If there was a nuclear war would people get any actual for-warning???

Why are their so many videos on youtube about ww3. It's nuts. It's very bizzare. Like alex jones was talking about it maybe I'll add that video.

But anyway it got me thinking.... so like if you're in a city would you even get any for-warning? Or would you just be dead? What if you were on the outskirts of the city say about 10 miles from downtown, and in a house basement? Would that help? Or would you still be dead? I'm virtually positive that my city would be targeted as there's a million people here. There's not a lot of big cities in canada so the top ones would probably be wiped out. They probably wouldn't let the general public know what's happening though right? I don't know, maybe that's a good thing. You'd just be dead. But that's if it would happen. You never know though. I mean population reduction is a huge nwo agenda. And I have this feeling that if things were to go down that road then they'd wipe everyone out first, then use it as a way to say "never again bla bla bla" and therefore all future people need to get marked and have a cashless society or something like that. Like all this is in the movie: "Brave new world". That movie specifically depcits the future. The agenda was leaked to huckstly and 1984 dude. Again these might seem liek remote possiblities. They might not even happen in our lifetime. however, the agenda is to reduce world population to 500 million. I don't think they're gonna do taht though until they're solid AI and also androids in place. Because they would have to be in place to take up the work load of the missing people.

But anyway, do you think WW3 is a real threat?

I know it's kinda stupid to worry about but you never know right. Like alex jones was saying something like "you never think you'll ever get cancer until you do, or you never think you'll be in a serious car accident until you are." like it's a bit unpredictable but it could happen.

Look: 9:20+









this is spooky in my mind. They have the full movie of Brave new world playing on youtube. Like that is a bit eiry.



(this video is freaky)

But to some degree in all honestly I'm not even fully convinced that nukes are real. It could be all a big brainwash. So few people have witnessed them live. The one's that have been filmed, well hollywood could fake anything. And we don't know if hiroshima was a nuke or if it was a regular conventional firebmbing. But it does sort of look plausible. See if I'm deep in the woods in my bunker by then I'll be okay.

a reply to: bigpatato

In way I hope not.
Not real sorry look at the special effects they could do in the 50's 60's nope they are not faked.

If you are in a large city, even with ample warning [ and you're only going to get about a 30 minute warning ] you'll never get out. You and every resident of that city will be clogging the roads trying to get out, with traffic accidents everywhere slowing things down even more. Imagine 1 million people all in a blind, drop everything and GO, panic to get away.

10 safest countries? World wide nuclear fallout. Not to mention, hundreds of millions of tons of dirt and ash in the atmosphere, blocking the Sun. Plants die, animals die...people die. If the nuclear holocaust that everyone has feared comes about, there will be no "safe countries".

I'm not even fully convinced that nukes are real.

I'm not even going to go in to that. I have no idea where people are getting this, but it's the most ignorant statement I've heard in a long while.

I talked with a family member about this that is former military. They said when he was in, he was told it is a 50 mile wide fireball in the middle and then 100 miles from that you got the boom and fallout... But the fallout can travel with the wind.. So potentially you could drop a bomb and kill lots of people in a country but the fallout could travel right to your country and give you radiation. This is why nukes are a no win weapon for anyone except the crazies that want to destroy everyone.

a reply to: bigpatato

No, until it happens it's just a possibility, you would want to keep the economy running. Mass panic has a way of disrupting that.

a reply to: bigpatato

Please don't add an Alex Jones video. "the agenda is to reduce world population to 500 million....That's the Georgia Guidestones, I think.

If there was time to get out, I believe they would warn. If there was no time, I believe they would not.

a reply to: bigpatato Hi, potato. The simple answer is NO. Reasons are few.

1st. Nuclear weapons from the third generation are "tactical" devices. This means small bombs with power of the lower kilotons. 0,5 and such. They are designed for precision strikes, like bunkers, airports, silos and such. They leave small amount of radiation.

2nd. If a possible destruction warfare takes place it won't be sudden. Nuclear explosion some say, and I believe so, requires the device to be detonated at the exact time on the exact spot. Otherwise you would have no bigger effect than a bomb.

3rd. No intelligence agency follows the tactic: speak before act. It is unwise. On the field is always do before talk.

I disagree with the main opinion that WW3 is imminent. I think we might skip it this time.

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
I talked with a family member about this that is former military. They said when he was in, he was told it is a 50 mile wide fireball in the middle and then 100 miles from that you got the boom and fallout... But the fallout can travel with the wind.. So potentially you could drop a bomb and kill lots of people in a country but the fallout could travel right to your country and give you radiation. This is why nukes are a no win weapon for anyone except the crazies that want to destroy everyone.

this is a recent thing you have come to understand?

If you could call a bright flash a warning, then yes!

a reply to: bigpatato

Well now... That depends on an awful lot. First, the delivery method. An older missile would ordinarily be more easily tracked by defense stations on the ground, and travel relatively slowly, compared to a modern weapon system. The earlier the warning of the launch and transit of the weapon, the greater reaction time, obviously.

But some of the modern weapons delivery systems that are being rumoured to exist, including near hypersonic systems, with all manner of stealth tech worked into them, would be harder to track, and faster to target, reducing the time available to make ready.

Anyone in a city looking to survive a nuke hit, would be an idiot to try and leave the city on the day, since the roads would be jam packed. My personal preference, if I were in London for example, would be to run down into the Underground system, and not just on the platforms, as my ancestors had to during the Blitz, but right down deep into the tunnels themselves, taking care to avoid the electrified rail and the onrush of hundreds of tonnes of electrically driven steel, glass, and plastics which are the modern subway trains. Any deep, closed off structure would do. Might not shield me from all the radiation, but it will be a damn sight better than getting stuck on the M25 or clogged trying to cross Tower Bridge.

You should watch the movie Miracle Mile, a cult classic. What would you do if you got a phone call like this?

I've wondered about this as well, will we have any warning as a fellow Canadian have you ever heard if we even have fallout shelters cause I've never heard of any at least here in Calgary and the police like to dodge the question. I wonder how big of a nuclear target we really are though here in the great white north.

If there was a nuclear exchange between the superpowers the first we would know would be the column of smoke and ash over our heads.

Apparent references by that US General in regards to this, mention advanced weapon systems and artificial intelligence.

The third war will reduce the population enough so the advanced technologies revealed during hostilities will be easily controlled, considering proliferation to the man on the street is their reasoning for denying us these life changing technologies, we should hope to be lucky enough to survive -

We may finally get that hoverboard after all

a reply to: bigpatato

If you are lucky ( 0r should i say unlucky ) enough you may hear a siren

By the way it is .............forewarning.

I think they'd have to warn us, if they want the surviving population to play ball. I reckon it's a face value thing though. Not convinced a warning would save anyone.

Here is a book to read about nuclear war and what might happen afterwards.

The Fate of the Earth by Jonathan Schell

a reply to: reldra

...adding to the discussion as the OP seemed to not understand.

" what if you were on the outskirts of the city say about 10 miles from downtown, and in a house basement? Would that help? "

Try to add to a discussion for a change please...

If it's any help, I honestly can't imagine Canada being in much danger. If we've reached the point where Toronto or Vancouver or Montreal are in danger, then we're at the "humanity is finished" stage of events.

If we're speculating about a nuclear exchange with Russia, the top target, by a very wide margin, would be the Washington DC/Northern Virginia area. The goal being a decapitation strike targeting the White House, Congress, the Pentagon, CIA headquarters, and the NSA. All of which are helpfully concentrated in a fairly compact area. By it's nature, there would be no warning of such a strike. You'd get maybe 15 minutes alert once the missiles start flying.

After that, I'd imagine likely targets would be locations with important military facilities: Honolulu & Guam would likely disappear from existence, as would San Diego. The ballistic missile silos in North Dakota would be hit (assuming they're still operational; the Russians certainly know if the nukes there still work or not.) They might target Manhattan, to bring down the US financial system.

After this, you start running into the question of why you want to waste nukes on simple wanton destruction. By this point, the US government is effectively defunct, so what would they need to target at this point?

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I've heard yellow stone would basically take take out the entire US...

To add to your targeted list:
-Yellow stone
-Area 51?
-Texas..because it is the 11th largest economy in the world
-I feel like I heard of bases carved in some mountains,but I cannot remember where.

I do believe Minot is still active as you mentioned you were unsure.

originally posted by: bigpatato
Why are their so many videos on youtube about ww3. It's nuts. It's very bizzare. Like alex jones was talking about it maybe I'll add that video.

But anyway it got me thinking.... so like if you're in a city would you even get any for-warning? Or would you just be dead? What if you were on the outskirts of the city say about 10 miles from downtown, and in a house basement? Would that help? Or would you still be dead? I'm virtually positive that my city would be targeted as there's a million people here. There's not a lot of big cities in canada so the top ones would probably be wiped out. They probably wouldn't let the general public know what's happening though right? I don't know, maybe that's a good thing. You'd just be dead. But that's if it would happen. You never know though. I mean population reduction is a huge nwo agenda. And I have this feeling that if things were to go down that road then they'd wipe everyone out first, then use it as a way to say "never again bla bla bla" and therefore all future people need to get marked and have a cashless society or something like that. Like all this is in the movie: "Brave new world". That movie specifically depcits the future. The agenda was leaked to huckstly and 1984 dude. Again these might seem liek remote possiblities. They might not even happen in our lifetime. however, the agenda is to reduce world population to 500 million. I don't think they're gonna do taht though until they're solid AI and also androids in place. Because they would have to be in place to take up the work load of the missing people.

But anyway, do you think WW3 is a real threat?

I know it's kinda stupid to worry about but you never know right. Like alex jones was saying something like "you never think you'll ever get cancer until you do, or you never think you'll be in a serious car accident until you are." like it's a bit unpredictable but it could happen.

Look: 9:20+

this is spooky in my mind. They have the full movie of Brave new world playing on youtube. Like that is a bit eiry.

(this video is freaky)

But to some degree in all honestly I'm not even fully convinced that nukes are real. It could be all a big brainwash. So few people have witnessed them live. The one's that have been filmed, well hollywood could fake anything. And we don't know if hiroshima was a nuke or if it was a regular conventional firebmbing. But it does sort of look plausible. See if I'm deep in the woods in my bunker by then I'll be okay.

First, I'm in NYC so I'm effed. Major target going back to WWII.

Secondly, if you were ten miles out you'd survive most nuclear weapons except the big boys, provided the prevailing winds didn't bring all the radioactive fall out your direction.

As for warning, potentially the first strike targets (NYC, DC, etc) would have little to no warning (20 minutes). Other secondary or less important targets might have more substantial warning however, as the first primary targets were attacked.