Nuclear survival map

File: US wind map.jpg (48KB, 620x387px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 620x387px

>>33641964
A map of the wind patterns to help you stay ahead of the radiation clouds

File: nuke-targets-48.jpg (1018KB, 2560x1620px) Image search: [Google]

1018KB, 2560x1620px

>>33641964

>>33641969
Is this current? I can tell you for sure that the southeast wind patterns aren't correct.

>>33641964
I can't wait until I start stumbling across dead retards on hiking trips. I may get some decent gear and a gun out of it.

>>33641964
My plan is to sit in my home and hope the warhead comes through my roof.

>>33641964
>This might become relevant soon
This map has not been relevant in 25 years.

>>33641969
You need current winds aloft.

https://earth.nullschool.net/
Use this and select between 700 and 500 mb.

>>33642089
Correction.
700 and 500 Pascals

File: a699ce4b45e8ed7ebd7da5c741b497c8.jpg (1MB, 1684x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1684x2560px

>>33642089
>>33642094
So you've taken up the cowl again?
If so, welcome back friend.

>>33642109
No. Just periodically. When there is a lot of this stuff in the news, misinformation can cause misconceptions.

>>33642089
Long time no see
What us your take on the current NK situation?

>>33642115
We appreciate someone with a level head and experience in the field getting involved in these threads, cheers.

>>33642117
Tense and dangerous. Chances for miscalculation and mirroring are high. Inexperienced administration.

No threat to the US even in the worst case scenario except for the political and economic effects, if the worst possible scenario comes to fruition.

Bottom line. Everything will be ok, but the chances that it won't are higher than normal.

Opp, what is your take on this article?
Irresponsible misinformation or gross oversimplification?

https://pastebin.com/RvRysh9p

>>33641964
>How do you plan on surviving?
Waiting for sweet release here. We go Nuclear it's not going to be worth it.

>>33642162
The errors in Slade's article are not major, and while I feel he presents some of his opinions as facts, overall it is accurate, even if I disagree with many of his opinions.

>>33642183
I suppose inherent bias seeps into quite a few articles no matter how objective you try to remain.
What are the opinions you disagree on?

>>33642207
>What are the opinions you disagree on?
Mainly post attack environment.

> inherent bias
Yes. I try to differentiate between what my opinion is and what the general consensus is, but I know what my bias is and I try to correct for it.

>>33641964
> Implying you WANT to survive a nuclear exchange

>>33641964
shit map, desu.

>>33642237
Curious, has your line of work made you more or less comfortable when it comes to these sorts of incidents?

>>33641964
Lol I'm fucked. If anyone wants to venture into my irradiated hellhole, you can have as many guns as you can carry.

>>33642237
has THAAD in South Korea essentially contained China's nuclear deterrent?

do you think China be motivated to remov Lil' Kim in order to get THAAD sent back?

If the U.S. strikes a Nork testing facility, will they warn the Chinese the way they warned the Ruskies in Syria?

Can China realistically do anything militarily to thwart any U.S. strike against Kim's nuclear or missile forces?

do you think they will retaliate or might they allow the U.S. to do what the U.S. does as long as they can affect/control post strike Best Korea?

>>33642094
Hectopascals

>>33642316
Gigganiggas

>>33642265
I am less likely to panic. My experience has taught me that (contrary to popular opinion) most national leaders want to avoid war. As one becomes more and more likely, they work harder and harder to stop it.
The problem is that by the time you realize the path you are on, it may be too late to stop it.

It is my opinion that large peer on peer wars of the future will be wars brought about though error or miscalculation, rather than wars of choice like we have seen recently. Even in Korea, neither side wants war (probably). The real danger is that one side will interpret the signals of the other as a prelude to a strike, and decide to strike first.
Or one side my feel that the other has maneuvered them into a corner and they have no choice but to strike.

If for example, you are the DPRK. All you have seen from the US for the past 30 years is a willingness to kill people they don't like. So you are afraid that they will come after you sooner or later. You hear them say that they don't want to invade you, but you do not trust them.

So you think that if you have a nuclear weapon, the US will never invade you. And you can also leverage your program into accomplishing diplomatic goals that you otherwise can not. For example, you can secure humanitarian assistance from the West despite them wanting to kill you (from your perspective).

But once you tested your first nuclear weapon, the US just got more confrontational. Surely they know that you don't intend to use it? they must not believe you have the capability. So you keep testing. Missiles and bombs.

But now, the US has launched missiles into Syria supposedly because they used chemical weapons. Never mind that they have used them 63 times since 2012 (allegedly). Maybe you should remind them that you are not defenseless.


CONT.

>>33642358
Now the US is led by someone willing to do what the previous leaders were unwilling to do. Does that also apply to you? And now you read in their press that the US has diverted a carrier group and soldiers to your shores.

