How far away do you need to be from DC to be safe from a nuclear attack?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very glad I live in unfashionable flyover.

You’re going to have to survive with a bunch of MAGA lunatics running around. Good luck.

The MAGA people I see around me are all decent, capable, law abiding family people. I don't agree with their politics but some of you have a very warped perspective of Trump voters in flyover.

+1 and I am not a Trumper

+1 and not a Trumper either, but people like the PP above NEED to brand people who support MAGA as lunatics so it can justify their own vicious hatefulness. Makes them feel good about themselves.

Nope. MAGA actions speak for themselves.

Your schtick is getting worn out.

I didn’t vote for Trump, but I will also acknowledge we didn’t have 22 page thread about a possible Russian nuclear attack during his presidency, either.

I have a serious case of buyer’s remorse with Joe Biden. I now look at the Trump-era fondly. I feel awkward admitting it, because I hate being wrong. But that’s how I feel.

GMAFB. You are blaming Biden for this?

“I voted for Biden but…” Sure you did. Liar.

NP. Fact remains we didn't have a potential nuclear war looming over us when Trump was president. He took a strong stance against Putin and put sanctions on the pipeline being built between Russia and Europe and warned of Europeans becoming too energy dependent on Russia. He called out NATO for taking advantage of the US, which NATO was doing. There are many, many, many things I disagree with Donald Trump but much of his foreign policy was actually on target. Despite all this, Trump got pilloried in the presses. But had the Germans and other nations not been so short sighted and shut down their nuclear plants in exchange for becoming energy dependent on Russia, had all the NATO countries lived up to their military spending obligations, Putin wouldn't be thinking the West is weak and divided and invading Ukraine. It's not to Joe Biden's credit that he removed the sanctions Trump put on the Russian pipeline. Nor do I think it was wise to have all the US embassies fly BLM and rainbow flags in despotic regions. In case you hadn't noticed, both Russia and China have been increasingly dismissive and aggressive since Biden took office and it's not hard to see why they may be thinking the US is weak.

The goal for each NATO country to reach 2% of their GDP was for 2024. Considering 2024 hasn’t yet happened, you can’t really say they didn’t live up to their obligations. Also, Trump started to dismantle NATO and ruin our relationships with our allies. If one wants to make baseless claims like you are, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to make the excuse that the members who had yet to project the 2% goal weren’t motivated to do so because they were worried about the state of NATO’s future due to Trump’s destructible behavior. He said multiple times he’d like to pull out of NATO. When someone asked him if he would adhere to Article 5, undoubtedly the most important aspect of NATO, if an ally was attacked, he responded, “That’s a good question isn’t it? I don’t know, it’s something I need to consider. The fact that he even answered the question in that manner proves he doesn’t know $hit about foreign policy, or any policy really, at all whatsoever. It would render NATO useless. And for anything to work, aside from signed contracts, treaties, agreements, etc. one also needs to adhere to the honor code. We already know Trump doesn’t give a crap about the rule of law, so acting like he would follow any sort of honor code is a flipping joke. Would you support pulling out of NATO?? Because that’s seemingly what you’re implying.

Further, Putin thinks the West is weak and divided because he helped to make it to at way. You’re living in la-la land if you think this is just an opportunity born out of convenience rather than a deliberate action on Putin’s part. Also, this “weakness” talk everyone keeps spewing is getting tiring. If you think Trump showed any strength, well…HAHAHAHAHA. You may be dumber than he is! He threw a temper tantrum over losing an election and TO THIS DAY, he is still crying about it. In fact, the other day on Fox he told Laura Ingraham that the reason for the Russia-Ukraine crisis is because of “the rigged election”. He refused to go to Biden’s inauguration. Anytime he was criticized it was “fake news”. The press was “constantly out to get him” according to him because he couldn’t handle anything less than groveling and praise, let alone constructive criticism. He fired anyone in his administration who wasn’t “loyal” enough in his eyes. He’s poisoned the Republican Party and continues to do so anytime someone in the party finds a spine and decides rightfully to defend the constitution instead of the orange blob of flubber with a bad hairdo. He does all of this because HE.IS.WEAK. Make no mistake, there’s not a single strength that trump possesses.

What a joke. So Western Europe didn't want to fund their own defense because Trump might not follow through and defend them? Doesn't sound real brilliant.

