What would be the best country to be in during a hypothetical

Iceland is quite isolated and has a good standard of living. They don't represent a threat for other countries either.

>>72403775
Doesn't Iceland being in NATO make them a target, or are they so small and irrelevant no one would bother anyways?

Some irrelevant tiny island in the middle of the ocean would be the least likely to be targeted, at least. Something like Easter Island.

File: 72445-0-1451978586.jpg (719KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 1920x1080px

>>72403664
india would immediately take a chance to go war with pakistan or vice versa. my cunt would soil itself because mongrels uprise and try to establish a meme caliphate.

i'd say brunei would be safe, but it has strict sharia law.

northern parts of canada maybe?

if all else fails, there's always switzerland.

>>72403664

You'd be better asking this question on /k/.

But the answer depends. It depends on a lot.

Without specific details of a scenario you can't point to what is the "best" country. Cities, by and large will be left alone between nuclear nations as there's high priority targets such as nuclear weapon sites and command & control facilities. In addition to those that would fail to fire, destroyed and held in reserve.

However, yes in general, an irrelevant county will be very low on the target list.

>>72404588
With Switzerland, you're surrounded by countries which have nuclear weapons on their own, or are sharing NATO weapons. France, Germany, and Italy would all be targeted, and the border regions of Switzerland could be hit directly, and if not, you'd still have the radioactive winds blowing into the country.

Though if the nuclear winter meme is true, then you'd be fucked no matter where on Earth you are.

The safest place would be the International Space Station then. At least until you starve.

Argentina, Uruguay, or Chile. Nobody cares about them so they wouldn't be targeted. All the other developed countried would either be targets or are right next to targets.

>>72404947
>Though if the nuclear winter meme is true, then you'd be fucked no matter where on Earth you are.

You are right to be sceptical. It is based upon poor science.

>>72405023

You are assuming a lot. It depends. A nuclear war does not mean LOLSPAM end-of-the-world tier. Limited nuclear war is indeed possible between nations.

>>72404588
Northern Canada would be safe from nukes, but there is the possibility that it would come under Russian occupation or become a warzone between Russians and Americans fighting over resources. It's a pretty big region though, so if you are a survivalist type you could just lay low in the bush and be left alone.

>>72403664
If a nuclear war ever kicked off, India and Pakistan would wipe each other out.

South America would probably be safe, well aside from argentina. We would probably nuke them before we got crippled so they couldn't take advantage of the situation and invade the Falklands.