Whats more, just last night some (idiot masquerading as a) reporter comes out and says that the US will preemptively strike you if they see a need to. This is exactly what you have been afraid of. A few hours after that report, someone from their defense ministry comes out and says that the previous report was an error. Likely story.

It seems that they are ready for a strike.

Is the best defense truly a good offense...?


None of this should be taken as justification for the DPRK's actions, but simply to illustrate how wars can start from miscalculations and poor intelligence.

>>33642306
>has THAAD in South Korea essentially contained China's nuclear deterrent?
No. THAAD is no threat to Chinese deterrent.
Its real capability is the tracking capability of its radar which the Chinese fear (probably correctly) that it can be used to enhance the interception chances of GBI.

>do you think China be motivated to remov Lil' Kim in order to get THAAD sent back?
No.

>If the U.S. strikes a Nork testing facility, will they warn the Chinese the way they warned the Ruskies in Syria?
Probably not. There should be no Chinese personnel there. If there are then there is something very amiss.


>Can China realistically do anything militarily to thwart any U.S. strike against Kim's nuclear or missile forces?
Yes, if they are motivated to do so.

>do you think they will retaliate or might they allow the U.S. to do what the U.S. does as long as they can affect/control post strike Best Korea?
I do not think the Chinese will retaliate militarily.
I do think the Chinese are trying to talk the US out of acting (if the US has decided to, which is not a foregone conclusion).

>>33642358
>though error or miscalculation

If i recall correctly wasn't it something very much like this that nearly caused Yeltsin to launch ICBMs? Or am I imagining that?

>>33642419
There are plenty of examples.

>>33642422
That has my more frightened than anything to be honest.
Nuclear weapons not deployed out of malice but from simple human mistakes or equipment failure.

>>33642361
Thanks Opp, good to see you still come around once in a while

>>33642430
>Nuclear weapons not deployed out of malice but from simple human mistakes or equipment failure.

Yes. The conjecture over the nuclear chain of command is an example.
An insane president that calls STRATCOM to nuke Canada would not be listened to. The military only has to obey lawful orders from a competent authority.

However, a President in the midst of a crisis, who makes bad decisions because of the stress of the crisis would be issuing lawful orders, and those orders would have to be obeyed even if everyone around the President is telling him it is a mistake.

>>33642437
I rarely trip, but i'm here a few times a week.

>>33641964
Doesn't fucking matter for me, I've got Dover AFB in my backyard. I'm fucked about 40 ways from Sunday looking at the surrounding area.

>>33642361
I have thought for some time that Saddam Hussein was a rational actor who was constrained by the reality of being a strongman in Asia. He therefore needed to act like he was maintaining an arsenal of WMD, even going to the extent of messing with international inspectors, in order to keep his subjects fearful and under control. Unfortunately for him, the act worked well enough that Bush the Second decided to invade.

Saddam couldn't very easily throw open the doors for Hans Blix and show that his WMD program was obsolete and almost entirely nonexistent by that point, because that would cause him to lose control of his country.

>>33642395
>if the US has decided to, which is not a foregone conclusion.
What is the likelihood that something similar to the concept I just laid out might be occurring in Korea?

>>33642458
>I have thought for some time that Saddam Hussein was a rational actor
Almost all world leaders are.

>who was constrained by the reality of being a strongman in Asia. He therefore needed to act like he was maintaining an arsenal of WMD, even going to the extent of messing with international inspectors, in order to keep his subjects fearful and under control. Unfortunately for him, the act worked well enough that Bush the Second decided to invade.
This is, in my opinion, exactly correct. He did not anticipate that all the false intelligence we was pumping out would suddenly turn into exactly what the US wanted to hear. It drowned out intelligence that suggested he was not as far along as he was implying.
By the time he was begging inspectors to come in and look at everything to see, war was inevitable.

>What is the likelihood that something similar to the concept I just laid out might be occurring in Korea?
Unlikely. They have clearly demonstrated the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons. They are trying to develop missile delivery systems.
If anything, the intelligence estimates were too conservative. Two years ago I would have sworn that they were pursuing simple nuclear devices. Turns out that they are going right to boosted fission from the start.

>>33642395
>No. THAAD is no threat to Chinese deterrent.
??? aren't mid course ICBM's exactly the thing THAAD is supposed to kill?

wouldn't putting THAAD closer to the launch sites of those ICBM's make it more effective?

couldn't you double the chances of a kill by having one THAAD installation near the launch point and one near the target?

Or is the lack of a threat to China's nuke forces because the forces aren't trusted with assembled missiles anyway?

what am I missing here?

>>33642491
>Turns out that they are going right to boosted fission from the start.
absolute madmen.

but Lil' Kim certainly can't back down now, because weakness is how dictators wake up with their balls in their mouth and their willing replacement standing over them.

how does he de-escalate while not losing his empire of dirt?

>>33642527
Simple, he de-escalates internationally then sends his spin doctors on his PR team into over drive on what to feed that masses.

