If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
All evil needs to thrive is for good men to sit back and do nothing
You mean we're not?!
I see your point, it's just watching Lois Theraux's weird weekends has kinda put a bias on my view.
Personally i'll be with the hippies on top of a hill smokin' da weed if it happens!
All evil needs to thrive is for good men to sit back and do nothing
Even though the film is 20 years old it scared me.
The weight of evidence from available studies suggests that that most would die in 30 days. Britain is likely to fare badly with perhaps no more than a few million people surviving the first month.
Today just one nuclear bomb - out of the tens of thousands in existence - has a destructive force equal to that of all the bombs dropped during the second world war.
Sorry but you dont know what youre talking about. You think that only 3 million out of 60 million would survive a large strike? Youre just plum wrong. What do you class as a large strike? The USA is the only country on earth that could blanket the UK with nukes. Hitting every square inch is the only way to achieve the casualties you are talking about.
Can you give a link to these 'studies' that give such weight to your argument? You are just perpetuating a myth.
Evidence from Hiroshima and Nagasaki shows that radiation victims (who had received large, but not lethal doses) were 4 times more likely to suffer from leukaemia than other people. Nearly all the early pioneers of radioactivity developed cancer in later life.
A person receiving a dose of 450r has, on average only a 50 percent chance of surviving. Within hours a person might feel nausea, vomit and develop diarrhoea. Those who do not die quickly might experience hair loss and will notice small haemorrhages in the skin and the nouth. The fall in the number of white cells would have progressed, imparing the bodies ability to fight infection.
[This message has been edited by byny (edited 03-12-2001).]
I think comparing the bombs dropped on Japan and those of today are unfair..The bombs of the 40's were very small compared to the ones we have today but they were also a great deal 'dirtier'..The bombs of today are relatively clean compared to those old ones and the radiation illnesses would be massively lower.
All evil needs to thrive is for good men to sit back and do nothing
'Nuclear war the facts on our survival' by Peter Goodwin.
Peter Goodwin has a first degree in physics, a masters in Radio Astronomy and is a fellow of the Royal Astronomical society. He is (or was) Science Editor for the Central Office of information.
On the inner sleeve it says
'this book is not a manifesto for disarmament, nor a guide to the best places to hide. Its chapters describe nuclear weapons, how they work and what happens to people and buildings in the vicinity of an explosion. It explains radiation and how it effects individuals. It examines the military strategies of the nuclear powers - their known plans and the risks they run'
Admittedly it was published quite a while ago but that would only suggest to me that the weapons discussed are now a lot more powerful. You could be right too that the weapons are 'Cleaner' in terms of fall out, but that would only apply to the nost advanced countries.
And.. the reality is that if a Nuclear power station exploded in the next town down the road from me - I'd certainly be effected in some way! ..so its not that clean and safe!
The tactics and strategies of the cold war nuclear war were an awful lot different from the plans of today. Russia is hardly a player anymore and they are the only plausible enemy.
Do you realise just how few countries have nuclear weapons? I believe its seven or eight. Russia and China being the only possible enemies that can reach us with missiles. Seeing as how Russia is likely to be in the EU within a few years I dont see them as doing much. China is far more interested in economics and trade than war.
The less developed nuclear states, India and Pakistan have 'dirtier' nukes but they cant reach us. Their nukes are firmly pointed at each other.
Nuclear power stations are a totally different issue. The chances of your local nuke power station exploding are probably equivalent to winning the lottery 2 weeks in a row.
Nuclear war is a horrific concept but in this day and age its not as horrific as it was in the cold war. If someone fires off a nuke now, its doubtful that everyone else would fire theirs off. Unless you are in the immediate area(20 miles or so) when a nuke goes off then you have a reasonable chance of survival.
All evil needs to thrive is for good men to sit back and do nothing
Nor can I agree that China isn't a threat. I think that China is probably the biggest threat we face.
I'll keep reading my book .. but I'm not about to freak over this - I was a very scared child in the late 70's after being told about the destruction Nuclear war would bring to the world... it hasn't happened yet, hopefully it never will. If it does I think I'd rather be in the centre of the Blast rather than Survive for weeks then die.
Id rather survive for years and life a happy and productive life.
The only chance you have is if you are in the armed forces or the police. They are the only ones with the training, authority and equipment. Anyone else is as good as dead.
Youve watched threads now so you must be an expert <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
The idea that after a nuclear war there will be troops of big strong men patroling the country keeping us all safe is just nonsense. When we are all fighting for the little available food and water there will most likey be anarchy. It will be a matter of survival and in extreem times people do extreem things.
The only person who can help you will be yourself and so it will be up to the individual if they want to work as a team or fight for themselves.
lol. To deflect the blast!
Great! I'm gonna get cancer anyway!!
I will point out that byny is closest to the mark. Both govnment and HMSO leaflets UNDERSTATE the effects of nuclear blasts. it would be truly deverstating! radation dose drop off quickly over 2 days but by then its in/on everything waiting for you to eat it.
thoses who dont die in the blast will die or have contracted terminal illness within the next 30 days, ne1 unluckly enuff to live past that will live on to suffer the same as those still alive 2day after Hiroshima and there defective offspring. it is truly sad. I done some site seaching and whilst reading a invertory of kit 4 ur shelter childrens toys were on the list and I felt my eyes well up (soft or wot) cos I KNOW a 2year old aint gonna survive. Plus I think it was the picy of mum, dad and the little girl with teddy tucked under her arm. Nah it aint roseie at all, yes the T.A. will be rolled out to gaurd supermarkets and the like. ex MOD bods will be recalled to service and all.
We had sheep dying of cancer in cumbria after 'Chynobal' cos of fall out so bollocks to your safe 20-30 miles away from ground zero!
[This message has been edited by Ibbow (edited 05-12-2001).]
It's so easy to dismiss the true effects of a nuclear war and start acting like there are imaginary barriers on each border .. like..If a bomb drops in India it won't effect the UK. Of course it will, in some way.
for example, u wanna buy some bread, basic stuff, say the shop owners survive, so does the baker, what happens if the baker finds out the flour factory is understaffed and he cant get other ingredients cos the people who are responsiable for them have been killed.
Ive been doing some research and will post links in a bit.
[This message has been edited by Balddog (edited 05-12-2001).]
All evil needs to thrive is for good men to sit back and do nothing
Deaths due to the chronic effects of radiation have gone on being registered ever since.
That's what a 'small' nuclear bomb can do.
I have personally witnessed three surface detonations in Nevada, USA, and it is quite impressive...certainly we will use them again and probably soon.
Diesel
88888888
I KNOW SOMEONE WHO SURVIVED A PRISONER OF WAR CAMP
THAT DOESN'T MEAN MILLIONS MORE DID! <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">