The Imminent Nuclear Catastrophe

Amidst the eternal forum isolation aloneness wining, there's also one eternal truth, the one of the finite nature of it all, - we're moving towards a nuclear catastrophe. So here go some genuine questions: how are you guys going to be preparing? What will you do in the next years, what can you focus on? Will you embrace it somehow towards a realization of your "hidden" alternative future and the embracing of the more subtle, hoped for tendencies and talents? Or do you plan on just blacking out of it? Does anyone carry out some legitimate physical unexpected post-conspiratorial preparations? Is there anything that can be done? Any neo-lainluddites escaping to the forests in hopes of a brighter future? Any Bradburists? Will you step in and do something or do you choose to watch the mascarade behind from out of the curtain, inevitably witnessing it all blow up to shreds and pieces, fall, and collapse on itself, while the whole world crumbles down? Let me know.

>imminent nuclear catastrophe what makes you say that nigger things to think about: >last time cities were nuked it was no big deal they repopulated pretty fast. >last nuclear test by a major nuclear power was decades ago. Many bombs have been sitting on shelves a very long time, subject to untested changes and refreshments, aging. probably most work ok. >russia recently demoed that IRBM looked pretty cool >wonder how everyone's ICBMs are doing >US had some recent minuteman embarrassments but also successes If we have a nuclear war, I wish I were somewhere a little further north, for I expect the view might be better there, though I expect further it will depend on the time of day, whether the weapons catch the sunlight. I think the aesthetics will make all the art directors of hollywood through the last 20 years kill themselves as they realize the deepness of their failure in depicting just how majestic this will look. If they don't then I hope they're all given high degree burns over their entire bodies. I will do what I can to advance the common cause of my family and my friends. I expect my house will survive but may need to eat my neighbors. They do not look too appetizing, but my grill is clean and ready.

>>86808 >what makes you say that nigger Not OP and I have to concur that a full scale nuclear exchange seems extremely unlikely for the simple fact that everyone involved knows they have absolutely everything to lose, and it's been a last resort of every nuclear power for the last sixty years. You're more likely to die from a lightning strike than a nuclear exchange. If it does happen it will likely be a freak accident from some drunk vatnik accidentally reporting a full scale yankee attack when his console malfunctions. Worry about dying of dehydration or exposure when soykaf hits the fan, not about Putin or Xi Jinpig deciding to play nuclear chicken with whatever senile old fuarrrk is in the white house this week.

The odds of this happening eventually are likely, as in probably at some point a relatively immature nation will decide to drop the nukes and get it back in return. The odds of it happening imminently id say are very very low. In order for this to be a sensible decision a nation has to value itself over life and everything. Even then it still has to not to a degree, as there is no advantage to actually winning the game of nuclear chicken (only playing it). Right now most nations with nukes are beholden to the dollar and liberal democracy not themselves. I want to hurt you, I impose a bunch of trade sanctions and tariffs on you, you threaten to nuke me if I dont stop, I laugh because you need my business and nuking me wont help. I start a proxy war at your borders, you threaten to nuke me, we already have radicalized some rebel group we arent the ones fighting uou and nuking us wont stop them and if you were to nuke us you would face certain destruction from all of us who agreed it was a no no. There isnt any problem you can solve with nuking someone in the current little playing field, and increasingly you cant even solve problems by pretending to. Countries like Russia and NK make vague threats not to sway officials but to rile people like you up and as a way to instill terror in the people in hopes of destabilizing things.

>>86810 >some relatively immature nation will decide to drop the nukes north korea has like fifty according to what I'm finding. South korea has more than that many cities over 100k persons. Probably most of their nukes will go into korea and Asiatic military installations by US Empire, to pave the path for invasion so they can win decisively before major US reenforcement. Even if they do it perfectly without missfires, duds, shootdowns or misses the total result will not be significant outside of a few small areas mostly in korea. Unless some socalled mature country decides to hop in the game and make it a general slugfest the probable result of that is just korean war round two and I think its an open question whether US would even nuke them. We didn't last time.

>>86813 I agree I didnt even mean in that sense when I said that. I meant like if 200 years from now some literal new immature nation is founded in some civil war or rebellion thats just totally on one and has access to its progenitor countries nukes.

>>86807 ohh POOP we are all gonna DIE. POOP.

It won't even require nuclear holocaust. Within a few hundred years or less there will be a collapse of civilization similar to the Bronze Age collapse. Most of the people on Earth will die in gruesome fashion: starvation, disease, violence. The survivors will be subject to roving gangs of warlords as happens in any anarchy. Maybe nukes will fly, too, who knows? Doesn't matter. This particular golden age that started with the Renaissance is just about over. I'm glad I'm old and won't see it. I feel sorry for kids today. Don't have kids.

