What Country Would Be The Safest If There Was A Third World War

Discussion in 'News, Current Events, and Politics' started by EarlAlexander, May 25, 2017.

What Country Would Be The Safest If There Was A Third World War 5 5 1votes
5/5, 1 vote

  1. lonewolf

    lonewolf Societal Collapse Survivalist. Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    being prepared is why we are here Bill.
     
  2. TexDanm

    TexDanm Shadow Dancer
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    2
    Basically I would go south of the equator. Brazil is a big place and has a comparatively stable culture and government. Australia has a lot to say for it but in the next world war the Eastern part of it may catch a lot of bad intentions. With an almost totally disarmed populace if they are invaded it would be pretty fast ended.

    I honestly don't believe that the big countries that actually have a lot of nukes are likely to go nuclear. That is a war that nobody can win. Even if you could manage to get a total wipe of the icbms that are land based the navy would wipe you out from the subs and missile carrying cruisers.

    The good news if there could be any such is that the modern bombs are a lot cleaner than the early ones as far a the long term radiation problems. There is also a lot of anti missile defence that is probably not talked about. The satellite systems mean that we will know if there is a launch almost instantly and the longer we have to react the better our chances of stopping the missiles and the more devastating the response that we will get off will be.

    I think that the next nuclear attack will be a very limited thing that will probably come from some smaller country like North Korea, Iran or Pakistan. There is also the ever increasing chance of a terrorist group getting their hands on a nuke. They would use it fearlessly because they are mostly crazy as hell and also they don't have any set pieces that we could hit in retaliation.

    The thing that people nowadays don't understand is that radiation is not nearly the death sentence that we think it is. Many of the people that survived the heat and concussion of the blasts in Japan ended up living long lives. Radiation and how it affects different people is extremely variable. We look at it like cyanide as deadly but the fact is that it is more like smoking cigarettes. Some people get cancer and some end up with emphysema and then there are those that never seem to be bothered by it.

    Safety is relative. While going off into third world countries might make you safer from the immediate actions of war there is a great probability that you are jumping from the frying pan into the fire. The entire world is now a part of a whole. Most third world countries are dependent on food shipments from other countries to feed their people. The medical care there will fall into the pits when there is no medicine shipped to them.

    Another problem that you will run into if you go someplace else is that when times get tough people tend to get VERY clannish and start to remember that their people never did like those other clans, tribes, races or nationalities. If you are a foreigner your thing will most likely get ugly for you if things get hard there.

    I think that the long term safest place will be wherever you live right now only as far from major targets as possible. While the big countries will get hit hardest they will also be the first to recover. They have a wider resource base and are better able to deal with the problems after a war. A lot of the third world countries didn't have a very big population before the 20th century. There was most likely a reason for that. Things now forgotten will return fast. Malaria is only controlled by insecticides that kill the mosquitoes jst as an example of what you will face.
     
    Ystranc likes this.
  3. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Legendary Survivalist
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    1
    Another vote for Canada.

    Only y'gotta figure that post-WWIII, Canada will be occupied by refugees from wherever. Russia & China would be two candidates (depending on who fares better, toss-up). Currently China hasn't the ability to move mass numbers of people by sea, however they are working on this issue feverishly.

    I also think that Spain, Portugal, and Italy (????) will have uncontaminated regions. Same for some southern nations in South America.

    I see Australia being overrun. Not enough people. No nuclear weapons. Lots of land to be taken.
     
  4. lonewolf

    lonewolf Societal Collapse Survivalist. Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I think the problem with moving to another country is that one would then become "that foreigner that lives down the road" and in a SHTF situation I reckon they would be the ones to be hit first on the basis that they have probably got more "stuff" than the locals.
     
    Ystranc likes this.
  5. lonewolf

    lonewolf Societal Collapse Survivalist. Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    no country would be 100% safe, that's why its called a WORLD war, but you might be able to find a remote area somewhere.
     
  6. watcherchris

    watcherchris Legendary Survivalist
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I have taken the time to buy two of these counters....radiation meters

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M7PTJC...eA&pd_rd_r=QVRQMYZWJH534XECD47D&pd_rd_w=hh5oZ

    I keep one here at home....without batteries in it....but with it. Spare batteries two...AAA type batteries

    The second Is at work in a locker with batteries not in it and also spare batteries AAA types.

    To my surprise these counters have increased some 20.00 dollars since I got my last one.


    I also have one of the older yellow Civil Defense counters.


    I have also taken the time to purchase Potassium Iodide tablets over the years and disposed of them when I felt the shelf life was due....and this recently. I carry a bottle of Potassium Iodide tablets with me daily in my BOB...to and fro work.


    I took the time to get this gear even though I believe I live in a very high risk area. Should I be unlucky enough to survive....then the problems verily begin...big time problems.

    You will be dealing with survivors with mostly a television and movie education in the Kardashian mindset...male and female both...but no real daily applicable skill sets.


    Jeager,

    Spent nuclear fuel cells are stored in large pools of water.


    Spent/used nuclear fuel cells are often disassembled by robotic arms at a distance but while suspended in a pool of water...disassembled underwater.


    What I am saying here is that water...or liquids...like diesel fuel...often serve as shielding between living compartments and a reactor..on ships.

    Water...liquids can serve as shielding from radiation.


    Free...no cover charge....


    You members do what you want with that information.


    Some of you might want to think about getting your own counter.

    What I have done and still need to update ...is make a map of this town . ....the places I frequent...and record the radiation levels there now...during good times.

