Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

https://www.ready.gov/nuclear-explosion

by ta988 • 4 years ago

127 175 4 years ago

ready.gov

smitty1e• 4 years ago

May Fortune restrain madness.

eggsmediumrare• 4 years ago

Seems weird to be concerned about social distancing in the event of a nuclear explosion.

pbourke4• 4 years ago

An N95 mask might help with inhaling irradiated dust. But yeah, COVID would be rather low on the list of concerns.

micromacrofoot• 4 years ago

imagine the bad luck if that’s when you contracted it?

mc32• 4 years ago

Especially considering most mask mandates are being rescinded.

But you’re right. The first concern should be protection from the most immediate threat —which in this scenario would not be Covid-19. That’s bureaucracy for us…

willismichael4• 4 years ago

If I were sheltering from a nuclear strike with a bunch of strangers, I think I would do the opposite - encourage everybody to come in close and share lots of hugs. Human beings need contact, especially while experiencing trauma.

soared3• 4 years ago

Just be sure everyone in the hug was in shelter before being exposed to fallout, otherwise those hugs might be radioactive!

tshaddox4• 4 years ago

Why? In relative terms, yeah, obviously, but a respiratory virus breakout in a fallout shelter certainly isn’t any less troubling than a respiratory virus breakout at a workplace or music festival.

kragen5• 4 years ago

A covid outbreak in March 02022, when everyone is already vaccinated and the dominant strain of covid is the omicron strain (which, even without vaccination, is only as fatal as the regular flu instead of an order of magnitude worse), is dramatically less troubling than a covid outbreak six months ago, and it isn't worth mentioning in the context of fallout safety rules, except to say not to worry about covid.

ozten• 4 years ago

+1 Also, this isn't a new threat vector. It's not like someone who hasn't heard of COVID-19 is going to discover this amazing survival tip here for the first time. Probably the doc change was proposed 2 years ago and finally shipped.

pbourke4• 4 years ago

“Last Updated: 02/25/2022”

bombcar2• 4 years ago

In case of nuclear hellfire, remember to continue to be scared of Covid.

gumby• 4 years ago

These are hard trade offs to make. Covid is increasing in Ukraine as people make this trade off. I read that they have run out of oxygen tanks.

weatherlight• 4 years ago

One horseman at a time please.

throwawaylinux12• 4 years ago

If you have just survived a nuclear explosion and find yourself in need of assistance, call 911 and be sure to let the operator know if you have or believe you may have COVID-19.

Absolute insanity.

cpncrunch• 4 years ago

"Many people may already feel fear and anxiety about the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). The threat of a nuclear explosion can add additional stress"

Ah, yes, a little additional stress from the nuclear explosion over and above covid. It's hard to know if this was written with a straight face or not.

mbg7213• 4 years ago

"If possible, please position the nuclear blast between yourself and COVID-19 in order to minimize proximity to COVID."

soared3• 4 years ago

Seems pretty reasonable though. Wearing masks and some amount of social distancing isn’t that hard, and reducing other strains on the medical system during nuclear war seems prudent.

kjsthree• 4 years ago

Actually LOL’d!

nosianu• 4 years ago

Right. What little is left of the medical system now is only a million and twenty three times overburdened instead of a million and twenty four. I guess it's good to inject some humor into dark situations.

throwawaylinux12• 4 years ago

Oh I totally agree with you, my problem with it is that they missed out some pretty basic fundamental advice. Like if there's a nuclear winter and subsequent collapse of society it's very important to huddle together for warmth in groups of no more than 3 while your nomadic tribe follows the migrating buffalo herds. See it sounds obvious now but it's easy to miss these trifling details.

tshaddox4• 4 years ago

Note that this is not a direct quote. That bit about COVID-19 appears in a big paragraph about what to do if you’re sick or injured. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a shared boilerplate across lots of government websites about emergencies. This whole page mentions COVID-19 a few times but really isn’t as ludicrous or reminiscent of satire as people here are making it out to be.

alatkins• 4 years ago

If you are told by authorities to evacuate to a public shelter, try to bring items that can help protect yourself and your family from COVID-19, such as hand sanitizer that contains at least 60 percent alcohol, cleaning materials, and two masks per person. Children under two years old, people who have trouble breathing, and people who cannot remove masks on their own should not wear them.

