3 ms·
Surviving nuclear armageddon is comparably easy and only boils down to a combination of luck (i.e. not being close to any military installation or major populat
by sigmoid10 5y ago
Surviving nuclear armageddon is comparably easy and only boils down to a combination of luck (i.e. not being close to any military installation or major population center) and having access to shelters with enough supplies for a few weeks to sit out the most dangerous radiation phase. The first days of a full all out nuclear war would only kill a small percentage of humanity (still 100+ million, but far from everyone). However, most people (i.e. billions) will eventually die due to lack of food. When the global climate drops 10 degrees for a few months and all surface level soil is polluted by radioactive byproducts with long half life, no country will be able to produce enough food anymore. If you're not 100% self sustaining (including indoor food, air and water production) like a permanent outpost on mars would have to be, you're definitely better off dying in the blast.
- quickthrowman 5y ago> Surviving nuclear armageddon is comparably easy and only boils down to a combination of luck Luck, and not being murdered for your supplies by your fellow post-nuclear wasteland survivors… I always see people claiming surviving a nuclear holocaust is no biggie, but they never address the violence that would occur.
- tablespoon 5y agoThat seems absurdly exaggerated. IIRC, the concept of nuclear winter was junk science and the cities that actually have been nuked were successfully rebuilt soon afterwards.