    This will serve as a base line.....and you now have a standard or record of what good times looks like....and you can then compare it after an emergency...a before and after if you like.

    Remember operational security here...after an event. The authorities may not want anyone else to have measuring devices.

    You can also compare it to what the news and political leadership are claiming is happening. You might want to be able to double check them.

    Those two little radiation counters are about the size of a pack of cigarettes.


    A radiation technician or monitor will take readings on an assigned area several times daily and plot this on maps. They are looking for an sudden change in conditions which might affect the work they are doing.


    I need to take a weekend and go about town on my scooter to places I am often want to frequent...the grocery store...the bank..the chemist, the Chinese food place...the park.....my mother's house.....the convenience store where I get gas...etc etc....the hardware store.

    Take readings there to see what these readings would be under normal non emergency conditions.



    Again ...free ...no cover charge.


    Some food for thought ...to the members here.


    Thanks,
    Watcherchris
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2018
    Ystranc likes this.
  7. JimLE

    JimLE Expert Member
      198/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I don't think that any one country would be 100% safe during a ww3 situation. Because of that.the only thing i see doing.is to locate someplace away from the big cities power plants.and any location that could be a target.then there's the fallout of each explosion. It either miss you or not.but yet tthe fallout will come back around eventually. Because of that.the only safe bet.could be a enclosed eco system of some kind.
     
    Sourdough likes this.
  8. TMT Tactical

    TMT Tactical The Great Lizard ! Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Here what you should be asking, what country that could be completely self sufficient? if it is ww3 and the big bombs (atomic) are not used, then it will be who can hold out the longest and has the best infrastructure and manufacturing capabilities. The USA is the strongest in all those categories. We are self supporting on oil, food and raw materials. Even with the all the Snow Flakes, the American spirit (survival) would kick in. Fighting spirit win battles but logistics win wars. If the big bombs are used, there will not be any safe places. There will only be places were it takes you longer to die, starvation or contamination will eventually get you. JM2c
     
    Sourdough likes this.
  9. Duncan

    Duncan Master Survivalist
      315/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    My wife and I had talked it over at length before deciding to relocate to rural Idaho. If (1) we were going to relocate, and (2) our new home were outside the USA, and (3) we considered that a general nuclear exchange were possible, we could eliminate most places.

    Our first choices would be in the Southern Hemisphere (less fallout and other problems) and in a country where we could speak the language (English and Spanish in our case, because that's all we know). There are only two politically and economically stable countries I can think of which match those criteria, and New Zealand is too far away if air travel goes away.

    Our final choice would be Chile, preferably somewhere between Santiago and Concepción in the western Andean foothills. Bonus: it's great wine country!
     
    Sourdough and TMT Tactical like this.
  10. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Legendary Survivalist
      515/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    To answer the original question, which country would be the safest? My guess would still be Switzerland. They have remained neutral in the past, and they are far better prepared as a country, and a population, to deal with a nuclear emergency. Still it is a pipe dream. How do you think you are going to get there? Are they going to beam you aboard? If you aren't there when it happens you are SOL. Transportation will be virtually nonexistent.

    Much will depend on the size and quantity of the ordinance used. If it were truly a World War where everybody cuts loose I would suspect there would be a nuclear winter, and the entire planet would be decimated for many, many years. You would have to be inside a mountain with years of supplies, and the seeds to replant when it was safe to come out in order to survive.

    There are four major isotopes released in a nuclear explosion; Strontium 90; Cesium 137; Iodine 131; and Xenon 133. Xenon is a gas with a very short half life (12-13 hours). That would dissipate very quickly. Iodine 131 will attack the thyroid ergo potassium Iodide tablets. I-131 has a half life of 8 days, so even in massive quantities it would be gone within a month or two. Strontium and Cesium both have a half life of nearly 30 years. They are going to be around for a very long time.

    If an event like this did happen it would be best to shelter in place for at least two to four weeks before it would be safe to venture outside.
     
  11. TexDanm

    TexDanm Shadow Dancer
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    2
    I'm not sure that any place is going to be truly safe. Switzerland for an example. While they may be safe from attack their population is larger than their available arable land can support. They are dependent on shipments of food that may not be possible in a war torn world. The current population is twice what it was in 1940. I'm not sure that I would want to be a foreigner there if food was a serious issue.

    While South America has managed to avoid being involved in the battles of the last few "world" wars their internal wars have been almost as bad and when the other countries are at war their internal politics would be possibly a lot worse for minority populations.

    I think that I will ride it out at home thank you. At least here I know what to expect from my fellow Texans.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
China At War With Your Country - Who Would Win News, Current Events, and Politics Oct 20, 2021
Aussies And New 15 Country Trade Pact News, Current Events, and Politics Nov 15, 2020
"untimate Backcountry Rifle And Cartridge" Guns, Knives, Tools, Etc. Jul 30, 2020
Country Music Addresses Diverse Participation News, Current Events, and Politics Jun 27, 2020
Calif Wine Country Now "fire Country" ? News, Current Events, and Politics Nov 3, 2019
The Country Chemical Supplies Other Homesteading Oct 26, 2019
Graphic Of How Much Foreign Aid The World Receives (by Country) From The U.s. News, Current Events, and Politics Oct 2, 2019
New Member Hello From Cowboy Country New Member Introduction Sep 8, 2019
Power Outage/ The Whole Country(uk) Grinds To A Halt. News, Current Events, and Politics Aug 10, 2019
Third Country Asylum Rule News, Current Events, and Politics Jul 17, 2019

Share This Page