and pack things up? Nuclear war is an extinction level event because of the sum total of what happens during and after. Even the basic poisoned water supplies and salted earth tactics will be used. This isn't something the human race walks away from. It's not being to be a bubbajillion nukes that wipe out all humans it's going to be a decade possibly century long process that ultimately ends in our specials going bye bye.

      Correction: it's not something YOU can walk away from. WE will be fine. The most your nation can do is spit on us before we lick your ass with eternal hellfire, and that's assuming you live in a nuclear-capable nation. As it stands, America is very likely the only nation on Earth with an actually-functional nuclear arsenal. Russia or China would get a city or two each with the rest of their missiles failing to launch due to being poorly maintained. We would then blanket them in nukes until their people are extinct.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Damn bro you are glowing really bright

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >>/k/ unironically thinks humans survival a total nuclear war
      Imagine a full nuclear exchange between US + allies and Russia + China + North Korea. Somehow they kill everyone in those countries. How do you get from there to 100% human death in Central America, South America, Africa and Southeast Asia?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        your post will go unanswered because you're right and the redditoids seethe at the thought that most major western cities produce no tangible goods nowadays, just intangible shit like software and finance and queer theory

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      you literally fell for the propaganda. nuclear winter was straight made up to prevent the cold war going hot. this isn't even debatable, it's fact. you just consoomed what you were told, and never questioned it beyond that. there were uncounted threads by nukeanon about all kinds of resources to research it, but yeah, it's everyone else that has brain rot, for not just being irrationally afraid of the ol spicy rock.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        its like the peak oil theory, it was made with the circumstances at the time in mind. if every nuke back then was launch and hit every nuclear power station then it may have affected Earth's temperature, just like if we had continued with the exact same oil technology that we had back then we may have ran out of oil. the problem with both is that they didn't account for advances in technology

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Different anon, one problem is that people can't tell if you're serious or a 'moon landings were faked' nutcase. The other problem is that of perspective. Assuming a long term power grid collapse, that means 90% of the population dies over the next year or so, for some people that's it, game over, unthinkable, for survivalists it means their life just started for real.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years?
    even low altitude, extremely inefficient nukes don't leave enough radiation to make an area hazardous for more than about a month.
    stop believing psuedoscience bullshit spread by propagandists. these are real things governed by strict physical laws.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    WW3 Nuclear exchange will be a Northern hemisphere problem.
    Africa gets ignored - they probably all starve back to mud huts without 1st world aid
    South America - ignored as usual, so continues as normal.
    Australia - maybe 2 chinese or russian strategic strikes on PineGap and HaroldHolt, both so isolated nobody really notices, so the rest is ignored and isolated, continues as normal.
    Eventually the Australian-Argentine Alliance 'wins' WW3.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Africa gets ignored - they probably all starve back to mud huts without 1st world aid

      there is a billion or so of them so they would be just fine (in mudhuts and with bows and spears).
      the entire southern part of the world would probably be mostly intact, if we don't count increased radiation pollution.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    So after going through some post-apocalypse media, wouldn't Mexico and Canada just move in and provide support? Some comment mentioned that a lot of such media is just suburban people believing that the world ends at their city limits and it seems like in so much media the world completely ends. Compare this to stuff like how Europe was constantly being bombed, or even how Russians in Metro remade society really quickly.

    Heck, it just feels weird how people believe everything will just completely collapse. Wouldn't we really just end up back at the late 1800s stage?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The entire global economy would collapse, cityoids would literally be cannibalized even in countries that weren't hit with nukes. Every market would crash simultaneously and never become operational again. Every brownoid country would backslide into more or less the position we found them in without the global market and global police artificially inflating their survival rate and economics.

      Humans, however, would be fine.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        if humans still exist there will always be a market as basic trade is everywhere where human monkeys operate.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, but that wouldnt stop hundreds of millions of people starving to death. It wouldnt be mad max and society would still function on a basic level, but a lot of people would die

          I dont think people realize just how interconnected the global food, economy and logistical network is

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I am not suggesting a cessation of exchange in the literal sense.

