NUCLEAR APOCALYPSE!!!!!!!!! And how you'd deal with one...

Maybe it is the idea of starting from scratch? Wipe the slate clean and just be a person without all the baggage of modern life.

These days I tell myself I'd hie me to a very remote beach house in southern aus that I figure'd be away from the chaos.

i wonder how long kids have been thinking about the apocalypse, and if they still think about it, and in what ways has that changed over the years? because i've been thinking about it since i was quite young too, and it obv had to do with things on tv, movies, books (and plenty of young adult fiction at that!), freakin air-raid sirens in the neighbourhood, etc.

but those things (representations of the end of the world) have changed over time, so i'm thinking that each generation, or maybe every few years, ideas change. are kids still afraid of nuclear war these days? or is it more about airplanes crashing into their schools? or both?? or pimp-ninja attacks??

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Red-Dawn-Patrick-Swayze/dp/B00004W4HZ/sr=1-1/qid=1161333184/ref=pd_bowtega_1/026-9025021-0919656?ie=UTF8&s=dvd

Are you a terrorist?

(xpost)

Remember this lady? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1856457/

What a CV.

Not actually that good but I remember it being interesting visually and, hey, talking dog...

Mainly because I used to live in Sheffield and it's always nice to see familiar places nuked and then descend into barbarism...

yeah key word there, 'they're', as in the natives.
not I

yes i think my scrawny ass would be dead within seconds.

...WELL AT LEAST SINCE THE WRITING OF REVALATIONS, INNIT?

My attitude hasn't changed much from his. Miracle Mile does need to get namechecked here though.

It's at http://ultimatesecurehome.com/ but offline at the moment

has anyone seen the US film testament, from the early 80s? i've heard about it, but want to know if it's worth the effort of tracking down.

I like it, but it's in the same ballpark as The Day After. Marin County folks face apocalypse with calm stoicism and dignity. Emotionally broad-brushed, but some scenes (Costner burying his baby daughter in a drawer, Jane Alexander encountering rats in the pantry) freaked me out

what is "z for zachariah"? "the chrysalids" was our obligatory nuclear war text in high school.

HELL YEAH

I tend to be one to take control and keep their cool in extreme situations, so I think I'd do pretty well. I have a broad theoretical and practical knowledge of the sciences and electronics, so I would fare well in terms of makeshift communications/medicine/shelter/etc. Of course, I have no actual preparations should the apocalypse come, so it'd most likely come down to luck.

...WELL AT LEAST SINCE THE WRITING OF REVALATIONS, INNIT?

haha, pwned by bible
i guess what i mean is, have kids always been 'paranoid' or felt unease about the end of the world and survival omg vs having faith and not worrying cause god would take care of them in kingdom of heaven anyway. but maybe all apocalypse scenarios take their cues from the bible and other religious texts/stories in the first place.

fwiw, i never had flood or earthquake paranoia but lots of parched-earth desolation paranoia, even though i grew up on the west coast. i mean, pop culture got into my brain more than bible (which is pop culture too, i realize, in a dif way than other books and tv, but still, obv, hueg). or at least not any bible that wasn't depicted in cartoon form on saturday morning. or in ghostbusters.

i don't understand that picture of the guy and the bags and drawers and all the doors at 45 dg angle.

As kid I would have these dreams where Mum is murdered. I would hunt down and shoot the killer myself-before the cops got him- as you do.

I was then going to take the family dog, my gun, and an unlimited supply of 'watties' creamed rice and head bush. I would cleverly evade police capture becoming something of a celebrity. (On reflection maybe 15 wasnt so great an age after all)

this would be more fun if he was building a couch fort

Put Out Fires.
Do not smoke.

Assuming you survive the initial devastation, the most important thing you can do is imagine a reason to live - something, anything, that you really must do before you die. This goal should be the strongest, most important, and most motivating thing you can believe in accomplishing. It doesn't have to be especially realistic: who could say what would be realistic in that circumstance? This imperative goal is your lifeline to pull you through the heartbreaking challenges to come.

Once you know why you are trying to survive, don't look too far ahead or attempt to make too comprehensive a plan. Instead, recognize your immediate needs and form short-term plans for meeting them and only them. Organize your thoughts around these very near term goals and make yourself pursue them. Savor every small victory you gain, then move on at once to the next one. Do not dwell on what you do not have and cannot do.