Yes, Merkel, Macron and Johnson hated Trump. He declared that he would act in America's interest, rather than "lead from behind" those three like Obama did. Of course they hated him. But frankly, I totally agree that NATO does not serve our interests. We bear the cost of defending Europe, subsidize their welfare state lifestyles and they undercut that defense by making deals with Russia AND routinely opposing US interests elsewhere (Iran especially) for $$. We need to let the European Union fund their own defense. They have a larger population than we do and a GDP that is close to ours (and lots bigger than Russia's.) We get nothing from the deal except arms sales.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It also does not make me feel entirely secure that Ready.gov just updated the page on nuclear expolsions on 2-25-22. They wanted to remind everyone to wear a mask in the shelters. IIRC it used to have info involving duct tape and staying inside for two weeks. Now it's just 48 hours. https://www.ready.gov/nuclear-explosion

The info says “If warned of an imminent attack, immediately get inside”
How do we get the warning? Everyone’s phones start buzzing like amber alert?

Yeah probably use the emergency broadcast system and I bet they would go ahead and use any air riad sirens that they still available. At the point of nuclear war I assume they will communicate however they can

[Anonymous]

I generally think this thread is alarmist…but as I watch the majority of our entire government gathered in one place for the State of the Union address, the timing does seem a bit ill-conceived.

Especially if you take reports that Putin is unhinged seriously.

😬

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I generally think this thread is alarmist…but as I watch the majority of our entire government gathered in one place for the State of the Union address, the timing does seem a bit ill-conceived.

Especially if you take reports that Putin is unhinged seriously.

😬

I’d be happy with POTUS Gina Raimondo. She’s the designated survivor.

[Anonymous]

To the person who mentioned shelters in the other thread: They probably weren’t built for nuclear attack but many of the older public schools and government buildings were built as fallout shelters. I remember seeing the old signs for them in my elementary and high schools. I’d also like to check to see if the underground METRO stations were designed with any sort of protectiveness in mind. In practice, though, it’s not really useful information—except, perhaps for people who happen to be in such places any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I generally think this thread is alarmist…but as I watch the majority of our entire government gathered in one place for the State of the Union address, the timing does seem a bit ill-conceived.

Especially if you take reports that Putin is unhinged seriously.

😬

I’d be happy with POTUS Gina Raimondo. She’s the designated survivor.

Haha. I joked about this earlier today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of Putin goes there, he'll get a bullet in his head from his own people.Anyone who's not totally insane knows putting nuclear on the table is just death.

If they even know what’s going on. The younger ones who use the internet do, as we can see from their protests. But last night on CNN, they interviewed a woman in Ukraine who had family in Russia and she said she was the one who gave them the news that Ukraine had been attacked by Russia. She said they were like, “What??! War?? What are you talking about?!?” They had no idea because…state-media.

Not even the young ones. They are mostly all brainwashed. I'm from Belarus and I have plenty of Russina friends and they are putin bootlickers. Even my coutrymen disgust me now with their attitudes.

Look at ovexhekin. He's a disgrace. Should have just kept his mouth shut but he's a Putin fan boy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very glad I live in unfashionable flyover.

You’re going to have to survive with a bunch of MAGA lunatics running around. Good luck.

The MAGA people I see around me are all decent, capable, law abiding family people. I don't agree with their politics but some of you have a very warped perspective of Trump voters in flyover.

+1 and I am not a Trumper

+1 and not a Trumper either, but people like the PP above NEED to brand people who support MAGA as lunatics so it can justify their own vicious hatefulness. Makes them feel good about themselves.

Nope. MAGA actions speak for themselves.

Your schtick is getting worn out.

I didn’t vote for Trump, but I will also acknowledge we didn’t have 22 page thread about a possible Russian nuclear attack during his presidency, either.

I have a serious case of buyer’s remorse with Joe Biden. I now look at the Trump-era fondly. I feel awkward admitting it, because I hate being wrong. But that’s how I feel.

GMAFB. You are blaming Biden for this?

“I voted for Biden but…” Sure you did. Liar.