While everyone else on the Earth hears how Kim back down, everyone in NK will hear of how Kim called the bluff heroically and everyone else backed down at the might of NK!

>>33642548
it's his generals he had to worry about. how many of them are *true believers*? how many of his relatives would be willing to cooperate with the generals in order to restore Best Korea's honor?

>>33642497
>mid course ICBM's exactly the thing THAAD is supposed to kill?
No. Its terminal defense.

>wouldn't putting THAAD closer to the launch sites of those ICBM's make it more effective?
No because it lacks the performance to catch the outbound ICBM.

>couldn't you double the chances of a kill by having one THAAD installation near the launch point and one near the target?
No, because the THAAD missile lacks the performance to hit the ICBM.

>what am I missing here?
You are misunderstanding the capabilities of THAAD.

>>33642527
>but Lil' Kim certainly can't back down now, because weakness is how dictators wake up with their balls in their mouth and their willing replacement standing over them.
Yes. This is a problem for him.

>how does he de-escalate while not losing his empire of dirt?
First the US needs to know and understand if Kim feels backed into a corner.
Then that need to provide an out for him.
Deterrence only works as long as there is an alternative choice that is judged to be more attractive than war. If Kim feels that his only choices are to attempt a show of force or to be disposed by his government.


>>33642548
It is the leadership he is worried about. If they perceive he is weak, they might try to remove him.
They may look at it as a chance to finally be free of this ruling family and his tyranny and strike while the iron is hot.
If you move quickly enough, you might even get help from the American carriers and Marines in the region.

>>33642599
>You are misunderstanding the capabilities of THAAD.
I see. so it isn't fast enough to catch the outbound ICBM or the bus mid flight. makes sense, then, that China is mostly concerned with the Very Powerful RADAR then.

>>33642422
Don't we still have the two-man rule for offensive nuclear release?

>>33641964
>tfw I live in Olympia WA
I either hope I become vaporized in the initial blast, or live long enough to die of either incompetence or radiation poisoning.

>>33643753
It would appear that the Defense Secretary is not as pivotal to the process as once believed.

>>33643759
Downtown Houston, TX. I get a free Viking burial. Two major strategic targets visible from my window: HCEAC and AT&T Long Lines building.

>>33643776
Well, so much for that. Although the younguns in the command centers might not turn the keys, a la WarGames.

>>33642361
If history teaches us anything, it's that people In power desperately try and cling to that power. It would be in Kim's best interest to not start a war with the planet's most powerful military. The bad thing about their sabre rattling is they'll keep trying to one-up their last publicity stunt, and at some point they'll go too far. Someday they will. But it won't be in the foreseeable future.

>>33643854
I hope so.

>>33643812
Doesn't matter. E-4 can launch the missiles without them.

>>33643854
>It would be in Kim's best interest to not start a war with the planet's most powerful military.
Of course.
All he wants is to show enough force that the US backs off and gives him strength.
What happens if that show of force is above the level of tolerance for the US?
What happens if the US' show of force is interpreted as the opening moves for a regime change operation by the DPRK?

>>33643870
So do I

>>33643891
'strength' = 'space'


>>33643854
>But it won't be in the foreseeable future.
You can not tell how either side is reacting in a crisis. You can only hope that your signals are being interpreted correctly.
So it could be this evening or it could never happen, but it is incorrect to rule it out for 'the foreseeable future.'

>>33643891
If the US decided to pre-emptive strike the norks, how upset would China be?
Surely they must be tired of the dramatic authoritarian theatrics best Korea keeps spitting out.
I doubt they'll repeat the last Korean war, but I understand major American military action right in their own backyard would rightly upset them in some way.

>>33643919
>If the US decided to pre-emptive strike the norks, how upset would China be?
Very

>Surely they must be tired of the dramatic authoritarian theatrics best Korea keeps spitting out.
Of Course.

>I doubt they'll repeat the last Korean war, but I understand major American military action right in their own backyard would rightly upset them in some way.
Sure.


What does any of that have to do with miscalculations leading to an armed conflict with the DPRK?

>>33641964

As soon as we go to Defcon 2

I load as much gear, food, and fuel as I can into my 1992 Ford Explorer, and hoist my dirtbike up onto the roof.

I leave the vicinity of Phoenix, Arizona and head towards the four corners region until I start questioning my ability to locate fuel. I hide my vehicle as well as I can, and take any gear I can't carry on the motorcycle and hide it in a few nearby locations as effectively as possible.

I take a single rifle, a single handgun, and as much food and ammo as I can on my motorcycle and disappear into the borderlands. I tune into radio frequencies on my chinkshit radio daily to listen for updates on the developing situation. I charge it with a solar kit I keep in my pack.

If shit goes South, who knows. Take it one day at a time. If it simmers down, I collect as much of my shit as possible and head home.

>>33644011
>As soon as we go to Defcon 2
You won't know when we go to DEFCON 2.