          The term "market" here is being used in the modern way, referring to a specific "instance" of organized exchange i.e. "The gas market" "The mens shoe market".
          A hypothetical to illustrate the way the term is used: Lets say 99% of Americans go barefoot or start making their own shoes, buying the most basic raw materials and forming them themselves. We would say in economic terms "the shoe market has crashed and wont recover", even though there are still 3 million Americans who want to buy shoes, and even if in some distant decade everyone went back to buying their shoes, we would call that a "new" or "different" shoe market, because that would be all new companies, new production lines, new business.

          So, in a situation of
          >generalized or widespread internal violence across the west
          or
          >Large scale nuclear exchange

          The important thing to note economically is the interruption of trade. So much of trade is "floating" at any one time that interruptions cause exponential loss; i.e. you already sent the truck with the shipment of corn to your buyer, he hasn't paid you yet, but you've got to keep the trucks moving so you can pay your driver (this relationship times 1000 for all business interactions). When the road's destroyed or your trucks are attacked or the guy you deliver the corn to is dead problems stack up quickly. One company can pivot with a little problem, a little delay, but every company facing massive delays and massive pivoting simply tanks the entire economy.

          This relationship is actually international. China anxiously awaits the shipment of Coal you're sending them from australia that you can only send them because your american investor allowed you to rent a german ship. If one piece falls through, so much falls through. One bad trade deal with australia left a third of China with weekly power failures for two years, a few years ago.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            if humans still exist there will always be a market as basic trade is everywhere where human monkeys operate.

            This is what is so absurd about people talking about "alternative economies" or "alternatives to the dollar".

            There are no international alternatives, there's essentially a single economy, all the currencies are exchanged with each other and all their values are tied to each other. If the dollar became wallpaper, the economy of China would implode, because they deal with dollar-companies, or they deal with companies who deal with dollar companies.

            I cant ship you the coal if I cant pay my captain. You cant keep the power on if you don't get the coal. You can't deal with me if your power isn't on and your people are rioting. We can't trade if the docks are destroyed, we cant build new docks if we cant pay and protect the workers. We cant pay the soldiers to protect the workers to fix the docks if the docks aren't bringing in coal that we use to do our business to pay the soldiers.

            Modern markets are great at handling isolated problems, but there's no pivoting around or suspending or insuring against a unilateral problem that ceases large scale trade in a huge chunk of the economy.

            If there was a huge nuclear exchange, or a great tide of civil conflicts across the west, you'd have people killing each other for water and food in countries you'd think were completely uninvolved, because they relied on this long chain of market interactions to feed the people in XYZ city in Whosfrickistan.

            Consider this, in America, the vast majority of urban households do not have a three day food supply. What will they do if all the stores are empty or burned down because the money turned worthless due to trade interruptions? There have been riots in the united states fueled exclusively by delays in Welfare benefits lasting less than a single week.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            This is what is so absurd about people talking about "alternative economies" or "alternatives to the dollar".

            There are no international alternatives, there's essentially a single economy, all the currencies are exchanged with each other and all their values are tied to each other. If the dollar became wallpaper, the economy of China would implode, because they deal with dollar-companies, or they deal with companies who deal with dollar companies.

            I cant ship you the coal if I cant pay my captain. You cant keep the power on if you don't get the coal. You can't deal with me if your power isn't on and your people are rioting. We can't trade if the docks are destroyed, we cant build new docks if we cant pay and protect the workers. We cant pay the soldiers to protect the workers to fix the docks if the docks aren't bringing in coal that we use to do our business to pay the soldiers.

            Modern markets are great at handling isolated problems, but there's no pivoting around or suspending or insuring against a unilateral problem that ceases large scale trade in a huge chunk of the economy.

            If there was a huge nuclear exchange, or a great tide of civil conflicts across the west, you'd have people killing each other for water and food in countries you'd think were completely uninvolved, because they relied on this long chain of market interactions to feed the people in XYZ city in Whosfrickistan.

            Consider this, in America, the vast majority of urban households do not have a three day food supply. What will they do if all the stores are empty or burned down because the money turned worthless due to trade interruptions? There have been riots in the united states fueled exclusively by delays in Welfare benefits lasting less than a single week.

            if humans still exist there will always be a market as basic trade is everywhere where human monkeys operate.