I beg to differ.

chias• 4 years ago

I expect you're right. I think a number of these sections were copied from a similar page on COVID-19, e.g. in the section about preparing early, it refers to the emergency as a pandemic:

Remember that not everyone can afford to respond by stocking up on necessities. For those who can afford it, making essential purchases and slowly building up supplies in advance will allow for longer time periods between shopping trips. This helps to protect those who are unable to procure essentials in advance of the pandemic and must shop more frequently.

throwawaylinux12• 4 years ago

There's lots of bits about COVID-19, and what I paraphrased came from the part about what to do after you have survived a nuclear explosion.

I think the more likely explanation is simply that it was written by people in disaster management who have a myopic focus on the COVID-19 crisis and a vested interest in keeping COVID under their purview (i.e., to be seen as an ongoing disaster).

bo1024• 4 years ago

But there are several places where the majority of the text is about covid-19 precautions. Example:

Go to the basement or middle of the building. Stay away from the outer walls and roof. Try to maintain a distance of at least six feet between yourself and people who are not part of your household. If possible, wear a mask if you’re sheltering with people who are not a part of your household. Children under two years old, people who have trouble breathing, and those who are unable to remove masks on their own should not wear them.

mbg7213• 4 years ago

During the Cold War, I believe the official British advice to be broadcast to the populace in the event of nuclear attack was "First, go make tea," because it was the most ingrained and instinctive thing every Briton knew how to do, and would best maintain calm. Whatever this advice says about Americans, I would like to fix it and elect the opposite of the thing perpetuating it, please.

Clubber2• 4 years ago

It's the news. Fear is their business model and they're all hurting, so they gotta ratchet it up to keep the dollars coming. The whole Appleby's advert in the middle of the Ukraine raid siren is the epitome of what they do. They also have a lot of sway in getting pols elected. It only works when people get fooled by it. The spell will break soon I hope.

cma2• 4 years ago

I think they just mixed up a page on pandemics in general:

This helps to protect those who are unable to procure essentials in advance of the pandemic and must shop more frequently. In addition, consider avoiding WIC-labeled products so that those who rely on these products can access them.

nimbius• 4 years ago

"survived a nuclear explosion" and arent blind, deaf, or dying, use a magical telephone that also survived a massive EMP rendering most telco switching equipment useless, and inform the nonexistent person at the other end of the line you would like to experience mass-casualty triage at an already entirely overloaded US hospital, presuming you have insurance.

iab4• 4 years ago

Would hate to see the copay for radiation burns

hammock• 4 years ago

Johnny5553• 4 years ago

Yes. If there's a nuclear explosion close enough that you need to take shelter, 911 isn't coming whether you tell them you have COVID or not, assuming you can even reach them, which is dubious.

Johnny5553• 4 years ago

At first I thought this was a parody, it's so ridiculous the way they added random COVID preparedness bits into it.

iab4• 4 years ago

“Also, ensure your most recent tax information is up to date using e-file on IRS.gov”

zionic4• 4 years ago

Personally, a government that takes 50%+ of my income producing this kind of garbage-level content scares me more than COVID ever did.

What the fuck am I/are we paying for?

whatshisface5• 4 years ago

Hey, they're also producing the nuclear weapons. :)

esrauch• 4 years ago

The maximum tax bracket is 37%

qiskit• 4 years ago

It seems like we were meant to be in a constant state of fear. The war on terror seems to have abated and now we get to worry about covid and nuclear explosions?

I believe it was steve pinker who showed that we live in the most peaceful time in human history. And yet, we are the most fearful people in history. It never lets up.

t0bia_s• 4 years ago

For example for experimental vaccines with uknown contracts.

dwaltrip• 4 years ago

What's your BATNA? Hmm?

Edit: I just skimmed the document. It's really not that bad.

nradov• 4 years ago

It really seems like we're approaching peak clown world. We are not being led by serious people.

bjt2n3904• 4 years ago

At least the mask is dropping!

(Haha.)

moron123• 4 years ago

I thought this was satire, but then I saw the .gov

We are living in a satire universe folks.

fastball3• 4 years ago

The US govt is literally adopting the dumbest takes on Twitter[1] as official policy.