>>33644011
If shit goes south then you might want to move more north into Colorado. There's game here in the four corners, but not much.

>>33643930
In the Event NK seems too capable and too serious.

>>33644065
>north into Colorado.
Why are you trying to get that man killed?

What's nukable in Kentucky? Is the map just assuming that every natl guard HQ gets hit?

>>33644065

I'm very familiar with the area. I've spent a lot of time in Southern Colorado, Western New Mexico, and all of Arizona but the NW-most part. Haven't tooled around in Utah much, but I'm in the middle of getting my XR650L kitted out to do some more exploring here soon so I might head that way.

>>33644147
The map is garbage.

>nuking Craig, Co

I'm ok with this

>>33644147
Ft. Campbell, Ft. Knox for starters, you'll notice every major military installation is targeted, as well as all major cities with a concentration of bases or a large military presence.

>>33644407
see >>33644288

Has anyone found a modern/updated version of the OP image?
We don't need January 2017's still -classified version, but something from the last 5 years would be nice

File: img1.png (2MB, 1991x1260px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1991x1260px

>>33644809
This is likely targets in a first strike scenario.
Note the word 'likely'.
Some of these targets will not be hit. Some not marked will be hit.
Additionally, this is not even the most likely scenario, just the most destructive, at least on a short term basis. There are a few oversights on the map. McDill should be a target. Some of the Sacramento area targets are no longer in use.
Others are targets that just missed the cut and a strong argument could be made that they should be included. Fairchild AFB falls into this category.

Producing a general 'target map' is next to impossible. You can say what is a possible target, or a likely target, and those might be two different things. For example. You local national guard armory is a possible target. But it is not a likely one.

The FEMA regional headquarters in Denton TX is a likely target, but its possible that it will escape attack for any number of reasons.


The general rule is that in a first strike, likely targets are nuclear weapons or the facilities that allow nuclear weapons to be commanded.

>>33644477
Oh, forgive me, I defer to your "Expertise"

Clown

>>33642491
Do you still have your email, Oppen?

>>33645868
First time in an Oppen thread? He might be back later to explain how stupid you are.

File: 14330100_1851679298409893_2886368318962695950_n.jpg (36KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 960x540px

>>33641964
>What do you pack?
I have at least one weeks of purified water, about 6 months of food, and 8,000 rounds of ammo. Along with first aid and general amenities like soap and lighters.
>Which direction do you drive?
North west from central Maryland (I might be fucked off the bat) to North western Maryland.
>What weapons do you bring?
All of them. SCAR 16s, Mossberg 930, my nugget, 10/22, Glock 19, Walther PPKC, Galesi Model 9, and my kukhri and cold-steel Ti-Lite. As well as my axe and my granddads boy scout hatchet.
>How do you plan on surviving?
Take the back roads that lead in the direction TO Baltimore, which will be empty. I'll get to my friend's house in rural farmland on the edge of a mid size city with no niggers, crime, or militarized police force.
Then we find something we can produce in order to sustain ourselves in a barebones market economy.
>You've gotta stay away from population centers
Correct.
>And you'll have to be very careful who you trust
Four others are planning on meeting at my friend's house and pulling our resources and labor. We've been friends for nearly 8 years.

>>33646253
"Yawns"

>>33645868
>Oh, forgive me, I defer to your "Expertise"
Probably for the best.

>>33645936
Yes.

>>33646922
Time for a nap?

>>33641964
Since this seems to be the nuclear thread now I'll ask here.

What is the British/French nuclear strategy in case shit goes down between the US and Russia/China?

What would a nuclear exchange between Russia and China look like?

>>33644986
How fucked would America's food supply be after a strike like this?

>>33647334
>What is the British/French nuclear strategy in case shit goes down between the US and Russia/China?
British would follow their role in the OPLAN. French would probably sit it out.

>What would a nuclear exchange between Russia and China look like?
Depends on how fires first, but Russia has a huge advantage.


>How fucked would America's food supply be after a strike like this?
A lot depends on when the strike happen.
If its in the fall, it wouldn't have that much effect as the fallout could be removed from the crop during processing, or the crop can be stored until the fallout decays to a safe level.

In the spring or summer you might lose a significant portion of it, depending on the exact fallout pattern.

File: 241tDnJ.jpg (80KB, 960x876px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 960x876px

>>33641964
I embrace a painless instantaneous death.

>>33648154
>he doesn't want to roam the Wasteland going on post-apocalyptic adventures
What a faggot

Oppen, how likely do you think we'll see a conflict in Korea in the coming days? Would North Korea use nuclear weapons? Chemical weapons? Would they go conventional?

Would the US use nuclear weapons in Korea against a conventional attack from the North?

>>33648963
>Oppen, how likely do you think we'll see a conflict in Korea in the coming days?
0.00000001%

>Would North Korea use nuclear weapons? Chemical weapons? Would they go conventional?
Maybe, Maybe, yes.