This narrowly-focused approach will help to get you beyond the first wave of trauma and shock. Later, as you become more adept at managing your survival situation, you will need to take stock and correct your course, as necessary. If you are resilient enough, you can survive almost anything. Damaged? Certainly, but alive and able to carry on.

It helps to read some of the literature of survival so your imagination is better stocked with images of how to do it. There are many good first-hand accounts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as numerous books about wilderness or wartime survival. Adrift by Steve Callahan is a good one. If anyone is interested, I can recommend some others.

That and nailing railway sleepers to your car.

http://www.amazon.com/After-Bomb-Gloria-D-Miklowitz/dp/0590405683/sr=1-1/qid=1161537081/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-0211265-9212039?ie=UTF8&s=books

Those combined with the kidz-in-the-wilderness factor from books like Hatchet and My Side of the Mountain were enough to start an interest in the post-apocalyptic.

it's a motherfucker, don't you know?
m.

the "Y" series of graphic novels might be appropriate as well. all the males except a few dying almost instantly... every teen nerd boy's dream! "i AM the last man on earth!"
m.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7648042.stm

1970s nuclear attack advice script released by the BBC.

It has previously been revealed the BBC stockpiled entertainment programmes to boost public morale in the event of a war.

Shit, if only they can find that stash to replace the dross on now.

I also reiterate my statements a year ago re: 70's muscle cars and eating dog food.

"Indeed, if an unfamiliar voice repeats the same announcement hour after hour for 12 hours, listeners may begin to suspect that they are listening to a machine set to switch on every hour... and that perhaps after all the BBC has been obliterated," he said.

I feel the same way when listening to Capital Gold these days.

I don't believe that DJ "Dean Martin" actually exists. Only a robot could broadcast 20 hours a day, seven days a week.

Cormac McCarthy's The Road is getting a movie adaptation with Viggo Mortenson, Charlize Theron and Robert Duvall.

I bought those script files from the national archives. V. Dull.

’d set up a post-apocalyptic café/bar.

I’d completely control the market with no competition; I’d do an apocalyptic breakfast theme where I’d stand a field mushroom up in the middle of the plate. That would solve any local starvation problems til I got of the ground and went nationwide.
Oh man, I can’t wait.

― not-goodwin (not-goodwin), Monday, 23 October 2006 12:10 (1 year ago) Bookmark

man that was a good idea!
still waiting though!

Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be all, end all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous regimes, again, cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.

Our nuclear weaponry here in the U.S. is used as a deterrent. And that's a safe, stable way to use nuclear weaponry.

But for those countries -- North Korea, also, under Kim Jong Il -- we have got to make sure that we're putting the economic sanctions on these countries and that we have friends and allies supporting us in this to make sure that leaders like Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad are not allowed to acquire, to proliferate, or to use those nuclear weapons. It is that important.

Isn't Kim Jong II on his way out, life-wise?

Hmmm. Dunno. Also I guess I should say that an armed, nuclear armed especially Iran is so extremely dangerous to consider. They cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons period. Israel is in jeopardy of course when we're dealing with Ahmadinejad as a leader of Iran. Iran claiming that Israel as he termed it, a stinking corpse, a country that should be wiped off the face of the earth. Now a leader like Ahmadinejad who is not sane or stable when he says things like that is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy, nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, the Castro brothers, others who are dangerous dictators are one that someone ilke Barack Obama has said he would be willing to meet with without preconditions being met first.

someone like Barack Obama

The wonder is we allowed Bush to acquire nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be all, end all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous regimes, again, cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.

Our nuclear weaponry here in the U.S. is used as a deterrent. And that's a safe, stable way to use nuclear weaponry.

But for those countries -- North Korea, also, under Kim Jong Il -- we have got to make sure that we're putting the economic sanctions on these countries and that we have friends and allies supporting us in this to make sure that leaders like Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad are not allowed to acquire, to proliferate, or to use those nuclear weapons. It is that important.

― Maverick (Mr. Que), Friday, October 3, 2008 2:29 PM (31 minutes ago)

You'd say that, wouldn't you?