[1] https://twitter.com/DanaHoule/status/1496723469890949127

whatshisface5• 4 years ago

That's not such a dumb take, diseases and wartime conditions go hand in hand.

Heyokamerican2• 4 years ago

As far as I can tell, this person is not in government [1] and is not claiming to represent anyone but themselves. I don't understand how you conclude that their comment is US govt policy.

[1] https://newrepublic.com/authors/dana-houle

soared3• 4 years ago

“Space Weather” preparedness is an interesting read too https://www.ready.gov/space-weather

TeeMassive• 4 years ago

Try to maintain a distance of at least six feet between yourself and people who are not part of your household. If possible, wear a mask if you’re sheltering with people who are not a part of your household. Children under two years old, people who have trouble breathing, and those who are unable to remove masks on their own should not wear them.

Is there a reason other than Covid-19? I know that when they give Iodine 131 pills to to fight thyroidal gland cancer the patient must be isolated from everyone else because he is radio active. But other than that this doesn't make any sense.

cma2• 4 years ago

It seems they mis-copy-pasted from a page on pandemics:

For those who can afford it, making essential purchases and slowly building up supplies in advance will allow for longer time periods between shopping trips. This helps to protect those who are unable to procure essentials in advance of the pandemic and must shop more frequently

hedora3• 4 years ago

Watch the "fallout" video I pasted elsewhere. It covers dealing with contamination.

alexb_• 4 years ago

These are the type of things that had to be a result of government bureaucracy and unnecessary rules. Probably something like "All guidance must mention xyz about COVID".

coenhyde2• 4 years ago

tbh I am more worried of an EMP nuke detonated high in the atmosphere than localized nuclear explosions. An EMP would lead to famines and total chaos.

wanderer_6• 4 years ago

To be honest, nuclear threats can pretty much be waved away with mutually assured destruction. I think we're all just saying, "Surely they won't do it..." because we know that if they do, there will be nothing left to worry about / plan for.

JKCalhoun2• 4 years ago

Do we know that to be a fact?

coenhyde2• 4 years ago

It has never happened, so the best we can do is speculate with what we know. The US and Russia did conduct some atmospheric nuclear detonations that unintentionally created EMP's. And determined yes it would be a bad day.

From https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/19_030...

  "The critical national infrastructure in the United States faces a present and continuing existential threat from combined-arms warfare, including cyber and manmade electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, as well as from natural EMP from a solar superstorm. During the Cold War, the U.S. was primarily concerned about an EMP attack generated by a high-altitude nuclear weapon as a tactic by which the Soviet Union could suppress the U.S. national command authority and the ability to respond to a nuclear attack—and thus negate the deterrence value of assured nuclear retaliation. Within the last decade, newly armed adversaries, including North Korea, have been developing the ability and threatening to carry out an EMP attack against the United States. Such an attack would give countries that have only a small number of nuclear weapons the ability to cause widespread, long-lasting damage to critical national infrastructures, to the United States itself as a viable country, and to the survival of a majority of its population." [Assessing the Threat from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP), Executive Report, July 2017]

wanderer_6• 4 years ago

Nothing about avoiding population centers? My reaction to nuclear attack would be to hightail it into the woods. Take some supplies, wait it out, and try not to be a burden to emergency services.

As for fallout and the like, I would just have to hope. Being far from potential targets and away from major jet streams (or whatever I'm not a meteorologist) would be my way to go.

tshaddox4• 4 years ago

How are you going to survive in the woods? In many places and times of year this would be very difficult for all but the most intensely prepared or experienced people. And is it even good advice?

lazide• 4 years ago

Also, fallout generally goes from what was bombed (cities) to what was nearby (forests and not cities).

wanderer_6• 4 years ago

I am rather experienced. Eagle scout, that sort of thing. Maybe I should have been more clear: That wasn't advice, just what I think I would do.

toast03• 4 years ago

If you want to live in the woods, fine, but you probably want to wait, inside (in a basement or building interior), for a few days so the shorter halflife stuff in the fallout can decay significantly. Plus you'll want to wait and see where everyone else is going, so you can avoid traffic.

creativeCak3• 4 years ago

I am genuinely asking; how worried should we be?