>Would the US use nuclear weapons in Korea against a conventional attack from the North?
No.

>>33641964
Non Amerifat here, why would so many nukes be concentrated to hit near Cheyenne, Helena and Bismark? Lots of military bases?

>>33649073
Peacekeeper missile silos.

>>33649114
Neat. Thanks for the info friend.

>>33649129
Sorry, Miniuteman III missles, the Peacekeeper got retired.

File: literally where.jpg (796KB, 2557x917px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 2557x917px

>>33641964

is that map even to be fucking trusted?

>>33649200
No.

A person I know claims that Russia wants to nuke the silos in the north of the US to "take out our food production." is there ant true for that.

>>33649453
No.

>>33649200
No.

>Live in Minnesota
>MFW Twin Cities gets five in both scenarios. Two too many.
>St. Cloud gets one in both scenarios for no fucking intelligent reason while Bismarck ND gets none.
>Duluth gets one, ok, makes sense.
>Black dot north of St. Cloud fucking WHY
>Black dot in the middle of reservation territory WHY?

>>33644986
I am really surprised every state capitol or major population center isn't a guaranteed hit

>>33649542
Dont have enough warheads for that.

>>33649073
We have massive ICBM complexes in those regions, positioned such that no more than one silo can be taken out by any one nuclear device. This makes any preemptive strike extremely expensive, since each individual silo would have to be targeted by multiple warheads to guarantee a kill.

>>33644986
I'm not very knowledgeable on this, but with your and OP's map, what are they bombing to hell and back in ND, MT, and WY/CO?

>>33649736
ICBM silos.

>>33649736
NORAD and nukes. Duh.

File: silo.png (2MB, 1195x977px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1195x977px

>>33649773
Mainly nukes.


>>33649736
These.

>>33649532
>live in Minneapolis
>literally within sight of Minneapolis International Airport and the Air Force base

Well, lads, at least the easy MCAD pussy was nice.

>>33649790
This wasn't even worth lookin at.

>>33644986
Not bad, anon. They used to include major population centers, but a military-only target map would look a lot like this.

>>33649736

NT /MT/WY contain the majority of operational US ICBM wings. CO contains NORAD, everything else contain either major military bases or command/control complexes of some kind (DC gets melted for obvious reasons)

File: silo russian.png (2MB, 1744x972px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1744x972px

>>33649819
Here is a Russian one.

What did you expect it to look like?

>>33649837

The guy who made that is not an Anon. He is a tripfag who knows a great deal about nuclear weapons.
Thats why its "not bad".

>>33649837
>They used to include major population centers,
They don;t because they don't have the warhead numbers they used to.

>but a military-only
Counterforce is the word you are looking for.

>>33642454
I know that feel, spitting distance from Bragg here.

>>33649837
I didn't know NORAD was there, I never thought about it and assumed it was in DC. The only thing I knew of over there was the atomic radio tower, and I didn't think that would've been a strategic target.

>>33649914
NORAD is at Peterson AFB in Colorado and CFB North Bay.

>>33649864

I didn't realize it came from one of the people with trip's. Anyway, If you took some of the 1960s/70s era target maps I've seen, took the civilian targets out, and extrapolated it for base closings / etc, you end up with something very similar. Hence still, hearty thumbs up.

>>33649877

Speaking of counterforce, any idea if the recently upgraded patriots can do terminal ABM intercept? That might actually change up that chart a little bit.

>>33649948
And Canada withdrew from its Underground Complex, moving everything aboveground to "keep things cheap and easy".
>We're just now paying to maintain an empty bunker

>>33642134
Why don't you suck his dick while your at it?

>>33650109
Sorry your uneducated and uninformed opinions aren't taken seriously, anon

>>33650050
>target maps I've seen
On the internet. Wow.

>>33650050
>Speaking of counterforce, any idea if the recently upgraded patriots can do terminal ABM intercept?
No.
>That might actually change up that chart a little bit.
Probably not.

>>33650117
>the joke
>???
>your head

>>33644011
find an old mineshaft and load gear in it.

>>33644147
near kingsport. its the usas RDX plant.

>>33642086


seriously man I don't want to live to see what happens after the first bombs go off

>>33650228
(The joke) (things that were funny)

It's hard to make Venn diagrams with just text, but the point is you're a homo

>>33650087
To be honest it's more important to be secret than protected. Nukes are powerful and accurate nowadays that the bunker won't save you. Shit, command could be operating from a Walmart parking lot as long as the Soviets don't know which one it is.

>>33644986
ATL
seatac
lax
JAX
any major ports.

major population centers. major tunnels the mississippi river crossings

nellis, Bragg, and Mcdill are going to get fired upon. as well as the hoover dam, and shitloads of nevada.

>>33650264
They dont have enough nukes for that.

1800 warheads.

400 silos, 2-3 warheads per silo.
Airforce bases, 2-3 warheads per base.
Naval bases, 3-4 warheads per.
Command and control targets, 2-3 warheads per.