That's not a "safe, stable" way at all. It's also very simplistic, imho, because you look at it only from the USA viewpoint. I bet Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il look at it exactly the same: them having it as a deterrent is fine, just to prevent the USA or Israel to attack their countries. And most people will believe that from their president. They do in America as well.

What annoys me to no end is that the Senate passed this bill yesterday - not the bailout one - which will allow America to sell parts and knowledge of nuclear weaponry to India. It's not just immoral, it also goes against every proliferation agreement that's been made on the subject. The deal was: you don't do business with countries who didn't sign the proliferation agreement. And what does America do? It does exactly that, because it can make a smack load of money. Not to mention that it will probably piss off Pakistan quite a bit. That doesn't seem right to me.
Once again, America gives fuck all about international agreements and just goes it's own way. I don't trust a nation with nuclear weapons that does that. Saying it's okay for America to have them, but others can't have them 'cause they mean bad business may seem right at first, but in keeping that stance, America just pisses off Iran, North Korea et al even more.

My point is that allowing yourself to have nuclear weapons and making money off of it, but denying other countries those same weapons, is hypocracy. It's what's the real danger here. Because if you want to rid the earth of nuclear weapons, that's just not the way to go.

I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes. We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them.So we have got to put the pressure on Iran.

But can't you see how that's gonna snowball if America uses the very same weapons of mass destruction to do so? I'm not saying America should disable all their nuclear weapons tomorrow, that's foolish. But this isn't really going anywhere.
I applaud Obama for wanting to talk to Ahmadinejad first. This president never did, he took extreme measures almost immediately. That's not going to be good for anybody. Shame you didn't comment on the bill I mentioned, on the deal with India. Because having nuclear weapons to 'detere' is one thing, but exploiting that this way - against what had been universally agreed - isn't making America that reliable country that just keeps his nuclear weapons to prevent others from attacking.

With some of these dictators who hate America and hate what we stand for, with our freedoms, our democracy, our tolerance, our respect for women's rights, those who would try to destroy what we stand for cannot be met with just sitting down on a presidential level as Barack Obama had said he would be willing to do. That is beyond bad judgment. That is dangerous.

No, diplomacy is very important. First and foremost, that is what we would engage in. But diplomacy is hard work by serious people. It's lining out clear objectives and having your friends and your allies ready to back you up there and have sanctions lined up before any kind of presidential summit would take place.

We seem to disagree about the 'sitting down'. It's also directly related to our values that we first talk to someone, see if there's a chance both can come to an agreement. If not, well, then there's other measures to be taken. America hasn't 'sat down' with Iran, it shot into action and it shot from the hip. I can't trust a country that on the one hand preaches peace, but engages is shady nuclear deals on the other. It undermines the stature America wants and wants to see acknowledged as a fair country striving for peace, not war.

Le Beateau Ivre - 3, Maverick 0

Should be Le Beateau Ivre - 3, Palin 0.

my plan is to get to the top of the tallest building i can find, wait 'til i see the actual bomb explode, (case it's a false alarm) then jump. fuck slowly dying of radiation poisioning or starving to death in some hellish mad max style landscape.

i think it'd be exciting. kind of like no teachers at school.

actually I believe this is Maverick Que 1 bazillion lulz, LBI and BJO negative fifteen thousand internets proficieny levels

I believe you're gay, and a pedophile. And that you probably have a lot of back hair.

way to misspell 'proficiency', dickdart

way to spell dickdart, you thin-skinned pansy

http://www.nurple.com/modelkits/images/Elephant-Man-Model-Kit-2.jpg

tombot otm re lulz

my plan is to get to the top of the tallest building i can find, wait 'til i see the actual bomb explode, (case it's a false alarm) then jump. fuck slowly dying of radiation poisioning or starving to death in some hellish mad max style landscape.

Well, it may be worth timing yourself - if you're lucky enough to get a warning at all (which might put more people at risk anyway, as people try to flee) you're only going to have a few minutes before the missiles fall. Probably not enough time for elevators (against the flow of traffic). :(

Probably not enough time for elevators

Assuming the electromagnetic pulse from other, earlier strikes hasn't already taken them out. If you want to freak yourself out a bit, read up on that stuff. Every time I'm faced with the prospect of flying, I remember that I still don't know whether an EMP would knock all passenger jets out of the sky; some sources say that they're hardened against it thanks to lightning protection, others say that wouldn't be enough. Sigh.

