Nuclear Shelter?

>>1081709
Trump won
WW3 has been averted, you dont need a fallout shelter

>>1081709
Since we all know you can't just bury a shipping container, how would you go about building a nuclear shelter

>>1081711
You start by grabbing your ankles...

>>1081714
The French National Approach?

www.alternatewars.com/WW3/WW3_Documents/Fortifications/TM-5-858-3.pdf

>>1081741
Thanks

>>1081710
Are you that dense? Trump won. That's the reason it's necessary. That fucking idiot will start WWIII.

>>1081766
>Trump
>the idiot
He's a sleazy businessman, but he ain't no idiot.

>>1081766
Compared to the cunt who wanted a no fly zone on Syria, when Syria themselves invited Russia?

You know fuck all of this election

>>1081802
Go back to >>/pol/ drumpfkins

>>1081808
Calling people names doesnt change reality. Hillary is firmly planted in the military industrial complex.

>>1081802
this was a legitimate worry, but on the other hand, expressing intent to abstain from supporting NATO allies might give Russia the power it needs to roll over parts of eastern Europe; it's easy to see how this could escalate into WWIII, while I think it's pretty clear that any conflict that came out of attempting to enforce a no-fly zone in Syria would be relatively small--more like America's support for Mujahideen than total war.
Because Clinton is firmly planted in the military industrial complex, we could have expected small wars from her, Libyas or Bosnias or Iraqs or Afghanistans.
The worry is that, by failing to maintain American global hegemony by means of these small wars, Trump will enable our most powerful enemies to become more powerful than ever, and thus pave the way for the big one--WWIII.

>>1081860
>NATO 'allies' that are former soviet states and don't pay to support nato, and Russia is pissed about it to begin with

The mistake was pushing to have them join nato in the first place. We can even draw the line at east germany. I'm not convinced Russia is such a bad place anymore after seeing what Europe is doing to itself.

>>1081867
That's all fine, but what we have to work with is what we've got; the worry isn't with Russian domination of Europe--it's with the global war that would precede it

you can talk about who deserves what and who isn't giving their fair share all you want, but the fact of the matter is that NATO allies we value will not stand idly by as Russia conquers their neighbors--at least not forever

File: tmp_25256-Screenshot_2016-11-10-10-12-461453260162.png (435KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1080x1920px

>>1081867
Ah, the ignorance of distance. Russia is neighbouring my country. Although the news coverage is biased (there was a war, got beaten but not invaded) I'm sure it's truthfully enough to convince me that a country that seems to be slipping back to totalitarism is not cool.

And here is another interesting fact about "democracy". The one that gets the most votes wins, right? But how is it happening again... The amerifat election system is convincing again.

>>1081867
>Russia isn't such a bad place
Litvinenko and Politkovskaya would like a word with you.
Oh wait.

>>1081885
When compared to the nineties? It is outright a nice place to live.

>>1081880
>The one that gets the most votes wins, right?

No. At least, not like you're thinking.

Waaaaay back in the day (as in, far back enough that slavery was still relevant), it was decided that it "wasn't fair" to the less-populated states that their opinions effectively counted less BECAUSE they were less-populated states. So, rather than simply going directly off the vote total itself, a vote is given for each area in which a candidate gets the majority.

That means, even if a candidate gets more votes overall, they can still lose if those votes come from heavily-populated areas, if enough of the more sparse areas vote for the opposition.

And that's exactly what happened; you'll note that's that the areas where Clinton won are all very population dense areas along the coasts.

>>1081963
Part of the electoral college was to protect the people from themselves. The founding fathers very much thought of themselves as fathers, dealing with children. Part of American history often glossed over.

>>1081880
It's a little more complicated than that, but either way, they are STILL counting, and he might just win that, too

And trust me, this election...
He basically broke all the rules, and expectations, so, looking to the future, when we discuss this election, consider it a VERY unique circumstance

>>1081709
The best nuclear shelter is not being in a target area. If you live right in the center of a targeted area then don't worry about a shelter, because unless you can build the equivalent of NORAD or bunker bros setup your dead anyway. Invest in alcohol and hookers instead.

But if you happen to live in that inconvenient area between certain death and innawoods you need to understand what a shelter is for. It is not a permanent residence, it is for a) protecting from the initial explosion and b) protecting you from the radioactive fallout long enough for it to decay to a level where you can safely leave the effected area.

Your main hazards during the initial explosion are overpressure, thermal and gamma radiation. An improvised shelter can be as little as a ditch with a car driven over it, something better would be a bunker made out of concrete blocks with rebar cement away from the house( the house would collapse on top of a basement bunker trapping you in there), no trees or anything combustible near the bunker either.

Avoid sharp corners as these are stress raisers that could induce failure. An igloo shape could work pretty well as the blastwave could just roll over the top of it. The structure needs to be able to withstand hundreds of psi of pressure.

Two entrances are essential in case one gets blocked by debris. The doors need to be as strong as the bunker, (Steel). I would avoid windows as these are weak points and would allow thermal radiation into the bunker.

Ventilation is essential but filtering is only recommended. Have a manual backup in case your pump breaks or runs out of power. Filtering is focused on particulate filtering to prevent fallout from entering the bunker.

You'll need to stay in the bunker long enough for the background radiation level to fall to a safe level. Radiation decays exponentially, so staying in there any longer than a couple of weeks would give little benefit.

>>1081709
Nuclear war survival skills by Cresson H. Kearny. Free download. And the designs were actually tested during an Nevada nuclear tests.

>>1081880
>And here is another interesting fact about "democracy". The one that gets the most votes wins, right? But how is it happening again...

I seem to have found your problem, you think we are a democracy. We really need to do a better job educating people on the difference between a democracy and a republic.

>>1082327
how long until it is safe to go out?

>>1082912
There is a design in nuclear war survival skills for an improvised radiation counter

>>1082899
The US is neither though. Its an oligarchy.

>>1083225
I haven't washed my body in weeks, my cock smells disgusting to the point that I almost gagged last time i gave myself head.

You are a piece of shit, as punishment i will track you down, put you on your knees, and make you suck my disgusting, smelly, stinky cock until you vomit, then i'll make you lick me clean and have you try again, over and over until i shoot smelly cum down your america hating throat.

>all satire ofc, k fbi?

>>1081808
How is unemployment treating you, CTR?

>>1082912
Two weeks if your a few miles away from. The blast radius

>>1083256
And when your out avoid kicking up dust and stepping in water

>>1081709
Are you asking how to build one? Sand bags filled with a borax rich sand mixture stacked in a dome shape with two offset doorways (so you cant see directly outside or in) would work well enough to survive nuclear fallout. If you are in close vicinity to the explosion you are pretty fucked no matter what, its one of the many good reasons not to live anywhere near large cities.

>>1083467
Forgot to mention, you will want to build this in your basement. Its probably not stong enough to be buried directly, and would likely get knocked over by the initial blast wave if you are close enough for radiation to be a problem.

>>1081766
Not likely. Putin likes him. Trump has no ideological reason to intevene in the middle east. He might piss off the chinks eventually but military retaliation isn't their style.

>>1081766
>That fucking idiot will start WWIII

Your ignorance of history and war dwarfs Trump's ignorance of history and war.

WORLD wars require, holy fuck, global participation. Trump doesn't want to nuke Russia or China, he wants to cut deals with them. Hence, no world war you ignorant mongoloid.

OTOH Hillary is pure NeoCon. Do your fucking homework and KYS if you have opinions not based on research.

>>1083530
Stock market for nuclear numbers is down as stock in salt mining companies rise