And you still havent taken into account reserves.

So the Russians do not have enough warheads to waste on pointless things that you listed when their are more important targets to hit.

any reason that they would nuke canada?

>>33650314
To hit early warning systems and NORAD.

>>33650304
im not saying all of that, but the bases are a priority

bragg and mcdill especially

>>33650331
If you bothered to read the post, you would see that McDill is mentioned.

There is no reason to hit any of the other targets you mentioned at all. They do not have niclear weapons and they are not part of nuclear command amd control.

>>33650346
Bragg is a major base, home of the 82nd, telcom hub, and airfield.

>>33650409
No role in nuclear command and control.

>>33650417
biggest base in the world my dude. 82nd and the teams, and the psyops schools are there. and pope air field.

>>33650445
None of those are nuclear weapons or nuclear command and control.
Wasting a Nuclear weapon on Bragg reduces the effect of the strike.

None of the assets there will play such a significant role in the post attack envrionment to justify hitting it.


My dude.

>>33650250
There's nothing secret about its location. It's literally on the same tiny base as the Underground Complex.

>>33650569
At the risk of stacking self (you)s, I see your point, though.

>All the nukes on San Antonio TX
Why tho

>>33650232
Kingsport is in TN, and it's Holston Army Ammunition Plant.

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

>>33641964
I live a couple miles from two top targets. Im fucked

>>33650596
Because the map is shit.

File: Libertado.jpg (36KB, 599x449px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 599x449px

>>33641964

>This might become relevant soon

>>33654087
Only if we time travel back to 1985.

Don't go anywhere, bunker down and wait for the hoards coming north (big mistake)

>>33641964
>Any of those targets in Northeast Oklahoma
You would have to be insufferably retarded to think any of those are of strategic value

>>33654133
Read the thread. You will see that the map is shit.
People will always post it, because they don't know any better.

File: MeWorry.png (706KB, 1267x935px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 1267x935px

>>33654096

https://www.google.se/search?q=Status-6&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjV8Jm_h6fTAhXhB5oKHfJjByIQ_AUICCgB&biw=1329&bih=940#imgrc=_

>>33654187
I think you are missing the point. But whatever.

>>33641964

I think the most likely scenario in the next 10 years is that terrorists nuke NYC and DC.

If they get real ambitious, they will take out Boston, Miami, LA, SF and Seattle, too.

Most likely their nukes will be on cargo ships flying under foreign flags.

Nuking 2 to 7 American cities in a sneak attack will kill millions, and plunge America into total chaos for years to come. The country might never recover.

And foreign countries like Russia and China might take advantage of the situation and invade, claiming large chunks of American soil as their own.

I am extremely well prepared for such an event.

My strategy would be to trust no one. Help no one. And to kill as many "undesirables" as I possibly can. I know I will likely be killed in my "personal war," but it's my hope that I can kill hundreds of "undesirables" before I am killed off, too. Kill or be Killed. That will be the only law of the land in this upcoming war of all wars.

My home town takes a nuke directly to the fucking face. I'm already dead

>>33656702
Please fucking tell me this is a pasta. Because if it isn't, you're a raging faggot.

>>33641964
leave rural minnesota alone reee

>>33656702
shut the fuq up niqqa

>>33656702
Go give your gun a blowjob.

>>33656702
you're like the gun owner in the horsey cartoons

>>33641964
>500 warhead scenario
>my area gets 2 anyway despite having a tiny air base with no strategic anything stationed there, no nuclear power plant, and no hydroelectric dam
why.jpg
>2000 warhead scenario
>my area gets 14 of them
WHY.jpg

>>33659254
Because >>33654154

>tfw want to build fallout shelter in backyard
>can't cause underground pipes
I didnt really need it anyway

>>33644986
seasonal reversals of winds could really fuck some people up

>>33642422
he lives!
>>33641964
why the fuck would they hit KUMMSC? it's all shit being disarmed anyway, and the mountain doesn't have shit in it. but, if they did, I'd just off myself. fuck that shit.

>>33641964
Why would this be relevant recently? No on who has the capability to nuke America would do it

>>33660671
Those fallout plumes are notional.

>>33660671
its winds aloft you need to pay attention to.


>>33660703
>why the fuck would they hit KUMMSC?
There are a a couple thousand nuclear weapons there as part of the hedge stockpile.

>>33660711
>Why would this be relevant recently? No on who has the capability to nuke America would do it
Or the warheads to do it.

>>33641964

Damn it, I live in the San Fernando Valley, near LA.

I really have to move up to eastern Oregon as soon as possible.

>>33649736
Can't speak for the rest of the flyover states, but here in ND we have a fair amount of ICBM silos, as well as Minot AFB, which has a B-52 mission, and Hector Field in Fargo, which is a drone control base

>>33641964
Where did you find this map OP?

