There's a reason why I'm creeped out posters on this board seem to think there'll be survivor nations, organized society, and band tours The Days After.And its only become worse since then.
There's a reason why I'm creeped out posters on this board seem to think there'll be survivor nations, organized society, and band tours The Days After.And its only become worse since then.
It absolutely will happen, I'm sure of it.There are still thousands of nuclear weapons in the world, and more countries have, could have, or want them since the Cold War. And with West/Russia relations plummeting...
The risk is absolutely still there. It's just not as omnipresent and overkill as it was.
I’m not so cynical. I think the chance is there, but it’ll happen because of mistakes, miscalculation and the fog of war, not a random choice to end the world.It absolutely will happen, I'm sure of it.
In an utter MAD scenario then Oz and NZ both lost major cities and faci lites from sub based launches. A lot more survives comparatively, but the countries are still hit.As I have recounted before - Australia would be relatively unharmed in a nuclear exchange as would most of the Southern Hemisphere. We simply do not have the targets worth wasting nuclear warheads on downunder. Our cities are too far apart. Neither the fUSSR or USA would have nuclear warheads to spare when they would be using them on each other. There is a world outside of the US and fUSSR.
And the total collapse of global trade, environmental effects, the issues of dealing with the blasts if they are hit...There are still radiation problems either way of course.
As I have recounted before - Australia would be relatively unharmed in a nuclear exchange as would most of the Southern Hemisphere. We simply do not have the targets worth wasting nuclear warheads on downunder. Our cities are too far apart. Neither the fUSSR or USA would have nuclear warheads to spare when they would be using them on each other. There is a world outside of the US and fUSSR.
How exactly? Where is this 1950's tech coming from? No one makes tubes anymore. Your car has an ECU that takes an engineer to maintain and good luck getting spares. Much of your small to medium industry has been swallowed up by globalization and if you have any nice shiny modern factories there's a good chance they are full of automation and parts and materials were sourced from somewhere on the other side of world that's either rubble or beyond reach after the collapse of international trade.I think all civilization ending is overkill. Is anyone going to bother to nuke Montevideo or Lima? Places will survive and be able to maintain a 1950s level of tech at least.
Also was either power planning on nuking India?
Until the surviving military elements of the combatants turn up and start requisitioning what they need at gunpoint, and of course the refugees start turning up in waves, and this assumes that Australia and New Zealand aren't heavily impacted by the climate change caused by a massive exchange. Oh and also that your optimistic assumption that no one will nuke them holds true.I studied nuclear war fighting strategies during my Master's degree. We had Des Ball just before he had been sucked into the Pentagon's orbit. He made it clear that Australia would be relatively unscathed by a general exchange. We simply are too far down the fUSSR's list if priorities to be worried about.
In 1983 we were self-sufficient in most industries - we made many things here. Sure, electronics might be a bit of a worry but their loss would not be earth shattering from our perspective. We had our own oilfields, we had our own gasfields, we exported a whole shed load of primary foodstuffs, we were much better off than you lot appear to give credit for. It was the northern hemisphere who looked south for it's beef, it's lamb, it's wheat, it's corn and so on and so on. You might be stuffed but Australia and New Zealand would be OK.
That's more of a conventional war than a nuclear war, at least at first; though I loved reading it and I would recommend it to those that like reading about WWIII.There's an Able Archer Timeline: https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...timeline-of-a-third-world-war-in-1983.279881/
It’s one of my favorites on the site, but the author did admit the nuclear war segment was very contrived.There's an Able Archer Timeline: https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...timeline-of-a-third-world-war-in-1983.279881/
Who Wins? In 1983?Besides the Cuban Missile Crisis, Able Archer in November 1983 was the closest we ever came to nuclear war. Let's say the Able Archer 83, the Cold War turns into the Hot War (meaning Nuclear war occurs between the US and USSR). How does this affect both the US and USSR and the world? Who wins- The United States or the Soviet Union?
View attachment 646928
I feel you.I live next to three major nuclear targets. I’m not likely to survive even a limited exchange.
Of course Australia had/has at minimum, high 2nd Strike targets, especially during the Height of the Cold War, when both sides had completely insane deliverable stockpile inventories.As I have recounted before - Australia would be relatively unharmed in a nuclear exchange as would most of the Southern Hemisphere. We simply do not have the targets worth wasting nuclear warheads on downunder. Our cities are too far apart. Neither the fUSSR or USA would have nuclear warheads to spare when they would be using them on each other. There is a world outside of the US and fUSSR.
As I have recounted before - Australia would be relatively unharmed in a nuclear exchange as would most of the Southern Hemisphere. We simply do not have the targets worth wasting nuclear warheads on downunder. Our cities are too far apart. Neither the fUSSR or USA would have nuclear warheads to spare when they would be using them on each other. There is a world outside of the US and fUSSR.
I studied nuclear war fighting strategies during my Master's degree. We had Des Ball just before he had been sucked into the Pentagon's orbit. He made it clear that Australia would be relatively unscathed by a general exchange. We simply are too far down the fUSSR's list if priorities to be worried about.
In 1983 we were self-sufficient in most industries - we made many things here. Sure, electronics might be a bit of a worry but their loss would not be earth shattering from our perspective. We had our own oilfields, we had our own gasfields, we exported a whole shed load of primary foodstuffs, we were much better off than you lot appear to give credit for. It was the northern hemisphere who looked south for it's beef, it's lamb, it's wheat, it's corn and so on and so on. You might be stuffed but Australia and New Zealand would be OK.
What people appear to be forgetting is that the reason why people shoot nukes at one another is to destroy targets of value. There simply are very few and they are far between such targets downunder. Our cities are thousands of kilometres apart and we have few if any targets of any value downunder.
Australia was, as I have already recounted largely self-sufficient in most goods. We had our own oil and gas fields. We manufactured most things still in 1983. We exported vast quantities of wheat, corn, beef, lamb, etc. We mined coal, iron ore, copper, lead, etc. We had our own steel works were we refined iron ore. We refined Aluminium. We made cars, trucks, etc. We were not reliant on external sources of supply, except for electronics. In a nuclear exchange we would be largely OK.