5 ms·

New Zealand is always the obvious "lifeboat". It's a long way from populated area so difficult to get there, and it's fairly easy to sink any ships that try. It

New Zealand is always the obvious "lifeboat". It's a long way from populated area so difficult to get there, and it's fairly easy to sink any ships that try. It's in the southern hemisphere so will be protected from the majority of nuclear war which would be in the northern hemisphere.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
Unless someone with nukes decides to threaten NZ to open up the borders for their people, or else. With global changes this big, we can't expect the usual MAD Mexican Standoff a couple big powers to keep everyone safe. It may be that all nuclear powers (or all that remained after a brief nuclear war) will decide together to politely ask NZ to open up or else.
- johnchristopher 3y ago
  Or else what ? They half nuke the place they intend to escape to ?
  - scott_w 3y ago
    Have you ever seen a child smash a toy they tried to steal rather than give it back?
    - johnchristopher 3y ago
      Can't say that I have. I say the people threatening with nukes here would turn to more subtle methods of invasion, that's their objectives. They won't destroy it because they can't have it. That'd be a waste of nukes. Now is there someone threatening another country with nukes at the moment but not using them because he knows that'd be useless anyway and would it prove my point ?
      - scott_w 3y ago
        > Can't say that I have. Then I recommend you spend more time around people. Grown men have been convicted of throwing acid in an ex-girlfriend's face because "if I can't have you, no-one can." > Now is there someone threatening another country with nukes at the moment but not using them because he knows that'd be useless anyway and would it prove my point ? It doesn't prove your point because no country today is facing imminent extinction. Rationality changes when desperation comes into play.
        johnchristopher 3y ago
        > > Can't say that I have. > Then I recommend you spend more time around people. Grown men have been convicted of throwing acid in an ex-girlfriend's face because "if I can't have you, no-one can." You come up with a stupid analogy based on children behavior and now you invoke people throwing acid ? This is nickelodeon level debate here. > It doesn't prove your point because no country today is facing imminent extinction. Rationality changes when desperation comes into play. You are making the extraordinary (and quite childish considering you started with an analogy based on children behavior) claim that a country would nuke another one to go and settle there, it's up to you to prove it. So far, in the real world, no one has used nukes like that. I'd follow the argument but if a guy would throw acid and was in position to throw a nuke over a country they were denied access to it's most likely plausible they have the means and resources to get into this country in a more discrete and safe way (safe as in: he's in a country that wasn't nuked).
        scott_w 3y ago
        > You come up with a stupid analogy based on children behavior and now you invoke people throwing acid ? It’s called an analogy. Given we’re talking about nuclear war, it’s not an insane analogy. > claim that a country would nuke another one to go and settle there, it's up to you to prove it. I never said they’d try to settle the wasteland. I think you’re struggling to understand the analogy.
        3y ago
    - swader999 3y ago
      Or spit in its food so no one else grabs it.
      - sharemywin 3y ago
        child? that tactic still works as an adult. even with strangers in a restaurant, besides who wants to eat "inside" that stupid restaurant anyway.
- sidewndr46 3y ago
  somewhat ironically, widespread nuclear war might actual pare back human population to a point where emissions dramatically declined.
swader999 3y ago
Its the first place I'm sending my shelter vent seeking drones so don't bother.
freedude 3y ago
much or all of it is under water...

TeMPOraL 3y ago

Unless someone with nukes decides to threaten NZ to open up the borders for their people, or else. With global changes this big, we can't expect the usual MAD Mexican Standoff a couple big powers to keep everyone safe. It may be that all nuclear powers (or all that remained after a brief nuclear war) will decide together to politely ask NZ to open up or else.

johnchristopher 3y ago
Or else what ? They half nuke the place they intend to escape to ?
- scott_w 3y ago
  Have you ever seen a child smash a toy they tried to steal rather than give it back?
  - johnchristopher 3y ago
    Can't say that I have. I say the people threatening with nukes here would turn to more subtle methods of invasion, that's their objectives. They won't destroy it because they can't have it. That'd be a waste of nukes. Now is there someone threatening another country with nukes at the moment but not using them because he knows that'd be useless anyway and would it prove my point ?
    - scott_w 3y ago
      > Can't say that I have. Then I recommend you spend more time around people. Grown men have been convicted of throwing acid in an ex-girlfriend's face because "if I can't have you, no-one can." > Now is there someone threatening another country with nukes at the moment but not using them because he knows that'd be useless anyway and would it prove my point ? It doesn't prove your point because no country today is facing imminent extinction. Rationality changes when desperation comes into play.
      - johnchristopher 3y ago
        > > Can't say that I have. > Then I recommend you spend more time around people. Grown men have been convicted of throwing acid in an ex-girlfriend's face because "if I can't have you, no-one can." You come up with a stupid analogy based on children behavior and now you invoke people throwing acid ? This is nickelodeon level debate here. > It doesn't prove your point because no country today is facing imminent extinction. Rationality changes when desperation comes into play. You are making the extraordinary (and quite childish considering you started with an analogy based on children behavior) claim that a country would nuke another one to go and settle there, it's up to you to prove it. So far, in the real world, no one has used nukes like that. I'd follow the argument but if a guy would throw acid and was in position to throw a nuke over a country they were denied access to it's most likely plausible they have the means and resources to get into this country in a more discrete and safe way (safe as in: he's in a country that wasn't nuked).
        scott_w 3y ago
        > You come up with a stupid analogy based on children behavior and now you invoke people throwing acid ? It’s called an analogy. Given we’re talking about nuclear war, it’s not an insane analogy. > claim that a country would nuke another one to go and settle there, it's up to you to prove it. I never said they’d try to settle the wasteland. I think you’re struggling to understand the analogy.
        3y ago
  - swader999 3y ago
    Or spit in its food so no one else grabs it.
    - sharemywin 3y ago
      child? that tactic still works as an adult. even with strangers in a restaurant, besides who wants to eat "inside" that stupid restaurant anyway.
sidewndr46 3y ago
somewhat ironically, widespread nuclear war might actual pare back human population to a point where emissions dramatically declined.

swader999 3y ago

Its the first place I'm sending my shelter vent seeking drones so don't bother.

freedude 3y ago

much or all of it is under water...