>>33663361
Its a bullshit map thats based on some old FEMA maps.
Its pretty much irrelevant these days.

>>33663368
I wouldn't say it's total bullshit, I do know that in my area it was one of the 200 first strike targets. I would like to find the source to see if my area was either upgraded or downgraded.

>>33641964
I live within 15 min walk from the aqueduct that brings in all of DCs water. It's the most cucked county in all of Maryland. I'm beyond fucked.

>>33644986
What the fuck are they targeting Fort Custer in Michigan for? Like, I can't even think of a logical reason for this. I've been there. Nuking it would almost be a favor.

>>33663437
>I do know that in my area it was one of the 200 first strike targets.
You dont know that.

>>33663961
see >>33663368

>>33665993
I am referencing a different map.

>>33666253
FEMA Regional Center in Battle Creek.

File: 1492354921806.jpg (8KB, 276x277px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 276x277px

OP This map doesn't make sense, why the hell would ppl want to nuke north Dakota and Montana?? There's nothing important there??
>T. Concerned leaf

>>33666715
Read the thread retard

>>33642454
Why Georgetown Delaware?
Couple Recruiting offices and a courthouse....and Hispanics.
Is it because of the roundabout on Rt9!?
it makes no sense.

I'd die more than likely because I live in Florida

>>33666715
ICBM silos

>>33641964
Anyone know what that one dot in east central Nebraska is? Only mildly interesting thing I know of in that general area is North Platte.

Im about 45 minutes west of Detroit, In a prime buttfucked region. Any other MI anons want to weight in here?

My goal is to make it home to the UP

Either I head towards Chicago, and go way the fuck around it (LOL) and head back up north through wisconsin. or try my luck heading towards Kalamazoo and running through the less populated areas heading north. Problem is, I have to hit I-75 eventually. If not head to petosky and get a ferry.

I'm thinking ferry ride would be the best bet, but both routes are quite unsafe. Heading straight north means in peacetime its a 5 hour trip, and approx 2 tanks of gas. since I have to avoid the freeway at all cost, this could devolve into a 2 day trip, and 5 tanks of gas.

Doable, but still highly dangerous.

File: news_photo_27206_1364609032_615.jpg (91KB, 615x250px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 615x250px

>>33666850
Well fug..
>Tfw I live close to Montana and North Dakota boarder..
>Tfw I'd be incinerated by the atom god..

>>33666930
No. You will die of fallout

>>33666405
Thank you, anon.

>>33666915
Grosse Pointe Fag, reporting in.

The map is out of date. It's unlikely Michigan would get pounded like that today. The reason why Michigan gets pounded in the scenario in the map was because of its previous industrial past and then Selfridge used to have an interceptor wing. This might even be taking into account Nike missiles. It's really out of date. Basically, if an exchange like this occurred, there aren't many places that would be safe.

File: maxresdefault (39).jpg (95KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1280x720px

>>33666956
You sure?? look HOW MANY dots there are in ND and Montana it's not just 1 or 2 it's fucking huge groups, that many I wouldn't be surprised if I was evaporated to the atom god

>>33641969
Trying to predict where fallout will land is like dropping a feather off of the Empire State Building and picking where it will land. The heaviest fallout will be close to ground or near ground level blasts but the lighter but just as deadly stuff can circle the globe before falling out entirely.

If it comes to a massive attack by a foreign enemy, you're better off hoping you live by a big city and getting a lawnchair to watch the fireworks. Living through it isn't something you want to do.

>>33643812
The wing still 'votes' for a launch but I would be really surprised if only three out of six LCCs turned their keys.

>>33667075
Good point. Detroit already looks like it got nuked 20 years ago anyway.

The travel heading back home would be rough going regardless in a shit hit the fan kind of scenario. If I went full retard and hit I-75 north, I'd have to hit Saginaw, AND Flint.

Perhaps I should get a couple jerry cans to stave off death and go the long way around.

>>33643891
I'm not so sure E-4 can launch the Minutemen. It can probably launch the ERCS birds (or their not-disclosed successor) but as for the actual missiles themselves I imagine they're still kept under positive control and not dead-handed.

>>33641964
I live in the center of a metropolitan area that will be flattened by nukes. There is no way to escape in time.

I have a few minutes left. I'll hug my family, tell them I love them, have a shot of whiskey and smoke a cigarette.

>>33644986
Missed Nellis, Mountain Home, Fort Gordon, Cape Canevaral, those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

>>33641964

>I live in Irvine

RIP

>>33663102
I'm pretty certain North Dakota or at least western Nodak land gets fairly well fucked in the event of a nuclear exchange. South Dakota not as much although I'm uncertain if Ellsworth would warrant a hot atomic dicking or not. No functional silos out here anymore, just some people using the fenced areas to store hay bales and a neat little museum.