            Rural communities where the food is actually produced are obviously better able to weather this kind of economic downfall, though obviously they're not "unaffected". With the loss of the "farming economy" supporting urban environments, and the loss of massive seed and fertilizer exchange, farming would "collapse", but collapse as a business, not as an enterprise of survival. Through force or cooperation or simple abandonment, large scale farming would have to be divided up as it would no longer be profitable or even possible in it's current form. Even without all our modern advancements, the farmland of America is far more than enough to support the rural population at a subsistence level. There would be violence, and periods of severe privation, but absolutely orders of magnitude removed from what cities would experience, globally.

            Nonwhite countries depend on the international market for basic life necessities exponentially more than white countries do, simply put if whites stop feeding the world (or conducting the business that allows a nonwhite to make profits that allow him to do business with another nonwhite to feed other nonwhites), most of the world will starve.
            America, et al, has created an environment where piracy, open naval aggression, and large scale territorial conquest are extremely inflated in their cost. Simply put, without the invincible American Navy threatening everyone all the time, there'd be naval destroyers vaporizing shipping vessels across the world. This is not praise for America or the "pax Americana", indeed the artificial "peace" enforced for most of the last century has lead to conflicts that simply linger on longer with no clear winner, and a globally suicidal society.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              [...]
              This is what is so absurd about people talking about "alternative economies" or "alternatives to the dollar".

              There are no international alternatives, there's essentially a single economy, all the currencies are exchanged with each other and all their values are tied to each other. If the dollar became wallpaper, the economy of China would implode, because they deal with dollar-companies, or they deal with companies who deal with dollar companies.

              I cant ship you the coal if I cant pay my captain. You cant keep the power on if you don't get the coal. You can't deal with me if your power isn't on and your people are rioting. We can't trade if the docks are destroyed, we cant build new docks if we cant pay and protect the workers. We cant pay the soldiers to protect the workers to fix the docks if the docks aren't bringing in coal that we use to do our business to pay the soldiers.

              Modern markets are great at handling isolated problems, but there's no pivoting around or suspending or insuring against a unilateral problem that ceases large scale trade in a huge chunk of the economy.

              If there was a huge nuclear exchange, or a great tide of civil conflicts across the west, you'd have people killing each other for water and food in countries you'd think were completely uninvolved, because they relied on this long chain of market interactions to feed the people in XYZ city in Whosfrickistan.

              Consider this, in America, the vast majority of urban households do not have a three day food supply. What will they do if all the stores are empty or burned down because the money turned worthless due to trade interruptions? There have been riots in the united states fueled exclusively by delays in Welfare benefits lasting less than a single week.

              I am not suggesting a cessation of exchange in the literal sense.

              The term "market" here is being used in the modern way, referring to a specific "instance" of organized exchange i.e. "The gas market" "The mens shoe market".
              A hypothetical to illustrate the way the term is used: Lets say 99% of Americans go barefoot or start making their own shoes, buying the most basic raw materials and forming them themselves. We would say in economic terms "the shoe market has crashed and wont recover", even though there are still 3 million Americans who want to buy shoes, and even if in some distant decade everyone went back to buying their shoes, we would call that a "new" or "different" shoe market, because that would be all new companies, new production lines, new business.

              So, in a situation of
              >generalized or widespread internal violence across the west
              or
              >Large scale nuclear exchange

              The important thing to note economically is the interruption of trade. So much of trade is "floating" at any one time that interruptions cause exponential loss; i.e. you already sent the truck with the shipment of corn to your buyer, he hasn't paid you yet, but you've got to keep the trucks moving so you can pay your driver (this relationship times 1000 for all business interactions). When the road's destroyed or your trucks are attacked or the guy you deliver the corn to is dead problems stack up quickly. One company can pivot with a little problem, a little delay, but every company facing massive delays and massive pivoting simply tanks the entire economy.

              This relationship is actually international. China anxiously awaits the shipment of Coal you're sending them from australia that you can only send them because your american investor allowed you to rent a german ship. If one piece falls through, so much falls through. One bad trade deal with australia left a third of China with weekly power failures for two years, a few years ago.

              if humans still exist there will always be a market as basic trade is everywhere where human monkeys operate.

              Whether the global police system is good or bad is irrelevant though. *Without* these artificial constraints, deep water piracy would explode back into being, polities now with no massive web of international economic pressures would go back to their previous doctrines of war (mass genocide), and for better or worse conflicts around the world would reach their "natural" conclusions rather than being suspended by the giant hand of the west.

