If nuclear war happened what geo location would be least affected?

As most countries in the northern hemisphere are playing with this fire, I was thinking south of the equator. The general west to east weather patterns would just make it a waiting game anywhere northerly. If you couldn't evacuate to the south I'm thinkin' look to be in the lea of a mountain range or watch the weather radar to see areas where as a storm goes through, there are pockets of less exposure to heavy rain or winds. I've actually lived in areas where storms would roll through the region and little or no rain would hit. You could watch the storms separate and come back together as they passed those spots regularly. I'd think that could extend life in just about any scenario that didn't involve nuclear winter.

 

As for Australia and Nuclear war!
We do not actually rate enough for the use of nukes!
Only real target is pine gap with its radars/comms !
A few conventual cruise missiles will shut us down
Very little fallout will come south and by the time it gets here it will be spent!
On the off chance we get one or two on the east coast the prevailing winds will take the fallout offshore and not a problem
Pine gap is a little iffy, it is small but just might rate a nuke, anyway most fallout from that would fall in desert country with few people, not good for those few but few none the less!
I have stopped updating my nuclear and chemical kit for that and a few other reasons!
Australia is just not suitable for the use of nuclear or chemical weapons! the population is far too spread out and the weather generally not condusive of chemical deployment!
Far less effective than in most of north America or most of Europe/Africa/asia!

 

For the same reason as Australia, Greenland and Iceland are nice places to avoid fallout, they might be in the northern hemisphere but they are also far enough from major targets.

It's important to be aware of how storms move across the atmosphere in general, here's a schematic:



A bomb in the subtropical high can disseminate the fallout across the entire hemisphere, but if it were to fall in the equator, it would likely stay in the equator. In any case, the safest place are the poles.

 

I believe that Europe, the Far East and North America would be hardest hit. As Africa still doesn't have nukes and won't play a huge role in any global conflict, I believe that parts of Africa and South America would be the least affected when we have a nuclear war but that doesn't necessarily mean they'd be the safest places to be in at that time.

 

We don't really know how advanced each countries anti-missile tech is, so for my answer I'm just gonna assume that there's none. I think regions closest to the poles are not easy targets, and obviously anywhere super secluded or underground would be fairly safe. Overall, depending on the size of the warheads and the amount, I'm not sure any location would be safe. I think nuclear outcome is one of the worst possibilities for human race survival.

 

A fallout shelter would probably be the best place.

 

I think we all would be pretty much in big trouble, if all the weapons went off, you know all ice in Antarctica is going to melt. If I had access to a large ship, like one bigger than the Titanic, all alone to myself, that I could take out into the middle of the Indian Ocean, fill it with decades of food, etc I think I would be OK. I know a lot of people will probably be like, why would you want to do that. Well, flowing with the water is key. If all the land is going to be drowned, at least I know I rise with the ocean. You can survive in a big ship for years if you planned it.

 

I agree with @hades_leae that when a nuclear war occurs the ice in the poles can melt and put all of us in trouble. The sea level will rise and islands will sink. Who knows if an entire country can vanish in water. But if a war like that breaks out, maybe the best you can do is to determine the target areas so you can get away from it. From the science subject in high school, there are 3 dangers of big bombs like atomic bomb or hydrogen bomb - explosion which can instantly kill, radiation which can burn people, and lastly the fallout which can persist for years. By the looks of it, the chances of being safe from a nuclear war is very small. But at least there is a chance so you have to pray hard for it.

 

The only thing is, it's "Nuclear War". If we've learned anything from the Cold War and the Cuban Mistle Crises; if one country uses Nuclear Weapons, then the whole planet will start firing. And even if you're in a place we're today's Warhead are smaller and the blasts from a neighboring country/state might not hit you, the radiation will follow. There are currently enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy life as we know 2x over. There's a post before this one I would consider reading. The key is to avoid the blast, but maybe even more importantly avoid the radiation. High mountain ranges, and weather patterns are the best tools for this situation. As far as places like this, South of the Equator. Less countries people would want to bomb.

 

^ Nailed it. Proper sheltering is key to survival.

For a good overview of fallout dispersal patterns, I would recommend chapter 9 of The Effects of Nuclear Weapons (1977). I just added it to the Resources section earlier today.

 

The Initial blast isn't the most dangerous, Sure that would kill a lot of people immediately, but its the Nuclear Winter, And Radiation that would be most deadly. Depending on how close or far away you are, wind could make the radiation travel, it might melt your skin off and kill you, or get you like Cancer does. It could poison crops and drinking water, and consuming those would kill you too.