I could swear I remember watching or listening to one of those prerecorded BBC "we're about to have a nuclear war" tapes, somewhere on line, and finding it completely chilling

I also remember reading about a false alarm that went out and freaked the fuck out of a few people. Ah, here it is.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/as-told-to/what-it-felt-like-in-hawaii-when-warning-of-an-in-bound-missile-arrived

basically filling the tub and containers with water, texting family, crying and hugging

i don't get it, one says drill and the other doesn't

This is the screen that set off the ballistic missile alert on Saturday. The operator clicked the PACOM (CDW) State Only link. The drill link is the one that was supposed to be clicked. #Hawaii pic.twitter.com/lDVnqUmyHa

— Honolulu Civil Beat (@CivilBeat) January 16, 2018

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/847818629840228354/VXyQHfn0_400x400.jpg

I'm way less into this idea now I have kids, strangely.

shame it's not a more widely-shared sentiment, really

"These pansy ass liberal snowflakes don't even know how to survive a nuclear exchange anymore."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/455446/if-missile-alert-sounds-prepare-live-dont-prepare-die

that's some real 'i'm not saying we wouldn't get out hair mussed, mr president' shit

remember back to those halcyon post-9/11 days when the threat of a dirty bomb in a city centre was being endlessly hyped as a terror threat? it's really cool that the apocalyptic overton window has shifted far enough that the thought of a nuclear strike levelling honolulu is met with a shrug and the assurance that leave many suburbs will be left intact

last year i read about Fukushima plant and how utterly fucked we all are. they are looking to possibly clean the plant up in 40 years, presuming they come up with the technology to do it. right now they are sending in robots just to even look at the mess and they last an hour or so. so far the solution has been collect all the radioactive water in giant bins (right near the shoreline) and build an experimental ice wall that is supposed to stop more water from leaking into the ocean. oh, and experimental ice wall has to be powered in order to work!

the genie is out of the bag and the apocalypse is happening whether there is a glory explosion or not. one cake of plutonium is dangerous enough to give cancer to every human on the planet. and we've been using nuclear power for 50 years and detonating nuclear material causing that shit to go into the atmosphere for 70+ years. why do you think everyone has cancer?

watch the "Dark Circle" anti-nuke documentary. the US gov't has detonated 900+ nuclear bombs on its own citizens. in many cases these were military personnel who were later turned down for medical help when they inevitably get cancer. because of the legal difficulties connecting cancer to nuclear radiation. even today many scientists gladly go around telling people how safe Fukushima actually is and not to worry about low levels of radiation.

as far as a missile, if i heard one was coming i would pack a bowl and load up Seinfeld cos it's the end, no Mad Max survival movie shit possible

yeah i enjoy playing fallout as much as anyone but if the bombs are gonna start falling, i'm glad i live in an area which is likely to be outright obliterated cuz i've seen threads and post-apocalyptic life is a fate far worse than death

atm, I think the most likely source of a nuclear detonation would be an accidental launch. second most likely imo would be a terror attack by a non-government actor, covertly supplied with a bomb by a government. these are remote, but not impossible scenarios. in each case the initial damage would not be sufficient to result in the nuclear apocalypse. the crucial factor would be whether or not this tripped a hair-trigger nuclear response that escalated in cascading fashion.

Fukushima and Swine Flu threads here had a lot of panic (maybe some fear mongering) in them iirc.

One for poster anvil:

https://theconversation.com/going-nuclear-why-a-growing-number-of-washingtons-allies-are-eyeing-an-alternative-to-us-umbrella-275389?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Thanks, I'll have a read of that when I get back from lunch.

A poster here said they read something about there being 2 non-nuclear countries that could feasibly put together weapons in a short timeframe but wasn't sure on who they were. No idea how true or feasible that is, can only really assume South Korea and Japan being in that position. If thats true and there's a relatively short timeframe then I think these would go in their own category, as it implies they were able to much of the groundwork (relatively) undetected

Otherwise, can see possible arguments for Poland, Taiwan, Saudi Arabia at a stretch but with possible exception of Taiwan probably looking at timeframes that are far too long. And I feel like Taiwan closed down some of their nuclear power stuff a while ago (could be wrong, does seem surprising).