Most likely aftermath of an early 80s nuclear war?

Here's what some Belgian animator came up with in 1987

A maffia war gets out of hand and Sicily gets nuked in the process. Italy responds by nuking Lybia, Syria nukes Italy, Israel nukes Syria, Everybody else nukes Israel, South Africa nukes all other African nations just for the XXXX of it. Although nominally partners, Germany, France and Britain nuke each other threeways, and not to be left out, Sweden nukes itself... the result... minute 2.30 of the video

Wait why do they nuke the Mafia? Why does Sweden have nukes?
 

apollo11

Banned
Here is a question for the forums that isn't largely touched upon: what would post-war urban planning and development look like? I've shared my thoughts about decentralization up-thread. What do you all think?
 

Jack Brisco

Banned
A fair point, but the whole region between dots will be bathed in fallout from ground bursts further west. Don't get me wrong -- people between dots who find fallout protection will survive. But their cows, chickens and pigs will be dead and their land will be poisoned. And some areas may escape fallout altogether if they get a break from the winds aloft sending the fallout somewhere else. But areas that escape all fallout will be the exception rather than the rule. The cities are going to be gone. A few might survive if they're targeted by a dud warhead, but that's a factor of luck, not Soviet planning.

Looking at that map, seems like the best place to be would be far northern California. Not likely to get much fallout, fairly mild climate for growing.
 
Do you have a source for this statement?

This is what Dr. Richard D. Small had to say when interviewed by the New York Times in the early 1990s:
Dr. Small estimates that a maximum of 1,475 teragrams of material would be burned in the United States, provided all the weapons in the Soviet arsenal were successfully launched and detonated, and that all combustible material was actually ignited. Comparable figures for burned material in Europe and the Soviet Union would be proportionately less, ''because those regions simply have less combustible material in homes, businesses and industries,'' he said.

''Our estimate is based on rigorous analysis of blueprints and other records of real homes and commercial and industrial structures,'' Dr. Small said. ''We add up every possible ingredient available for burning to estimate a weighted total.''

1475 Tg is equal to 1,475,000,000 tonnes according to a conversion calculator. Now that sure sounds like a lot, to be sure, but it's really not. Why? The Tambora Eruption in 1815 produced around 10 Billion tonnes of ejecta. So even a full scale, ASB influenced strategic nuclear exchange in ~1990 would only have about 10-15% the power of the Tambora eruption*, under which global temperatures decreased about 0.4–0.7 °C and only one documented case of a person freezing to death occurred (According to Dangerous Planet: Natural Disasters That Changed History, by Bryn Barnard). This is also ignoring the fact the Soviet strategic capabilities were lesser in the 1980s and that it's completely ASB to assume every Soviet weapon is targeted at CONUS, successfully hits it target and all combustible materials are successfully ignited; in short, it would never happen.

* Said eruption may have been helped, further reducing the Nuclear Winter argument.
 
Here is a question for the forums that isn't largely touched upon: what would post-war urban planning and development look like? I've shared my thoughts about decentralization up-thread. What do you all think?

Initially it would depend on how much law and order the region has, but city walls of various materials are almost sure to come back into vogue with city ruins perhaps using perimeter highways as a defensive line (285 for Atlanta, 235 for Dallas, etc.). Interstates become toll highways based on a 'might makes right' principal, large roving biker/RV/trucker gangs might be prevalent in the Plains or even Gulf Coast (running on biodiesel or alcohol?).

New towns are likely to resemble fortresses in the beginning, castles or semi-modern facsimilies will appear and dot the land, perhaps becoming a cultural legacy in the centuries to come. Later as the new civilization (hopefully) spreads out it will *probably* become more relaxed and similar to today a generation or two after most of the continent is pacified.
 
With the radioactive fallout, the natural plagues and potential bioplagues, the disruption of international trade from machine parts to food, and areas of mass famine and Volkwanderung "planning" is a luxury. As noted in my and other posts, urban planning is going to consist of "how do we make our town safe from the neobarbarians".
 

apollo11

Banned
With the radioactive fallout, the natural plagues and potential bioplagues, the disruption of international trade from machine parts to food, and areas of mass famine and Volkwanderung "planning" is a luxury. As noted in my and other posts, urban planning is going to consist of "how do we make our town safe from the neobarbarians".
Yes but eventually civilization would rebound. Presumably such civilizations would understand that nuclear war destroyed the previous global civilizations and they would likely be engaged in nuclear arms races themselves. In Raven Rock the author noted that at the dawn of the Atomic Age we didn't see large scale transformations in urban planning and the like because the cities were largely already constructed. We had sunk costs with our pre-Atomic City design. For the most part post-WW3 civilizations would be working with clean slates when creating planned cities and new settlements. Even if we assume every government on earth collapses and every sub-national unit of organization collapses they wouldn't stay at low levels of development forever. Complexity will increase and with it planning won't be a luxury just as it hasn't been for us, wasn't a luxury for Empires as far back as the Romans or even further back the Indus Valley Civilization.
 
I think there's a solid chance that all the radiation, biological and chemical weapons released end up creating new hominid forms through evolutionary pressure- if anything would be able to survive in the areas affected by this deadly cocktail.
 
I think there's a solid chance that all the radiation, biological and chemical weapons released end up creating new hominid forms through evolutionary pressure- if anything would be able to survive in the areas affected by this deadly cocktail.
You'll get mutations and there might be some short-cutting of the evolutionary process. Historically, it takes at least 50,000 years for a new mammal species to emerge as distinct, so no single generation will see a new species. Yes, survivors will pass down radiation-resistance.
 
Top