>>86843 or a new species will emerge. Completly divergent from ethnics.

>>86843 prove it fillertextfillertextfillertext

>>86851 well, south africa is back to fire just like Rhodes*cough*zimbabwe

It's simple. I plan to learn practical skills and make friends with people around me who feel similarly about the future. Reduce your level of dependence on the formal economy in reasonable ways -- fulfill more needs using the informal economy. Keep doors and contacts open in case nobody can have a job anymore and you have to live with your parents, where their mortgage is payed off and there is space in the back for a chicken coop. Just Like Old Times when one roof would house three generations. No amount of civilian-operable gadgetry will save you from a war band of like, three guys. You need a team. Irrespective of your personal feelings about The Communism, Mao Zedong as a warfighter is objectively an excellent example of how to coordinate something like a civilization out of chaos and anarchy with almost no resources. He is studied as such in the American military academies.

>>86854 i feel the same.Although its hard to build a connection nowadays.

>>86854 >muh Mao Cunt couldn't even feed his population properly when he had access to a stable and functional economy, which he couldn't help put drive into the wall anyway.

>>86864 He clearly did eventually because he is responsible for china's immense population boom. In some post revolution or post apocalypse scenario there isn't going to be someone who takes the reigns and rebuilds and industrializes without making horrific fuarrrk ups most likely and if they do they are probably going to be seen as the next muhammed or jesus for thousands of years to come. It's far more likely that under someone other than mao that china today would still be poor, starving, or split up into 10 different chinas than it is likely someone better than mao for the job came along and perfectly executed industrializing a nation of that size.

As I understand it, China's economic boom came after they made the decision to allow a few aspects of limited capitalism. At the same time, the most economically powerful Western countries are the ones that operate with certain aspects of limited socialism. That seems to suggest that the best form of government is a hybrid of the two (socialism and capitalism) where neither is allowed to become too extreme.

it's already happening. mini nukes are already being used in Russia and in Palestine/Lebanon/Syria.

>>86873 >mini nukes are already being used in Russia and in Palestine/Lebanon/Syria. Please post evidence for this if you have any. It seems like something you just pulled out of your ass.

>how are you guys going to be preparing? hiding under a student desk and eating lead paint >What will you do in the next years, what can you focus on? hmm i think i'll melt the sixfold gold and form the holy unutterable word ARARITA, dissolving the 5 elements back into Mahapurush >Will you embrace it somehow towards a realization of your "hidden" alternative future and the embracing of the more subtle, hoped for tendencies and talents? Or do you plan on just blacking out of it? my shakti power's brahmastra go harder than some materialistic asura's nukes >Does anyone carry out some legitimate physical unexpected post-conspiratorial preparations? watch jane fonda aerobics, learn aikido, eat organic fruits >Is there anything that can be done? no, user >Any neo-lainluddites escaping to the forests in hopes of a brighter future? posada wuz rite

>>86852 SA is kept as a preserve to demonstrate the principals of Neocon foreign policy. Its survival is contingent on outside support and supply, just managed to keep it balanced between utter savagery and something able to pretend to be a real country. Remove the outside support and it would fall quickly out of its precarious middle position. Orania seems nice.

Recommend the 2024 book Nuclear War: A Scenario by Annie Jacobsen. Very well researched, based on interviews with top US nuclear weapons people. The fictional scenario is entertaining while based on facts, while having a US bias. State of nuclear warfare is fuarrrking insane, stranger than fiction. >"launch on warning" policy, on detecting a hostile launch the recommendation is full on retaliation, before any enemy nukes drop, decision window is only a few minutes >"mad king", an irrational leader has authority to go school shooter on all our asses >failed diplomatic relations can lead to serious misunderstandings, like when Russia launched an unannounced test nuke and didn't pick up the phone >there are no effective countermeasures against nukes >large scale nuclear war means not only radioactive fallout everywhere, but also a dark ice age which kills everything >we're moving towards a nuclear catastrophe Yeah. Chances of a launch aren't high at any one point, but the weapons are hot and sitting in silos and on subs, one depressed dictator or technical mistake and it's all over. Wars where we kill our neighbors by the thousand are bad enough, having nukes around is madness. "Why didn't you listen."