I'm really freaking out about this...

stevemk14ebr• 4 years ago

either way nothing you can do. So don't worry until there's something you can control

wanderer_6• 4 years ago

Not extremely. Helpful stuff to know, but there is, right now, no real reason for anyone to launch an attack of this scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

Clubber2• 4 years ago

Having been one who grew up during through the cold war in the 80s, it's just something you have to accept. I remember in 4th grade on the playground, the kids (me) were debating with the teacher whether it was better to stand outside and get nuked or go inside and live through the aftermath.

Having said that and having lived through all this before and nothing happened, I wouldn't worry too much. Also read Alas Babylon, it's pretty good and related.

On a side note, we could also get hit by an asteroid at any time with no notice, so there's always something to make you unease if you dwell on it.

hunterb123• 4 years ago

Depends who you ask. I'm not worried at all as it doesn't benefit either side.

We were much closer in the 80's, nuclear warfare won't break out over this.

MAD should actually help you sleep at night.

willismichael4• 4 years ago

My dad spent his career processing nuclear waste as chemical engineer. I called him over the weekend to ask about the prospects of surviving a nuclear strike. We had a good long chat about it, but the summary is that if you can avoid direct exposure to the initial gamma ray burst, and then avoid the fallout for at least a few hours (ideally longer if you can), you actually have a sizable chance of survival.

After that it's a matter of cooperating with the people around you for the basic needs. It would be pretty grim, but people could still rebuild civilization.

ncallaway5• 4 years ago

Have a battery powered portable radio! I’ve read that the amount of fallout that comes down (and thus the amount of time you’ll want to wait in shelter to avoid the initial fallout) can vary dramatically depending on yield, blast location, wind speed, etc.

A battery powered portable radio will let you access the information you need to know if you should be sheltering for 2 hours, 2 days, or a week.

Also, a battery powered emergency radio will be absolutely useful in a wide variety of other (probably much more likely) disaster scenarios.

javajosh2• 4 years ago

What did he have to say about decontaminating top soil?

ncallaway5• 4 years ago

I wouldn’t be too worried. The best things you can do to prepare are often the same kinds of other disaster prep you should do. Have a couple of weeks of water stored safely in your house. Have a small emergency supply of food. Have a well stocked first aid kit (watch for expirations). Have a battery powered portable radio.

Look at ready.gov for a checklist: https://www.ready.gov/kit

Such a kit will have the high value things you’ll need for a wide array of emergencies (hurricane, extended power outages, other natural disasters, etc).

toast03• 4 years ago

(Adding on) If doing stuff helps you with worrying, then assembling the emergency kit is a pretty good thing to do. Chances are, you won't need it for nuclear war, but having it will help you be prepared for other emergencies that are probably more likely, too.

JKCalhoun2• 4 years ago

Don't freak out. I am not at all worried, you should not be either.

We've lived under this threat for, what, 70 years now? You just have to learn to put it out of your mind. Day to day I worry more about someone crashing into my car when I am driving (a much more likely Bad Thing).

bobsmooth2• 4 years ago

Either we all die or we don't[1], either way there's nothing you can do. I'm sure there's things you can be worried about that you can actually affect.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs

ncallaway5• 4 years ago

That’s not quite true! If you live, a little prep will go a long way.

Have an emergency kit (see ready.gov for a good checklist). If you survive, such a kit will help significantly in the immediate aftermath.

It’s also a useful kit for a wide array of (more likely) natural disasters.

After you’ve put together your kit, then I agree. You’ve done your prep, nothing else you can control about it, so don’t stress too much about it.

rillazawayyy• 4 years ago

Not worried at all.

If a nuclear war happens, you probably won't know about it for very long. So why bother stressing?

This is like asking whether you should be worried about the fact that you will die someday. If you sweat that sort of thing, you'll never get anything done.

treespace8• 4 years ago

I read this from the BBC and it calmed me down a bit.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60559574

vlunkr• 4 years ago

I'm no military expert, but it seems like common sense to assume that if the Russian government gets a single nuke off the ground it will be the last thing they ever do.

timbit42• 4 years ago

True, but are you willing to bet Putin isn't that crazy?

lamontcg• 4 years ago

We have 70 years of precedent already.

When nuclear superpowers invade another country in a proxy war, the other superpower is allowed to send military aid without threat of nuclear retaliation.

If that wasn't the tacit agreement then WWIII would have already happened over Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan at least.

