WWIII and safe havengreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
OK, let's say WWIII is imminent; where would you rather be?where you are now? [where is that?]
somewhere else? [where is that?]
cite some reasons if you like
thanks!
Perry
-- Perry Arnett (pjarnett@pdqnet.net), March 01, 2000
I read that some of the missiles that come over the north pole will detonate short over Southern Canada and the winds will blow all the muck to the South - which is where most of you live. Aren't we lucky??Still would rather be here in case they miss and actually do make it to their destination. Sorry all - but this is self-preservation and my tinhat and foil antenna won't cut it. Nor will my 4 foot underground bunker (actually a hole).
-- Laurane (familyties@rttinc.com), March 01, 2000.
If you are really serious about your question and not trolling, if there were to be a all out nuclear exchange, my studies back in 1983 lead me to conclude that the southern hemisphere would survive. There are few strategic targets located there, and the hemisphere's have limited interchange. Global warming was a bogus invention. Long term effects of fallout are much more serious.If people were not willing to relocated because of a possible y2k problem, I very much doubt any American would have the foresight to relocate just because of a potentional war.
-- WWIII (not@telling.org), March 01, 2000.
Get Joel Skousens book "Strategic Relocation"
-- advice (it'sa@goodone.yep), March 01, 2000.
First choice: Northern British Columbia/Vancouver Island or SE Alaska.In the southern hemisphere, I'd favor Chile. Moderate climate, well developed agriculture and a conservative God-fearing, bilingual population. A bit prone to earthquakes, though.
-- chairborne commando (what-me-worry@armageddon.com), March 01, 2000.
I'd rather be in the palm of Your hand tho' rich or poor I might be. Faith can see right through the circumstance; Sees the forest in spite of the trees. Your grace provides for me.-Ron Block (Alison Krauss' guitar player)
-- Slobby Don (slobbydon@hotmail.com), March 02, 2000.
My dear Mr. Arnet,Sir if you are not a troll (as I fear that that is the case). Then I submit that you purchase or check out a the libaray a book titled "Life After Dooms Day" written by Dr. Bruce Clayton.
Nuclear war was/is the most likely end result of Y2K. For it is as I have stated. Y2K in and of it's self is but a "trigger" effect. For all else that follows.
A Thermonuclear war is survivable in the northren hemisphere. It is the major worry I have had for the past nearly thirty years now. And yes...I have studied the subject, from it's known targets, to it's local, hemispheric, and global effects. Most of those effects have beed the subject of far more sci fi flicks then I can count. And all of them have taken a "literary licence" with their "event duration". Which can only be called criminal" in the way it miss leads people into believing that "The living will envy the dead"!
The movie made in the late fifties, called "On the Beach"! Comes fore most to the front of my mind. As being the biggest portrayal of false, senseless, and yes...Dangerious doctrine.
To kill all life on the planet. As was/is the plot in "On the Beach". There would have to in order of 500,000 times the number of nuclear weapons in exhistance than there are at this moment.
And finally, Thermonuclear device (s). Are configured primarily for air bursts. Their fire ball never touch the ground. And leave minute radioactive fall out.
Even the two bombs used on Japan. Very primitive weapons. Did not kill with radioactive fall out. All the victums received their radiation from the burst (s) themselves.
The true danger of nucear war is this...The russians know (and believe) that a thermonuclear exchange. Is the begining of WWIII. Just the first battle of the rest of the war to come. Thusly, they placed their under ground cities (and food stores) in readiness. And those hidden cities remain in readiness today.
Americans at the same time where being lead to believe that WWIII would be TEOTWAWKI. ( Now I know that that is a familuar set of letters to you).
Oddly enough...I am a polly on this subject. I have studied the possibility from ever angle. And West Texas is one of the "safe zones" from fall out. There are many such places in the United States.
And remember "When they proclaim that Peace is at hand! The grim reaper is at the door".
"As for me...I shall finish the Game"!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shakey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), March 02, 2000.
-- Slobby Don (slobbydon@hotmail.com), March 02, 2000.
This board is SO serious sometimes, I'd rather be inside a beautiful woman? right now i'm tapping a keyboard. i'd like to be inside a woman cause it's romantic & sweet and it feels nice, & then she might cook me a meal.
-- INever (inevercheckmy@onebox.com), March 02, 2000.
Thanks shakey.I will sleep better tonight...I live in west Texas.
Sandy
-- sandy (rstyree@overland.net), March 02, 2000.
INEVER..thanks for sharin.And as for me...I would most certainly be toast. I am right on the coast between San Diego (huge naval station), Camp Pendleton (huge marine corps), and Long Beach (naval station). What ya think about that Shakey? Any chance for me?
Any way life is good here (for now) =o)
-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), March 02, 2000.
ANywhere but next door to ex-Gould Ocean Systems, and down the block from the payroll center for 2 services.
Chuck
-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), March 02, 2000.
OH YEAH and just down the block from the [quote] no longer used [end quote] Ravenna ArsenalC
-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), March 02, 2000.
Cin,SD is beautiful, and must be a great place to live. However, with all the defense plants visible off the freeway, and big naval bases, etc. I wouldn't want to be there in a nukefest.
But really, I don't think a nukefest will happen, so enjoy!
Frank
-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), March 02, 2000.
I believe that right here in New Zealand should be a fairly safe place to be. Our government passed a law 16 years ago stating that any nuclear weapons sent to NZ will be returned unopened.Seriously though, the world has lived under the threat of nuclear war ever since a New Zealander (Ernest Rutherford) first split the atom. Ever since USA demonstrated the power of these weapons at Hiroshima and Ngagasaki the world has been sensible enough to keep them out of any wars. Lets hope they are never needed.
-- Malcolm Taylor. (taylorm@es.co.nz), March 02, 2000.
Do you have your potassium iodide pills? If it isn't too bad ( no particulate discharge on your soil), the radiation will wash out of the environment near you after a month. GET THE PILLS!!! www.ki4u.com, www.beprepared.com
-- prepped (for@a.war), March 02, 2000.
those who know me here know I'm not a troll...; [sigh?]read the Cresson Kearney stuff in late 60's long before he became famous; own a well-worn copy;
with the China missile threat against US involvement in the Taiwan mess, India-Panama Canal-Russian-Costa Rican-connections et al, the question is real and I'm interested in real responses, not hypotheticals.
i.e. -
if YOU thought the shit was going to hit the fan in the next 60 days, are you now where you'd rather be, or is there somewhere else you'd rather be and do you have the will to relocate there?
again, thanks
Perry
-- Perry Arnett (pjarnett@pdqnet.net), March 02, 2000.
Funniest most pretentious Doomer statement yet this week goes to the Dullard named "Shakey:"Nuclear war was/is the most likely end result of Y2K. For it is as I have stated."
Tinfoils - ya gotta laugh...
-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), March 02, 2000.
Richard Mayberry also predicts WWIII. He says it won't last very long, won't be like the previous world wars. Joel Skousen provides graphic descriptions of impact of a nuclear weapon hitting USA. My understanding is that the only place to be to keep from getting radiation sickness is in an underground shelter for 2weeks after impact. I Hope I read that wrong.Where would I be? Right where I am, in the country, in Florida.
nancy
-- NH (new@minspring.com), March 02, 2000.