Nuclear armageddon has been an 'imminent' threat since my grandparents were my age. I just don't buy it. I think it's a meme. Not saying it's an impossibility, but I don't believe the formal processes, and series of decisions, required for such an event, have a high probability. The r-tardation of most people notwithstanding; as long as there's enough intelligence, or at least competency and profit motive, to keep 'the machines going' as it were, I'd like to believe that same minimum of rationale would still translate over. Or at the very least, it would still be considered contentious enough that it would be hard fought for, and wouldn't happen via a smooth, individual executive decision. However what I do believe is much more likely, and imminent, is the threat of vulnerable systems in an increasingly interconnected '4th Industrial Revolution'/4+ Gen Warfare world. Whether that be 'hackers' (read: government agents, or the developers who backdoored the tech in the first place) messing with individual systems, or if it's entire sections of a country's infrastructure - all, essentially, using the same tech - being shut down by the company themselves. Especially when virtually ALL the tech is R&D'd, if not directly owned, by one country. Especially when that one country is one that can say 'jump' to the US, and the - ostensible - 'world superpower' replies 'how high'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaFPQJBWTC0

>>86878 >one depressed dictator or technical mistake and its all over you say that but the better part of a century after their advent and it still hasn't happened. USSR collapsed and it didn't happen. South Africa collapsed and it didn't happen. India got them and it hasn't happened. North Korea has them and it hasn't happened. And these minor countries even if it did happen, just don't have the firepower. People blow nukes up to be some kind of doomsday weapon. They're big, sure. People survived in Hiroshima surprisingly close to the blast. Its a meme but what the US did to detroit was far worse than the bombs in japan in terms of lasting devastation. And don't forget that when the technical glitches happen, or even perhaps when real attacks happen, you'll likely have guys like stanislaw petrov in the works and who knows what they will do.

>>86808 The oil peak is in two or three decades. After that, we will have a bronze age kind of collapse. And I don't see the nukes staying where they are. The only alternative is fusion reactors, and we won't have them in 30 years. >>86810 That used to be the case but the incompetents election-winners decided to not lift the sanctions made after the invasion of Crimea. After the other invasion, the only possibility for sanctions was to create a rift in the global economy. Now, we effectively have two world powers with two different economies, just like in the cold wars. We only have China connected to the two blocks. And they aren't neutral and make an economical war against us. Cold war is back on the menu boys. Ho, and India/Pakistan/China. Possibly Iran "soon". This is going to end well. >>86813 Seoul is 20% of SK and their fertility is 0,68. They don't even need atomic bombs. They compensate by a massive Chinese immigration which mean in 30 years they will win the referendum to become a Chinese province. >>86844 If Elon buy Boston dynamic perhaps.

Uploading yourself into Singularity with friends might be the only asnwer

>>86898 >peak oil, bronze age collapse I think you're trying to come up with a path that gives you the cool disaster you want to see rather than making any reasonable conjectures. Even if you have peak oil followed by major collapse like this, the requirements to make massive nuclear war happen are not guaranteed. Could wind up with very slow collapse and when/if things ever come to a head the nukes won't work and there won't be the infrastructure to use them at any rate. Not saying that will happen just that even supposing your first two dubious assertions are correct the third need not follow.

Its not going to happen, this hell will end before we see nukes

Imo nuclear war within the next 5-10 years is if not inevitable then highly likely, since the world is moving from a unipolar world order to a multipolar one, and the United States is willing to go to war against nuclear armed superpowers to try to prevent this. Adding to this, most people in the west seem to have lost the fear of nuclear war, thus diminishing nuclear deterrence. >how are you guys going to be preparing? I'm not preparing, as it is estimated that 99-100% of the population of my country will starve to death in the first two years of nuclear winter. So I will die as well, as will my friends and family. >Is there anything that can be done? If you're really motivated to survive a nuclear war (I don't see how one could be), and if you live somewhere that probably won't be hit by nuclear strikes, then the best thing to do is to start prepping by saving around 2 years worth of canned food for yourself and anyone that you might want to save. I read that the Swedish government is preparing 500 000 graves in the case of war, and that the Danish prime minister stocked up on three days worth of food. Which is funny, since we're gonna need a lot more graves and a lot more food.

It doesn’t make sense for the ruling class to diminish their serfs, especially well conditioned ones that we currently have. Sure, there are some in the ruling castes that perceive a world filled with less people as more romantic, but this kind of world ultimately diminishes their power and profits. Who will do all the jobs and build soykaf for them? Labor is so cheap right now, there is zero reason to diminish the herd, or at least it wouldn’t be a rational decision. I see the possibility of population decrease once robots will replace most of the wagies, but it isn’t ready yet.

>>86873 That was not a nuke just so you know, the fireball was likely from a ammunition/weapon storage that was blown up.