Not really related, but what about Yurop? I thought the USA had some nukes stashed somewhere in Italy and Germany

>>33644986
>Live in shitty town in central CA
>"Most miserable city in America"
>Major exports: Meth and news stories
>Nuke right on our fucking doorstep

I accept it.

>>33649037
>>33644986
If these are you, Oppenheimer, tell us with your trip on. A regular anon's "expertise" aren't to be trusted.

File: 2IMG_20170415_111901.jpg (1MB, 2560x1438px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1438px

>>33641964
Ausfag here, how worried should I be about any nuclear strikes in south Adelaide or around the bay area of Sydney? I live in SA and my parents are in NSW. Mainly concerned about what the Chinks or Russians might throw at Australia in the event of an all-out nuclear shitstorm.

Would Australia even be a target?

Pic is my aunt and uncle's shed out in the Barossa region, it's pretty much my go-to SHTF bugout spot because of how far away it is from anywhere important, just need to start stocking up on supplies to bring there.

>>33649532
mn fag here too south or north of twin cities?

>>33641964
I would stay right where i am since almost all wind comes from the sea and no nukes are detonating withing 200 miles

File: Astrea-Dear_08rgb_230pxlH.jpg (42KB, 172x230px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 172x230px

>>33641964
>>33641964

>>33668650
If your county DID turn into a post-nuclear hellscape, would you even notice?

>>33668814
Joke as much as you want, but yeah, depending on what gets targeted it would be a substantial increase in the overall hellhole rating.

At least I'm a mechanic, so my job won't be affected too much unless our supply chains for parts also get totally wrecked. Not to mention there'll still be plenty of survivors who need functioning vehicles.

>>33668490
Your second link.

>>33668490
Correction. The first.

>>33667138
Very sure.

>>33667249
It wouldnt matter. They can launch the ICBMs remotely.

>>33667290
You are mistaken.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Launch_Control_System

>With land-based ICBMs, the ALCS has the unique capability to retarget and launch the missiles without the interaction of the missile combat crew (MCC).

>>33667295
Why do you think your area will be flattened?

>>33667365
No Nuclear weapons there, or nuclear command and control.

>>33669630
Not him, but I live within the 495 belt of MA (fucking slave state). Even if Opp is right about the outdated map, there are still viable strike targets very near me, excluding the obvious state capital.

>>33649532
>bismarck gets nothing
>fargo gets 1
>GF gets one, understandable because airforce base
>minot afb and 100 miles all ways get cleansed in nuclear flame because reasons
this map is fucked

>>33669726
ayyyy, 508 also reporting. time to do any and all drugs within reach and watch the fireworks,la.

>>33669016
>aus
>mechanic
>post-apocalyptic
Might as well go full mad-max carpocalips

>>33669726
None of those are strike targets.

>>33641964
Why the fuckity fuck is Klamath Falls a target?

File: unnaground.jpg (4MB, 3488x5380px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3488x5380px

>>33641964

Topside will be finished, can't go innawoods when the purple rain falls and washes them all away.

Gotta go unnerground, gotta strike the earth and live on salamanders, slam the bangsticks in the dark to test the support gods and bless your rare meetings with others of your kind, those few cthonic visionaries who knew the only way out was down.

UNNA
GROUND

>>33671010
phil, that map is shit. read the damn thread.

>>33669016
Mechanic here as well. Im building up a 78 Bronco as an apocalypse bugout vehicle.

Its all good old fashioned analog machinery, save for the ignition box, voltage regulator, and electronic distributor. Thinking about getting extras of those three parts and storing them in a faraday cage in case of an emp.

>>33671010
Fuck off, phil

>>33671364
I thought the main problem with EMPs is that they propogate electrical pulses through the power grid (which has many thousands of miles of power lines) and in the very tiny, very delicate electronics of integrated circuits?

High amp/voltage stuff like you get in a car (which is pretty much a faraday cage in its own right) should be pretty resistant to the EMP pulse.

>>33669555
Is there a first-strike map that you endorse?

>>33646617
HELLo friend. I live over the bridge past the reservoir in 4 corners. I have 2 hunting dogs guns and at least 2 other close friends I could link up with immediately following an attack. Is your friends farm near bel air or monkton?

>>33643919

What if China handles things themselves? If North Korea is their sphere of influence, then it's on them to keep them in line.

That keeps America and South Korea out of things, solves our nuclear threat, and reinforces China's primacy in the DPRK.

Obviously, the challenge is in executing the plan. A major military operation is out. A coup requires a puppet leader, and that's hard to find given the recent assassination. Air strikes are hard for China and the targets are probably too hardened anyway.

But, if in theory China could impose a solution, would they and would the US/RoK leaders accept that?

>>33674367
The one I made.

File: 1454792686931.jpg (86KB, 565x600px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 565x600px

>>33674750
Wouldn't YOU like to know!...
But the answer is no anyway. They're closer to Taneytown.

>>33641964
>tfw literally my entire state is vaporized

>>33676403
>>33644986
Maryland is suffering.