Honestly its a good thing we've got Biden in power since he's old and mellow and chill and won't be trying to act tough and make shit worse.

Sounds like it is about to get really horrible for the people in Kyiv and Kharkiv though.

whiddershins• 4 years ago

I saw these guidelines 6 months ago. Was living in an area that was at legit risk of a nuclear incident.

Saw all the Covid stuff and just started laughing. No sense of scale or proportion here.

daenz• 4 years ago

  1952 - "Duck and cover"
  2022 - "Mask and distance"

hedora3• 4 years ago

Duck and cover; still laughable after all these years:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqXu-5jw60

"Fallout" is far more useful than current covid information sites. It's sad how far the US gov't has fallen in 70 years:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GFmy55rPrT0

Remember: In case of nuclear blast, stick your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye!

kragen5• 4 years ago

What the fuck, this has to be a parody:

Be Safe AFTER

Immediately after you are inside shelter, if you may have been outside after the fallout arrived. ...

Engage virtually with your community through video and phone calls. Know that it’s normal to feel anxious or stressed. Take care of your body and talk to someone if you are feeling upset. Many people may already feel fear and anxiety about the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). The threat of a nuclear explosion can add additional stress. Follow CDC guidance for managing stress during a traumatic event and managing stress during COVID-19.

Last Updated: 02/25/2022

cbfrench• 4 years ago

I’m glad I can expect Zoom calls to remain a feature of the post-apocalypse landscape.

pbourke4• 4 years ago

Apparently we will have all of the downsides of Armageddon without the bliss of its few upsides.

I’ll make sure to update JIRA ahead of standup the afternoon of the apocalypse.

kingcharles• 4 years ago

This way you'll be able to watch the flesh slough from your neighbors bones in realtime.

geraldalewis2• 4 years ago

Being scared/stressed/panicked by a nuclear attack during a pandemic is reasonable. Trying to be conscious about taking care of your mental health during a traumatic event is hard to do, but it’s important. Some people need to be reminded of that. That’s fine.

kragen5• 4 years ago

Yeah, that part is fine.

geraldalewis2• 4 years ago

The comments here are silly.

You can absolutely prioritize your risks, which means you’re not precluded from taking sensible precautions if you’re able to. This isn’t rock/paper/scissors. If you’re far enough away from the point of impact and the winds are right, Covid might be more of a threat than a nuclear bomb.

If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off, and insist on open-mouth kissing strangers as they cough on you, that’s up to you. But also you can just throw on a mask and step a few feet back from folks and be a little safer.

Also, really bad scenarios can often stem from a couple of things going wrong all at once. So just be safe and use as much good judgment as the situation allows. And lean on easy, automatic, strategies to help you not compound issues.

throwawaylinux12• 4 years ago

No, what's silly is filling people's heads with rubbish about COVID in case of a nuclear disaster or other acute emergency.

Hand sanitizer is absolutely not the right thing to be concerned with. Masks perhaps, but not for COVID.

Storing clean water, minimizing your perishable food waste, securing your house/shelter and making makeshift repairs to damage, using a radio (e.g., from your car) to listen for information, etc., keeping a basic first aid kit around and understand basic wound management, are all far more important.

Social distancing because of covid comes in at around number 32,238 of things to worry about.

ihumanable3• 4 years ago

Remember kids, the best time to needlessly contract a disease is right after a nuclear blast has rendered any aid completely inaccessible.

Also considering that one of the parts that suggests hand sanitizer says the following

If you are able to, set aside items like soap, hand sanitizer that contains at least 60 percent alcohol, disinfecting wipes, and general household cleaning supplies that you can use to disinfect surfaces you touch regularly. *After a flood*, you may not have access to these supplies for days or even weeks. Keep in mind each person’s specific needs, including medication. Don’t forget the needs of pets. Obtain extra batteries and charging devices for phones and other critical equipment.

The "After a flood" part makes me think this is just general disaster preparedness and has nothing at all to do with COVID.

Edit: There was another part about hand sanitizer that was much more COVID-19 related that I missed the first time, my mistake. But the entire page looks like a copy-pasted frankenstein.

lvs2• 4 years ago

You do realize that this advice is supposed to apply for some time into the future, i.e. potentially during the next wave, right? Risk assessments are fluid and change with conditions. Covid precaution hostility is not rational.

mauvehaus3• 4 years ago

If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off...