              To sum up, in a situation in which there is mass civil war in the leading world economies, mass nuclear strikes, or other similar forces, large scale market infrastructure will collapse globally, leading to starvation and extreme violence in cities globally, billions of dead, and a complete restructuring of governments, with little relation to the governments that proceeded them.

              the southern half of the world would likely be mostly intact...

              >Africa gets ignored - they probably all starve back to mud huts without 1st world aid

              there is a billion or so of them so they would be just fine (in mudhuts and with bows and spears).
              the entire southern part of the world would probably be mostly intact, if we don't count increased radiation pollution.

              The global south would mostly starve and descend into violence, but yes 100 years hence, their 1% survivors would be "stabilized" in much the same condition they were found in when they first contacted the outside world (the relative elevation of populations that retained some European ancestry notwithstanding).

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The global south would mostly starve and descend into violence, but yes 100 years hence, their 1% survivors would be "stabilized" in much the same condition they were found in when they first contacted the outside world (the relative elevation of populations that retained some European ancestry notwithstanding).

                i doubt that south america would starve... some parts of africa would also be better off than others (zim, south africa maybe, kenya, botswana...).
                it would be interesting to see if they would band together or start wars (without western weapons).

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >i doubt that south america would starve
                Doubt all you want. South America feeds itself through constant contact with the global economy. There isnt a self sufficient city on this planet. There isnt a dollar independent nation on this planet

                (maybe north korea? I've read their supply from China has dwindled precipitously over the last 20 years, so they might be the most "independent" economy on earth)

                "parts" of South America would survive. Not "nations", but groups of people that would become the new nations in the centuries to come.

                Every country is plugged in to the global economy so heavily there would be ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEED starvation when it disappeared.

                also it would be ironic if aliens visited us at that point and saw how primitive are we (them).

                I'm sure they'd be more shocked at what we'd been doing for the previous 100 years than the "natural conclusion" of that suicidal path.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                also it would be ironic if aliens visited us at that point and saw how primitive are we (them).

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Heck, it just feels weird how people believe everything will just completely collapse.
      welcome to doomerism. its not some new phenomenon. Ever wonder what all those doomsday cults of ye olden days was about back in the medieval and ancient rome times. Specially when you had stuff happening that might have seen as the end of the world being it it. Like black plague killing half of euros population with mountains of corpses getting mass graved outside city gates.

      Doomerism is written in on a genetic level.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It really depends on which nations would be most affected by a complete breakdown in international trade, and in which ways. The Middle East would be apocalypticly fricked because it imports 75% of its food, the EU would be incredibly damaged by deindustrialization through lack of exports and energy imports

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've been preparing for this my whole life.

    (I'm gonna be vaporized as a warhead lands smack middle of my asscrack)

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Whats the deal with those SAT scores? When I was in highschool it was out of 2400

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      sat score is out of 1600, they probably revised the scores again since that image was made as they had to remove a lot of the language on the SATs because:

      "It is unfair to people of low socio economic factors to understand what words like Yacht mean"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That was probably from before they added the writing portion, or at least before they gave a shit about it's effect since the grading of essay's is pretty easy to bias.

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Every music will be stuck in the early 20s
    Every architecture will look like from 2000-2024

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Every architecture will look like from 2000-2024
      Brutalism and post modernism aren't actually more practical than older types of architecture. Just because something's shaped like geometry doesn't make it more mathematically pragmatic.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It would unironically be a much-needed purge of the genome. High-IQs are most likely to survive and take over responsibility for re-building. The great masses of low-IQ genetics would largely disappear. The IQ of humanity will go up and result in a better long-term future.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Most of the world won't notice anything different in their immediate environment--except for an economic crash worse than any other due to supply chains being broken all over the world, and mass panic as everyone assumes that the next nuke is somehow aimed at them, personally. Fallout will be a non-issue except for a few areas in a couple of weeks (don't tell Todd). Deaths from the nukes might only be a few million, possibly tens of millions; deaths over the next few years, however, could be in the hundreds of millions or even billions due to the aforementioned panic and economic dislocation.