NP. Fact remains we didn't have a potential nuclear war looming over us when Trump was president. He took a strong stance against Putin and put sanctions on the pipeline being built between Russia and Europe and warned of Europeans becoming too energy dependent on Russia. He called out NATO for taking advantage of the US, which NATO was doing. There are many, many, many things I disagree with Donald Trump but much of his foreign policy was actually on target. Despite all this, Trump got pilloried in the presses. But had the Germans and other nations not been so short sighted and shut down their nuclear plants in exchange for becoming energy dependent on Russia, had all the NATO countries lived up to their military spending obligations, Putin wouldn't be thinking the West is weak and divided and invading Ukraine. It's not to Joe Biden's credit that he removed the sanctions Trump put on the Russian pipeline. Nor do I think it was wise to have all the US embassies fly BLM and rainbow flags in despotic regions. In case you hadn't noticed, both Russia and China have been increasingly dismissive and aggressive since Biden took office and it's not hard to see why they may be thinking the US is weak.

The goal for each NATO country to reach 2% of their GDP was for 2024. Considering 2024 hasn’t yet happened, you can’t really say they didn’t live up to their obligations. Also, Trump started to dismantle NATO and ruin our relationships with our allies. If one wants to make baseless claims like you are, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to make the excuse that the members who had yet to project the 2% goal weren’t motivated to do so because they were worried about the state of NATO’s future due to Trump’s destructible behavior. He said multiple times he’d like to pull out of NATO. When someone asked him if he would adhere to Article 5, undoubtedly the most important aspect of NATO, if an ally was attacked, he responded, “That’s a good question isn’t it? I don’t know, it’s something I need to consider. The fact that he even answered the question in that manner proves he doesn’t know $hit about foreign policy, or any policy really, at all whatsoever. It would render NATO useless. And for anything to work, aside from signed contracts, treaties, agreements, etc. one also needs to adhere to the honor code. We already know Trump doesn’t give a crap about the rule of law, so acting like he would follow any sort of honor code is a flipping joke. Would you support pulling out of NATO?? Because that’s seemingly what you’re implying.

Further, Putin thinks the West is weak and divided because he helped to make it to at way. You’re living in la-la land if you think this is just an opportunity born out of convenience rather than a deliberate action on Putin’s part. Also, this “weakness” talk everyone keeps spewing is getting tiring. If you think Trump showed any strength, well…HAHAHAHAHA. You may be dumber than he is! He threw a temper tantrum over losing an election and TO THIS DAY, he is still crying about it. In fact, the other day on Fox he told Laura Ingraham that the reason for the Russia-Ukraine crisis is because of “the rigged election”. He refused to go to Biden’s inauguration. Anytime he was criticized it was “fake news”. The press was “constantly out to get him” according to him because he couldn’t handle anything less than groveling and praise, let alone constructive criticism. He fired anyone in his administration who wasn’t “loyal” enough in his eyes. He’s poisoned the Republican Party and continues to do so anytime someone in the party finds a spine and decides rightfully to defend the constitution instead of the orange blob of flubber with a bad hairdo. He does all of this because HE.IS.WEAK. Make no mistake, there’s not a single strength that trump possesses.

What a joke. So Western Europe didn't want to fund their own defense because Trump might not follow through and defend them? Doesn't sound real brilliant.

Yes, Merkel, Macron and Johnson hated Trump. He declared that he would act in America's interest, rather than "lead from behind" those three like Obama did. Of course they hated him. But frankly, I totally agree that NATO does not serve our interests. We bear the cost of defending Europe, subsidize their welfare state lifestyles and they undercut that defense by making deals with Russia AND routinely opposing US interests elsewhere (Iran especially) for $$. We need to let the European Union fund their own defense. They have a larger population than we do and a GDP that is close to ours (and lots bigger than Russia's.) We get nothing from the deal except arms sales.

You know who causes this mess? Western Europe. They are weak and spineless. Now we're gonna eventually get dragged in to clean up their mess. It's gonna be bloody. Putin has been attacking Ukraine for YEARS. YEARS. We are YEARS late with agressive sanctions. We should have turned Ruasia into a mirror image odlg starving ass North Korea back in 2014. Russia needs to be wiped off thr map and start fresh. Someone should have assassinated Putin when they had the chance. Put a bullet through his head right when putin wad kicked out of the G8. Could have done it right there in Normandy. Would have been poetic.

He illegally annex Crimea and his consequence is getting kicked out of the G8? Pathetic, weak and frankly disastrous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very glad I live in unfashionable flyover.

You’re going to have to survive with a bunch of MAGA lunatics running around. Good luck.

The MAGA people I see around me are all decent, capable, law abiding family people. I don't agree with their politics but some of you have a very warped perspective of Trump voters in flyover.

+1 and I am not a Trumper

+1 and not a Trumper either, but people like the PP above NEED to brand people who support MAGA as lunatics so it can justify their own vicious hatefulness. Makes them feel good about themselves.

Nope. MAGA actions speak for themselves.

Your schtick is getting worn out.

I didn’t vote for Trump, but I will also acknowledge we didn’t have 22 page thread about a possible Russian nuclear attack during his presidency, either.

I have a serious case of buyer’s remorse with Joe Biden. I now look at the Trump-era fondly. I feel awkward admitting it, because I hate being wrong. But that’s how I feel.

GMAFB. You are blaming Biden for this?

“I voted for Biden but…” Sure you did. Liar.

NP. Fact remains we didn't have a potential nuclear war looming over us when Trump was president. He took a strong stance against Putin and put sanctions on the pipeline being built between Russia and Europe and warned of Europeans becoming too energy dependent on Russia. He called out NATO for taking advantage of the US, which NATO was doing. There are many, many, many things I disagree with Donald Trump but much of his foreign policy was actually on target. Despite all this, Trump got pilloried in the presses. But had the Germans and other nations not been so short sighted and shut down their nuclear plants in exchange for becoming energy dependent on Russia, had all the NATO countries lived up to their military spending obligations, Putin wouldn't be thinking the West is weak and divided and invading Ukraine. It's not to Joe Biden's credit that he removed the sanctions Trump put on the Russian pipeline. Nor do I think it was wise to have all the US embassies fly BLM and rainbow flags in despotic regions. In case you hadn't noticed, both Russia and China have been increasingly dismissive and aggressive since Biden took office and it's not hard to see why they may be thinking the US is weak.

The goal for each NATO country to reach 2% of their GDP was for 2024. Considering 2024 hasn’t yet happened, you can’t really say they didn’t live up to their obligations. Also, Trump started to dismantle NATO and ruin our relationships with our allies. If one wants to make baseless claims like you are, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to make the excuse that the members who had yet to project the 2% goal weren’t motivated to do so because they were worried about the state of NATO’s future due to Trump’s destructible behavior. He said multiple times he’d like to pull out of NATO. When someone asked him if he would adhere to Article 5, undoubtedly the most important aspect of NATO, if an ally was attacked, he responded, “That’s a good question isn’t it? I don’t know, it’s something I need to consider. The fact that he even answered the question in that manner proves he doesn’t know $hit about foreign policy, or any policy really, at all whatsoever. It would render NATO useless. And for anything to work, aside from signed contracts, treaties, agreements, etc. one also needs to adhere to the honor code. We already know Trump doesn’t give a crap about the rule of law, so acting like he would follow any sort of honor code is a flipping joke. Would you support pulling out of NATO?? Because that’s seemingly what you’re implying.

Further, Putin thinks the West is weak and divided because he helped to make it to at way. You’re living in la-la land if you think this is just an opportunity born out of convenience rather than a deliberate action on Putin’s part. Also, this “weakness” talk everyone keeps spewing is getting tiring. If you think Trump showed any strength, well…HAHAHAHAHA. You may be dumber than he is! He threw a temper tantrum over losing an election and TO THIS DAY, he is still crying about it. In fact, the other day on Fox he told Laura Ingraham that the reason for the Russia-Ukraine crisis is because of “the rigged election”. He refused to go to Biden’s inauguration. Anytime he was criticized it was “fake news”. The press was “constantly out to get him” according to him because he couldn’t handle anything less than groveling and praise, let alone constructive criticism. He fired anyone in his administration who wasn’t “loyal” enough in his eyes. He’s poisoned the Republican Party and continues to do so anytime someone in the party finds a spine and decides rightfully to defend the constitution instead of the orange blob of flubber with a bad hairdo. He does all of this because HE.IS.WEAK. Make no mistake, there’s not a single strength that trump possesses.

What a joke. So Western Europe didn't want to fund their own defense because Trump might not follow through and defend them? Doesn't sound real brilliant.

Yes, Merkel, Macron and Johnson hated Trump. He declared that he would act in America's interest, rather than "lead from behind" those three like Obama did. Of course they hated him. But frankly, I totally agree that NATO does not serve our interests. We bear the cost of defending Europe, subsidize their welfare state lifestyles and they undercut that defense by making deals with Russia AND routinely opposing US interests elsewhere (Iran especially) for $$. We need to let the European Union fund their own defense. They have a larger population than we do and a GDP that is close to ours (and lots bigger than Russia's.) We get nothing from the deal except arms sales.

Subsidize their welfare lifestyles?!? Haha good one 🤣 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very glad I live in unfashionable flyover.

You’re going to have to survive with a bunch of MAGA lunatics running around. Good luck.

The MAGA people I see around me are all decent, capable, law abiding family people. I don't agree with their politics but some of you have a very warped perspective of Trump voters in flyover.

+1 and I am not a Trumper

+1 and not a Trumper either, but people like the PP above NEED to brand people who support MAGA as lunatics so it can justify their own vicious hatefulness. Makes them feel good about themselves.

Nope. MAGA actions speak for themselves.

Your schtick is getting worn out.

I didn’t vote for Trump, but I will also acknowledge we didn’t have 22 page thread about a possible Russian nuclear attack during his presidency, either.

I have a serious case of buyer’s remorse with Joe Biden. I now look at the Trump-era fondly. I feel awkward admitting it, because I hate being wrong. But that’s how I feel.

GMAFB. You are blaming Biden for this?

“I voted for Biden but…” Sure you did. Liar.

NP. Fact remains we didn't have a potential nuclear war looming over us when Trump was president. He took a strong stance against Putin and put sanctions on the pipeline being built between Russia and Europe and warned of Europeans becoming too energy dependent on Russia. He called out NATO for taking advantage of the US, which NATO was doing. There are many, many, many things I disagree with Donald Trump but much of his foreign policy was actually on target. Despite all this, Trump got pilloried in the presses. But had the Germans and other nations not been so short sighted and shut down their nuclear plants in exchange for becoming energy dependent on Russia, had all the NATO countries lived up to their military spending obligations, Putin wouldn't be thinking the West is weak and divided and invading Ukraine. It's not to Joe Biden's credit that he removed the sanctions Trump put on the Russian pipeline. Nor do I think it was wise to have all the US embassies fly BLM and rainbow flags in despotic regions. In case you hadn't noticed, both Russia and China have been increasingly dismissive and aggressive since Biden took office and it's not hard to see why they may be thinking the US is weak.

The goal for each NATO country to reach 2% of their GDP was for 2024. Considering 2024 hasn’t yet happened, you can’t really say they didn’t live up to their obligations. Also, Trump started to dismantle NATO and ruin our relationships with our allies. If one wants to make baseless claims like you are, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to make the excuse that the members who had yet to project the 2% goal weren’t motivated to do so because they were worried about the state of NATO’s future due to Trump’s destructible behavior. He said multiple times he’d like to pull out of NATO. When someone asked him if he would adhere to Article 5, undoubtedly the most important aspect of NATO, if an ally was attacked, he responded, “That’s a good question isn’t it? I don’t know, it’s something I need to consider. The fact that he even answered the question in that manner proves he doesn’t know $hit about foreign policy, or any policy really, at all whatsoever. It would render NATO useless. And for anything to work, aside from signed contracts, treaties, agreements, etc. one also needs to adhere to the honor code. We already know Trump doesn’t give a crap about the rule of law, so acting like he would follow any sort of honor code is a flipping joke. Would you support pulling out of NATO?? Because that’s seemingly what you’re implying.

Further, Putin thinks the West is weak and divided because he helped to make it to at way. You’re living in la-la land if you think this is just an opportunity born out of convenience rather than a deliberate action on Putin’s part. Also, this “weakness” talk everyone keeps spewing is getting tiring. If you think Trump showed any strength, well…HAHAHAHAHA. You may be dumber than he is! He threw a temper tantrum over losing an election and TO THIS DAY, he is still crying about it. In fact, the other day on Fox he told Laura Ingraham that the reason for the Russia-Ukraine crisis is because of “the rigged election”. He refused to go to Biden’s inauguration. Anytime he was criticized it was “fake news”. The press was “constantly out to get him” according to him because he couldn’t handle anything less than groveling and praise, let alone constructive criticism. He fired anyone in his administration who wasn’t “loyal” enough in his eyes. He’s poisoned the Republican Party and continues to do so anytime someone in the party finds a spine and decides rightfully to defend the constitution instead of the orange blob of flubber with a bad hairdo. He does all of this because HE.IS.WEAK. Make no mistake, there’s not a single strength that trump possesses.

What a joke. So Western Europe didn't want to fund their own defense because Trump might not follow through and defend them? Doesn't sound real brilliant.

Yes, Merkel, Macron and Johnson hated Trump. He declared that he would act in America's interest, rather than "lead from behind" those three like Obama did. Of course they hated him. But frankly, I totally agree that NATO does not serve our interests. We bear the cost of defending Europe, subsidize their welfare state lifestyles and they undercut that defense by making deals with Russia AND routinely opposing US interests elsewhere (Iran especially) for $$. We need to let the European Union fund their own defense. They have a larger population than we do and a GDP that is close to ours (and lots bigger than Russia's.) We get nothing from the deal except arms sales.

Subsidize their welfare lifestyles?!? Haha good one 🤣 🙄

Ever hear of "guns or butter"? If we pay for their guns, they have more for butter. Not to mention the fact that we subsidize their health care costs through R&D and paying the profit for Pharma and medical devices while they price fix.

[Anonymous]

Soooooooo I know we were joking and all but …what was the name of those pills?

Because I’m seeing the news about the latest nuclear plant fight and fire and things are not comforting right now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of Putin goes there, he'll get a bullet in his head from his own people.Anyone who's not totally insane knows putting nuclear on the table is just death.

If they even know what’s going on. The younger ones who use the internet do, as we can see from their protests. But last night on CNN, they interviewed a woman in Ukraine who had family in Russia and she said she was the one who gave them the news that Ukraine had been attacked by Russia. She said they were like, “What??! War?? What are you talking about?!?” They had no idea because…state-media.

Not even the young ones. They are mostly all brainwashed. I'm from Belarus and I have plenty of Russina friends and they are putin bootlickers. Even my coutrymen disgust me now with their attitudes.

Look at ovexhekin. He's a disgrace. Should have just kept his mouth shut but he's a Putin fan boy.

All of my Russian friends are in Georgia or other countries protesting the war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the most insane threads I've ever read on DCUM.

All you paranoid folk must know nothing about nuclear war!!

Mutually Assured Destruction means just that. No one will survive. The planet will not survive. Everything and everyone on the planet will die.

Sorry, but that’s just not true. Lots of people will still survive. The planet will absolutely survive. The most dangerous radioactive materials in fallout are essentially gone after about 4-8 weeks. A few types of long lasting isotopes will remain but they aren’t nearly as radioactive as the other materials in fallout. You can read about this stuff on wiki. I did a lot of reading about this stuff last night. The radiation is very high in the first few days, then starts to reduce quickly. There’s a mathematical formula for it called the 7-10 rule. Google it.

Where did you read this?

A large scale nuclear attack between the USA and Russia would mean a nuclear winter that would kill most of the human race. If that wasn’t in the materials you read, they aren’t reliable. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the most insane threads I've ever read on DCUM.

All you paranoid folk must know nothing about nuclear war!!

Mutually Assured Destruction means just that. No one will survive. The planet will not survive. Everything and everyone on the planet will die.

Sorry, but that’s just not true. Lots of people will still survive. The planet will absolutely survive. The most dangerous radioactive materials in fallout are essentially gone after about 4-8 weeks. A few types of long lasting isotopes will remain but they aren’t nearly as radioactive as the other materials in fallout. You can read about this stuff on wiki. I did a lot of reading about this stuff last night. The radiation is very high in the first few days, then starts to reduce quickly. There’s a mathematical formula for it called the 7-10 rule. Google it.

Where did you read this?

A large scale nuclear attack between the USA and Russia would mean a nuclear winter that would kill most of the human race. If that wasn’t in the materials you read, they aren’t reliable. Period.

Sorry. You’re misinformed. Physics just doesn’t work out that way. Nuclear bombs aren’t magic. They’re just bombs - with some interesting side effects that subside on an entirely predictable mathematic timetable. 4-8 weeks is entirely correct in terms of fallout. Iodine 131, Cesium 137 and Strontium 90 require more time but are produced in far smaller quantities relative to the more energetic isotopes produced in a fission cycle, which are the primary dangers from fallout. Localized neutron activation in otherwise stable elements is another source of intermediate length contamination, but it is very localized, confined to the area of neutron flux at the moment of the fission/fusion cycle.

“Nuclear winter” was a term created by Carl Sagan and embraced by Hollywood script writers. It has no basis in reality. A large scale exchange would put enough soot, smoke and dust into the air to cloud skies for a short time, but that’s all. Many volcanic eruptions in the last millennia have put far more ash into the atmosphere than every nuclear weapon on earth possibly could.

[Anonymous]

6 feet of course, and wear your mask!