Spoken like someone who isn't from Rhode Island.

spcebar• 4 years ago

The good news is, Providence _probably_ isn't on the top of anyone's to-bomb list, so a direct blast likely isn't going to be a concern.

"The principles of MAD have been narrowed for a post cold-war age. Now that Russia and the United States have decreased their nuclear arsenals, it's been decided mutually that only Providence and Shoyna are to be bombed."

anamax• 4 years ago

If you’re two states away from where a bomb goes off, and insist on open-mouth kissing strangers as they cough on you, that’s up to you.

Which states? Two states away can be <10 miles or it can be >500, even if we ignore Alaska and Hawaii.

As to "open-mouth kissing strangers" after a nuke, that's a rational way to build the social structures that you're going to need to survive. Stand back and be the creepy guy. That difference trumps whatever "little safer" you think that you're getting.

jtbayly• 4 years ago

No, the page is truly absurd. It mixes things up so much that you can't even tell why you're supposed to be doing something like wearing a mask. What kind? Gas mask? Cloth mask? Why?

The page is useless as is.

jillesvangurp3• 4 years ago

Wearing a mask also seems sensible to keep the radioactive fallout out of your lungs and thanks to Covid, most people have masks on their person most of the time right now. If you survive the initial blast, fallout is the thing that you need to be weary off and radioactive dust is just nasty. Your concern right after that should be staying safe, cleaning up, and minimizing the risk off radiation sickness, cancer, etc. The article does a good job of giving you some simple hints here of what might be helpful here. The covid thing is just ass coverage, I guess. It's the modern equivalent of making sure the deck chairs are properly arranged on the Titanic. It's not going to be a primary concern for anyone right after a nuclear attack.

colanderman2• 4 years ago

The sections mentioning COVID have been in place for over a year: http://web.archive.org/web/20210326031042/https://www.ready....

i.e., from a time when almost no-one was vaccinated, and the strains of COVID going around were much deadlier. It's absolutely reasonable for the guidelines of that time to try to prevent fallout shelters crammed with thousands of people from all coming down with COVID simultaneously -- and particularly trying to protect aid workers.

georgecmu• 4 years ago

Last Updated: 02/25/2022

Absolutely insane. And at the same time:

President Biden on Monday rejected concerns about the potential for nuclear war amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Asked if Americans should be worried about a nuclear war, Mr. Biden said: "No."

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-...

Trasmatta2• 4 years ago

Last Updated: 02/25/2022

I looked up the previous snapshot on Internet Archive, and I see no differences, except maybe some tiny formatting changes (which could also just be a result of how the Internet Archive is rendering it):

https://web.archive.org/web/20220206045759/https://www.ready...

nytesky• 4 years ago

Has this site been hacked as a psyops attack?? Usually ready.gov has cute infographics not photos

titzer• 4 years ago

If you're warned of an imminent nuclear attack, be sure to move towards the expected epicenter of the blast. You'll want to be vaporized rather than cooked alive or suffer fatal radiation sickness (over the period of days or weeks). You'll want to be spared the horror of watching others die and society quickly unravel. You'll want to avoid being a burden on the non-existent safety net that won't survive.

Watch "The Day After". It's probably the most realistic depiction of a post-apocalyptic situation to date. (It's not dramatic and cool, or cinematic--long, boring, and flat out horrifying.)

znkynz• 4 years ago

It it is absolutely not- sugar coated bullshit. You need to watch "Threads" - a British production from the 80s. Terrifying: https://archive.org/details/threads_201712

pbourke4• 4 years ago

Because I am apparently a masochist, I watched Threads for the first time in the week leading up the the war. It lives up to its billing.

Sosh1012• 4 years ago

I'm not sure advocating suicide is the best advice.

ihumanable3• 4 years ago

For a large area around a nuclear blast you'll be dead anyways. It's just choosing to minimize suffering on the way out.

phendrenad2• 4 years ago

The "Soviet surprise attack" model was always a joke. I can't believe people don't see that. If nukes are used in this war, almost certainly the first ones dropped will be warning shots, detonated underwater or in an uninhabited desert. Just to let the world know that you're serious. There would be plenty of time to try to get away from the major cities and military bases. Of course, those of us who aren't millionaires won't be able to get a plane ticket. But hey, that's capitalism.

jillesvangurp3• 4 years ago

I live about 1300km away from Kiev in Berlin. Any fallout cloud might head my way if the winds are from that direction. Putin is right now leveling cities with heavy artillery and massacring civilians at a scale not seen since WW II in Europe.

So, the chances are he'd actually use a small nuclear weapon to make the point that the Americans are not the only ones who get to level cities with nukes (Nagasaki, Hiroshima). The main point of those attacks was to bomb the Japanese into submission. It worked.

All of the obvious targets for a Russian nuclear attack are cities in the Ukraine. It doesn't have any deserts. It's not a NATO member and his issues are with the Ukrainians and getting the rest of the of the world off his back. Such an attack wouldn't trigger any immediate retaliation from any NATO country. A first strike on the US or NATO member on the other hand would be suicidal as it pretty much would guarantee at least a response in kind and probably more. However, taking out Kiev or a smaller city elsewhere in the Ukraine, would be a desperate move of course but he might get away with it and it would probably lead to capitulation by the Ukrainians.

If he goes there, most of Europe is going to be worrying about fallout. Chernobyl fallout is still a thing in some places. A full nuclear blast, even a small one, might produce a lot more of it. Scary thing that such a thing is even conceivable right now.

allturtles• 4 years ago

Where are you imagining that all the people in the cities would go, and how would they get there? You should look at what the partial evacuation of Houston from Hurricane Rita was like [0]. It took people over a day to get to Dallas. And that was just one city partially emptying, mostly going to other cities.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Rita#Mass_evacuation

jdlyga• 4 years ago

No shelters within 200 miles of me. I live next to New York City. Are we screwed?

Johnny5553• 4 years ago

I live next to New York City. Are we screwed

You're probably screwed unless you have an extensive shelter that you can stay in for days or weeks. I'd expect NYC to be high on the list of targets with multiple warheads.

Based on a simulator [1], An single 8 megaton airburst has a 28 mile radius of "extensive injuries/fatalities. With a dangerous fallout cloud hundreds of miles long (winds may blow it toward or away from you)

https://www.nuclearwarmap.com/

(their 1000 warhead large attack scenario predicts almost 200 million deaths across the USA)

javajosh2• 4 years ago

Serious question: should we all get tarps to cover up the ground around us before fallout comes? We could save significant topsoil this way.

jillesvangurp3• 4 years ago

If that makes you feel better; go for it.

iends• 4 years ago

I'm about 45 miles from a large US military base, is there a point in doing anything?

bombcar2• 4 years ago

Given that tweets move faster than earthquakes you should have adequate time to get a good viewpoint for the blast.

hedora3• 4 years ago

Probably. Unless they're missile silos that are housing nuclear weapons meant to be used as part of an automated nuclear response, US military bases are surprisingly low on the nuke priority list.

The eastern seaboard, communications hubs and centers of industry will go first.

It's easy to mop up the military bases once the command structure and supply lines have been annihilated (and defectors/equipment may come in handy post-war). If the aggressor survives the initial strike, they basically just needs to wait.

(That'd only happen if the mutually assured destruction mechanisms failed. They're set up to glassify the surface of the earth once the government collapses. Most military bases get melted during that wave, but then so does everything else.)

The craziest part is that the Russians actually built the doomsday machine from Dr Strangelove, and then kept its existence secret.

Game theoretically, that somehow made it a better deterrent, as sarcastically posited in the film.

At least they didn't do something really dumb, like set the launch codes to all zeros()

() yes, that was the actual launch code. They probably didn't sticky note it to the monitor though, at least at first.

colanderman2• 4 years ago

[2021], except for:

    $ diff -u 1.txt 2.txt
    --- 1.txt 2022-02-28 23:02:05.000000000 -0500
    +++ 2.txt 2022-02-28 23:02:41.000000000 -0500
    @@ -98,11 +98,10 @@
         Nuclear Explosion Information Sheet (PDF)
         Download the FEMA app
         Centers for Disease Control
    -    Health and Human Service
         Get inside, Stay inside, Stay Tuned Video (English)
         Get inside, Stay inside, Stay Tuned Video (Spanish)
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Coronavirus (Federal Government Response)
         Keeping Children Healthy During the COVID-19 Outbreak
     
    -Last Updated: 02/19/2021
    +Last Updated: 02/25/2022

1.txt: http://web.archive.org/web/20220206045759/https://www.ready....

2.txt: http://web.archive.org/web/20220226211632/https://www.ready....

Trasmatta2• 4 years ago

Yes, seems like just a related page was removed, and any page that referenced it was automatically updated. I think the "Updated rules" in the title of this post is unnecessary and probably causing needless concern for people. None of the content in the page seems to have changed in at least the past year.

Given that nothing has actually been updated in the rules, maybe a mod should update the title of this post?

jker• 4 years ago

“After a flood, you may not have access to these supplies for days or even weeks.”

Looks like part of this was copypasted, and no one bothered to proofread it.

mherdeg• 4 years ago

For the past few years I've held the view that choosing to live in a large metropolitan area (NYC, DC, SF, Boston) is basically choosing a fast, fairly low-pain death in the event of full-out nuclear war.

Did I get that wrong? Is a barrage of modern weapons actually survivable within city limits?!

phdelightful• 4 years ago

If we are envisioning a single “nuclear explosion” (not a large nuclear attack), then this advice is not as crazy as it might seem. Think terrorism, or accident. If you survive the initial event, and the rest of the country is immediately in a position to render aid, then your objective is just to stay healthy and safe for the 1-4 days it would take to start getting things sorted out. In that scenario, access to clean water, first aid, and not getting covid actually seem like reasonable things to worry about.

There’s not really any good advice in a MAD scenario. Only a tiny faction of people would be able to set out for the wilderness and survive. The vast majority will die of exposure of one kind or another regardless of how much prepping they do.

XorNot3• 4 years ago

Well, also the wilderness can't support a large foraging population for more then a couple weeks at most. Like, there are straight up too many people for wilderness survival to work at scale - North Korea is in widespread ecological collapse because its population has essentially stripped the wilderness bare trying to survive.

Sosh1012• 4 years ago

I notice that iodine tablets are not mentioned. I realise that iodine isotopes or iodine-like element isotopes are not the main concern after a nuclear weapon hit. But still, do they have no value?

samus• 4 years ago

After a flood, you may not have access to these supplies for days or even weeks.

It's a copypasta from similar guidelines for flooding events

throwawaygh• 4 years ago

These are guidelines for preparing for a nuclear explosion, which can happen in contexts other than all-out nuclear war.

Probably not helpful in WW3. Possibly helpful in a "Goldsboro, North Carolina, January 1961 but not lucky" type of situation.

TrispusAttucks• 4 years ago

Remember kids: In case of global thermonuclear war be sure to wash your hands, cover your face, and keep 6 feet of distance between you and the other survivors who just received lethal doses of radiation.

“A fire broke out backstage in a theatre. The clown came out to warn the public; they thought it was a joke and applauded. He repeated it; the acclaim was even greater. I think that's just how the world will come to an end: to general applause from wits who believe it's a joke.”

- Soren Kierkegaard, Either/Or, Part I (1843)

fr33d0m_• 4 years ago

Curious as to why there is no mention of having and taking Potassium Iodide?

"The FDA has approved two different forms of KI (potassium iodide), tablets and liquid, that people can take by mouth after a radiation emergency involving radioactive iodine." If there was a radiation emergency, people should take a drug that would help protect them from thyroid cancer.

beefman• 4 years ago

If it seems ridiculous to add COVID stuff here, consider that the nuclear stuff is equally ridiculous. No one wants to use nuclear weapons, and if they did it would be against military targets (mostly other nukes). If one did hit a populated area, the region between instantly dead and totally fine is narrow. Yet this page implies all readers are in that region, and the danger of fallout is highly exagerrated. Get to a shelter? What fration of a percent of the population can they accomodate? I just texted 43362 with my zip code (San Jose, CA) and got this reply: "We could not locate a SHELTER within 200 miles of [zip]." Even during the cold war hysteria of the early '80s, my town of 30,000 people had only one shelter: the bank.

The COVID-19 stuff is perfectly at home here.

professoretc• 4 years ago

I picked the worst time to build a deck over the fallout shelter in my backyard.

Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

Related Stories