    The Earth will never stop being habitable.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Land won't be farmable for up to 10 years, maybe 20. That's an issue

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Source
        >No results found
        okay

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Survival will be ensured only by nuclear-powered deep underground bunkers housing thousands of people (10,000 is the actual MVP - Minimum Viable Population - to avoid inbreeding and genetic drift, along with disease tolerance). Realistically you'll need structures with 4 ft of tungsten and 17 ft of reinforced 10,000 psi concrete buried underground at 330 ft, away from cities as possible and other sensitive targets. Water reservoirs are essential an adult person uses 200 USG per day, which rounded to 400 days a year (margin), equal 80,000 USG per person per year. Estimates say land won't be farmable or productive for 10 - 20 years, so say you stay down 100 yrs. This means that for a 10k population x 100 yrs = 80B USG of water needed without counting water for production of food, etc.

    You basically would have to build an underground city. There's a gazillion factors coming into play, especially since bunkers will be seen from space, thus you could expect to be willingly targeted by the enemy even if it's a civilian bunker (that big too). Also, all the stuff needed to repopulate and rebuild needs to be stored somewhere.

    On the surface, the rebuilding efforts are gonna be immense.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    PUTIN ROLLS NUCLEAR ROCKETS TO FINNISH BORDER.
    Russia army units all out of barracks and in attack mode along all NATO borders.

    NATO "going nuts" with combat aircraft flights in Baltic area.

    Hope you gays got your pills already, expected to sell out world wide.
    d.com/first-aid/potassium-iodide-radiation
    Pro-tip: I'd bet you could order bulk industial that will be basically just as pure and probably better if the Pills cum from some shit hole like Israel, Mexico or India like most meds sold in USA these days.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >t.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >moving ICBMS closer to borders
      Lord they are moronic
      >Russia army units all out of barracks and in attack mode along all NATO borders.
      Do it lol. Ah, its another chimpout and Putana b***h will piss itself again. So sad!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous
  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    At least these guys would survive, right.

    Right?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >tribals

  36. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >unless those days where shortened, no flesh would be saved
    No

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The most of Russian/Chinese missiles get wienerblocked. After a couple of missiles have "accidentally" made it through the defenses end evaporated San-Francisco and Detroit, NATO launches the response and makes BIS from BRICS.

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years
    Yes. The radiation from nuclear bombs is somewhat exaggerated in popular consciousness, people often forget that Hiroshima and Nagasaki started rebuilding themselves within a week of the bombings. It's obviously still very fricking bad for those exposed to the detonation at the time it happens, but the idea that the radiation lingers around for decades and turns the place into Chernobyl is a false one.
    Also note that Hiroshima and Nagasaki both are in line with Japan's national average for cancer rates and life expectancy.

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >So what will realistically happen in total nuclear exchange scenario between all nuclear powers in the world. What would the world look like? Will it be habitable in 50 or 100 years?
    2-4 weeks for most places if that, a year for normality, ground zero 5 years

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    real oldgays will remember

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      fiyaH the laz0rz

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Everyone will be dead of radiation sickness. There will be no ghouls in fridges for 200+ years, no mutants, and now pipe guns. Everyone will be dead and anyone who is still alive somehow will resort to cannibalism or eating radiated fauna until they get radiation sickness and die an agonizing death. But that will never happen as the world leaders, oligcarchs and israelites get nothing out of ending the world.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Everyone will be dead of radiation sickness.
      Cityoid thinks the whole world is cities.

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What would the world look like?
    Your eyes melting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The world isn't the city, Black person. The world is everything outside the city.

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You can survive in rural America if you have potassium iodide, a few years of food stores, a well, lots of guns and ammo, etc
    Source: my intuition

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      good luck growing your crops without any sun. You would need a few years of stored food at least. Nuclear winter might last up to a decade.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        nuclear winter is overhyped

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Nuclear winter might last up to a decade.
        Japans doing pretty well and it didnt take a decade

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Do you even know what nuclear winter is? Hint: It has nothing to do with radiation.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, a myth.

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Grand Dragon Empire of Bhutan will wage war on the Fiji Federation.

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    unironically canticle for leibowitz, you'll get nuked, die and dozens of years later no one will remember you but the war that fricked everything over, and then some time later we will nuke ourselves again.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *