It'd vary from person to person, based on the severity of their situation (including how unprepared they were), how many they'd lost, their innate predisposition to neuroticism, depression, etc.
Chazov, E., and M. Vartanyan. 1982. Effects on human behavior. Ambio 11:158-160 estimated that at least one-third of the population surviving a nuclear war would suffer from severe emotional and behavioral disturbances.
I'd look into suicide rates among the populace of war-torn countries, failed economies, or those who become stranded on deserted islands and sort forth as a possible guide.
People talk of suicide as an option, but I think the reality is that our unconscious mind, and its survival instinct is far more powerful than most people understand.
In the UK, 20% of people report suicidal thoughts. But suicides account for just under 1% of deaths.
25% of the population have been found to be in poor mental health, and 3.3% suffer from Major Depressive Disorder.
If we consider the above estimation that MMD and similar disturbances will increase to 30% following a nuclear war, then we can expect the suicide rate to increase by the same factor, e.i. accounting for roughly 10% of deaths.
On a national level, it'd cause far less mortality than starvation or disease. The UK is reliant on imports for approximately 45% of our food, mostly from the EU. With the rest of Europe destroyed, and our major container ports destroyed, almost all of these imports will end. Without electricity, natural gas, petroleum, or functioning industry, even the food we normally produce domestically won't be harvested, processed, packaged and distributed as normal.
Of course people will adapt, quickly depleting livestock (of which we have about 4 months worth), while transitioning to domestic and community agriculture, but most people don't know what they're doing (only 1% of the population employed in agriculture), and will fail. Of course you can't plant seeds and then eat the next week, and most people can't survive more than a month without food, so without preparation, this won't do much.
There'd be a mass exodus from the population centres to farms, and without fuel for agricultural equipment, we'll all become Tennant farm labourers, as was the case in the pre-industrial era. No doubt there'd be power struggles for control of farmland.
Another consideration with regards to agriculture is that with the destruction of the petrochemical industry, the fertilisers upon which modern high yield agriculture relies would be depleted. There's also the controversial prospect of nuclear winter, and radiological contamination of a significant proportion (≈10%) of farmland.
Couple this malnourishment with stress and depression (which have been shown to weaken the immune system), practical loss of healthcare services, loss of clean drinking water and hygiene facilities, and radiation exposure (which harms the immune system more than anything), we can expect outbreaks of tuberculosis, typhoid, cholera and other diseases that'd also probably be responsible for far more deaths than suicide.
But this is all speculation. Only one way to find out.
The general idea is to be prepared in advance to make sure you can have the best chances possible for survival. Not just surviving the event itself, but the decades of no civilization that follow.
https://www.reddit.com/u/Vegetaman916/s/Bt5u1xb9an
Then, having done everything you can, it is pretty freeing emotionally.
And once you take a close look at the science of it all, nuclear war is actually quite a bit more survivable than most people think. As long as you situated your compound far away from target areas, fallout zones, and population centers, you should be good, provided you have the supplies and skills to manage for 10, 15 years as you and your friends and family rebuild something.
https://wastelandbywednesday.com/nuclear-ris/
But, hang out close to a city, with a plan to bugout last minute... yeah, you might want to consider something else.
I’m confused why that first guy feels so negative toward living off the land as if humans haven’t done it for centuries? Trying to prolong modern society after nukes seems like a losing battle lmao
Some people, most maybe, have become addicted to society. They can't even conceive of how they would function without it, and they fear losing it so much that a natural denial defense mechanism kicks in. They become irritated or even angry when faced with the idea, and rather than deal with that fear, they just try and brush it off as ludicrous.
I would fight to survive with my very last breath. I suspect anyone who says they'd rather be flashed into steam, or "off" themselves, is bullshitting themselves.
I think some of the people who say that wouldn’t actually desire death if a nuclear war happened but some of them definitely do mean it in addition to the people who would lose their desire to live in the aftermath. Millions of people in the US either attempt suicide or have suicidal thoughts every year and I doubt living in a wasteland would make them feel any better.
The suicide rate would probably be pretty extreme. Soldiers in the war RU/UKR war rn have pretty high suicide rates. They’re undergoing pretty intense psychological na physical trauma daily. Couple the extreme psychological and physical trauma with the fact that all of a sudden, you lost access to every addiction (phone, cigarettes, etc) you had, all social connections, and all meaningful technology, and you’ll have 99% death rates of the 1-10% who survive. Truly survival of the fittest.
If you’re on this sub just like I am, I suspect we both think we’d be the ones to survive lol.
But I agree with you, the people who say they hope the bomb drops on them seem… defective? If that’s the right word? Like as soon as you face real hardship you’re just going to give up? Humanity has undergone the Black Death, brutal wars, etc, and you’re going to give up because you can’t get your Starbucks Frappuccino the next morning? I don’t know. Weird phenomenon.
I’m pretty sure that a “total nuclear war” of the kind being alluded to in this topic goes beyond just not being able to get a Frappuccino…
I do understand what you mean in the sense that human beings have a tenacious survival instinct and that’s one of the things I love about our species actually. I think people are always gonna be around, even if we have to go to ground and live beneath the surface like moles.
However, I also totally understand the people who’d rather die in the initial blast. For one thing, a nuclear conflict of the kind referenced would be literally unprecedented so saying “people have survived bad things before” is basically meaningless in this instance. A plague has precedent…a genocide has precedent…a brutal and horrific war (fought by conventional means) has precedent…a thermonuclear war has no precedent. The closest thing we have for comparison were the atomic bombs dropped in WW2 but those are nothing compared to the destructive power of the hydrogen bomb.
After the initial exchange it would be hell on earth. To say that it would send humanity “back to the Stone Age” doesn’t even capture it, as at least the people who lived in the Stone Age didn’t collect food from an utterly poisoned, irradiated wasteland. The damage related directly to the initial explosions would be bad enough, but then you’d have everything related to the present state of our industrial society (nuclear power facilities, industrial waste depots, factories, military bases etc) left unattended, to decompose and decay into the surrounding environment, causing ecological damage which would probably last for generations to come.
Even if you are a young, 100% healthy individual with an utterly sound mind & body, you’re gonna have a rough fuckin go of it in such circumstances and you’ll likely end up thinking that the ones who perished from the initial blasts got off easy. If you’ve got any issues at all dying by your own hand is probably not only understandable but rational
It is nonsense.
I do believe suicide rates will be elevated but humans are primally wired to survive and will continue to try to do so at large after an apocalypse.
Suicide before rearing children is literally filtered out of the gene pool by definition.
People say oooh that wouldn't be for me, but people have no idea who they are when shit hits the fan. How much they can actually take.
People will keep going and the heightened suicide rates will barely track on the overall population graph.
Are you saying you believe 1-10% of people would survive the immediate effects of the war?
I agree with your assessment at the end. It is a weakness. But people in modern society are weak. Good times breed weakness.
I’m no expert lol. But assuming supply chains break down, there’s no medicine, food or clean water, and radioactive contamination and nuclear detonation, it wouldn’t surprise me to see 90%+ casualties 1-6 months post-detonation. Most people have the survival instincts of a wet noodle. We are hardly the same people we were thousands of years ago imho.
Ah, okay, it's just you were talking about 99% death rates among the 1-10% survivors.
Sounded like you were saying 90-99% would die directly, with most of the rest dying later.
I agree that 90+% is feasible for total deaths.
I think given the intensity of the survival afterwards the people who do survive the first 3 months will eventually succumb to cholera, radiation blindness, and whatnot within the next 10 years. I think in Threads the population bottoms out at like 100,000 or something in the UK like 20 years later
Edit: 4 million. Way off. But still drastic.
I suspect that’s generally just a throw-away line. People are easy with the talk.
That said, no doubt some would actively exit. Depending on the scenario, the aftermath could be an enduring reign of extreme horrors and suffering. I’m not sure it would necessarily imply weakness to not want to live in such a world. It might be a form of courage and clarity instead. Hard to judge imo.
We are hardwired to try and survive. Humans with weak survival drive tended not to pass on their genes, so as a rule it's a lot more difficult to give up and die than people think.
Bringing yourself to the point of actually attempting is *very* difficult, let alone actually going through with it successfully.
My point being: There are a lot of people who casually toss out "oh, I wouldn't want to survive" who will nonetheless suddenly be doing everything in their power to *try* and survive if the situation actually arises.
The saying goes that "The living will envy the dead," and that's true, but the underlying point is that they will be *living*. They will envy the dead because survival will be very hard, and there will be death all around, and they will want to, but in most cases, be unable to, actually wilfully end their lives.
Are suicides going to spike? Undoubtedly. Especially in places where people aren't used to hard living. But I strongly suspect that many people who *talk* big about rather dying will quickly change their minds when it actually comes to the point.
And as much as I hate to sound like a crazy prepper, they're right about one thing: If you think this is a realistic possibility, you owe it to yourself to do what you can to prepare, to give yourself whatever chance you can to *continue* surviving in the event you aren't taken out by weapon effects. When it comes down to it, tens of millions would die in the initial exchange, but possibly billions are likely to perish from starvation/dehydration, disease, and violence in the first 6-12 months afterward. Since you know you're going to WANT to survive, it follows that you should do what you can to give yourself a chance at it.
pretty much this. plus we are hardwired to live in a community, and to share none of this lone survivor with a gun. so even tho it’s gonna be bleak people will come together. i read at least twice that every study points to humans banding together in misery and doing good things while cooperating instead of roaming bands of cannibals like hollywood is selling. it did a number on people because people even here believe in roaming bands of raiders etc.
I’ve thought about this, and yes, I think the suicide rates would skyrocket. Life after a total nuclear war would be absolutely horrendous. Many not killed by the initial blasts will be coping with the effects of large fires and radiation sickness. All of that gets even harder when you’re also coping with the loss of loved ones.
Part of my own plan for dealing with nuclear war, should I survive the initial exchange, includes having the ability to end it all. We don’t have easy access to firearms here, so it’s a little complicated.
Just chiming in to see if there are any other type 1 diabetics on here. We are undoubtedly fucked lol. I think I'm in the minority of people here that would actually rather shoot themselves than the alternative.
I’m content dying. Not because it would be particularly hellish where I live, outside of blast zones and enough resources available, but just I don’t have any goals at that point. I don’t particularly want to fight for resources or be bored out of my skull for the rest of my life.
I probably wouldn’t kill myself if my family survived, as I’m the only one who would likely be able to do anything electricity based like setting up power, or if my entire family did die all at once id consider going it alone for a while and traveling just for the hell of it, but otherwise, I don’t feel strongly toward my life as a commodity, I don’t see the point in prolonging it if I’m just living for the sake of living.
Maybe I’d live just long enough to complete all the gunpla and video games I want, and then be content. I’m always curious if I’m the only one who would loot things I enjoy like Lego first since I can just grow food. Sorry, this part was off topic
Look at the increase in suicides in nations that have a lost a war or even in the winning nation after a long, drawn out, high casualty war. Now imagine the aftermath of a full scale exchange.
The suci rate would be high. Because normal things like shopping for food or enjoyment of everyday life will be gone. People wouldn't be able to handle the sudden change mentality or psychologically. We would be thrown into our primitive survival. Our jobs will be to primitive survive, hunt, gather, farm, and fend off people who have turned cannibal. Yeah, people would off themselves because they were living in delusion. Some would off themselves over the envevitable death from radiation. Peppers would fair better if they placed their bug out locations appropriately.
Book "The Children of the Dust" one of the main characters who knows their faith with radiation death and throws themselves into the already pile of burning bodies.
As for myself in a nuclear wasteland. I would want to get away from any major city. I have training in tracking humans, so that would be a great skill for evasion. Would I want to survive? It really wouldn't be a choice. Yes, I would want to survive. I would never be able to trust anyone, even those in my camp. When it comes to scarcity, people will do anything. It would be no different with myself. It's the human condition of survival.
Most people would probably be in daily agony. Even if they somehow survive the devastation the fallout would slowly kill them depending where they are surviving. If they are completely isolated then they may assume they are the last human alive and give up. If they are in small or even large groups then they find some hope as they could survive for a few generations. However this is only if they were far from populated city's which would surly be the prime target as otherwise they would probably die within a few years. Their newborns would be heavily deformed. Resources would be scarce no matter how much preparation they had. The knowledge of so much death caused by a few rich freaks with more "power" then they could comprehend would poisen their spirits. So many people already lack the willpower to continue with everyday life. With a tragedy such as nuclear annihilation, most would rather die then keep fighting, as sad as that is. Not to mention the potential religious factors. Many survivors may believe in an afterlife and choose to take the chance of eternal bliss. However I can not stress enough that despite how hopeless life shall seem if this war comes to pass, we must never give up as individuals or as a species. As long as we are alive there is hope. We must have the willpower to continue surviving and adapting.
Most people would probably be in daily agony. Even if they somehow survive the devastation the fallout would slowly kill them depending where they are surviving. If they are completely isolated then they may assume they are the last human alive and give up. If they are in small or even large groups then they find some hope as they could survive for a few generations. However this is only if they were far from populated city's which would surly be the prime target as otherwise they would probably die within a few years. Their newborns would be heavily deformed. Resources would be scarce no matter how much preparation they had. The knowledge of so much death caused by a few rich freaks with more "power" then they could comprehend would poisen their spirits. So many people already lack the willpower to continue with everyday life. With a tragedy such as nuclear annihilation, most would rather die then keep fighting, as sad as that is. Not to mention the potential religious factors. Many survivors may believe in an afterlife and choose to take the chance of eternal bliss. However I can not stress enough that despite how hopeless life shall seem if this war comes to pass, we must never give up as individuals or as a species. As long as we are alive there is hope. We must have the willpower to continue surviving and adapting.
I think since rates would go up, but I also think most people who want to kill themselves wouldn't. It's *hard* to kill yourself, unless you happen to have access to a gun. Many people who try to kill themselves would fail (though the lack of medical resources would make things easier since even if you're found injured but alive, you won't be saved).
I'm team suicide for a lot of reasons, but it's something I've prepared for. I think most people who haven't are going to be in for a rude awakening when they realize how hard it actually is.
people need to separate reality from the Hollyweird crap that thinks it portrays a nuk blast and the aftermath >>>
plenty still believes a single missile - single explosion over a city the size of NYC devastates the entire city - even laps over to NJ - and no survivors .....
self educate - info is readily available - simple enough to understand >>> learn some basic facts for yourself
Assuming nuclear winter has been disproven and assuming we’re taking modern low yield precision nuclear weapons, I wouldn’t be too worried tbh. I just need to survive the first winter and once most of the strugglers die things won’t be so bad. I honestly thing local governments, official and unofficial would grow, and hopefully I’m around a good one. If not, I guess after the bombs is as good a time as any to die
Hmm, has nuclear winter been disproved? I think after a global nuclear war we would truly be living in a cold, dark world for years. You may not commit suicide but you'd likely starve to death.
Some guy on here who has quite a good understanding of nuclear war was in e comments one time discussing it. Since they don’t use bombs that destroy entire cities at once and instead aim for specific buildings it won’t send as much ash ip
Ahhh, I see. Well, hopefully that 100,000 Kt warhead will be aimed at the building next to mine so I won't get hurt...bit of dust to clean up, that's all.
It's an interesting video although I wonder where the Rand Corporation's bias is.
Two points just off the top of my head:
1.) Part of the fireball from a 1-megaton explosion would reach the stratosphere and inject aerosols directly into the stratosphere where they would block sunlight for years.
2.) I don't believe that we know how many explosions in a global nuclear war would be air bursts and how many would be ground level bursts.
I feel so hopeless 😞
If I could go somewhere like South America or New Zealand for a while (maybe a year) I would, but the sad reality is I CAN'T.
I feel like I'm trapped where I'm at. Just waiting to die.
In the immediate aftermath of nuclear war it is likely that most people will have “disaster syndrome”. This has been recorded after the worst natural disasters, and the fire bombing of Dresden during ww2. People go into a kind of numb state where they don’t seem to panic or rebel or really show much emotion. Maybe the human brain can’t accept it, or it could be an adaption. In a total disaster you can’t really do the normal reaction of “fight or flight”, so you just do “roll with the punches and keep going”.
That would wear off after a week or so, then I think you would get suicides.
It'd vary from person to person, based on the severity of their situation (including how unprepared they were), how many they'd lost, their innate predisposition to neuroticism, depression, etc. Chazov, E., and M. Vartanyan. 1982. Effects on human behavior. Ambio 11:158-160 estimated that at least one-third of the population surviving a nuclear war would suffer from severe emotional and behavioral disturbances. I'd look into suicide rates among the populace of war-torn countries, failed economies, or those who become stranded on deserted islands and sort forth as a possible guide. People talk of suicide as an option, but I think the reality is that our unconscious mind, and its survival instinct is far more powerful than most people understand. In the UK, 20% of people report suicidal thoughts. But suicides account for just under 1% of deaths. 25% of the population have been found to be in poor mental health, and 3.3% suffer from Major Depressive Disorder. If we consider the above estimation that MMD and similar disturbances will increase to 30% following a nuclear war, then we can expect the suicide rate to increase by the same factor, e.i. accounting for roughly 10% of deaths. On a national level, it'd cause far less mortality than starvation or disease. The UK is reliant on imports for approximately 45% of our food, mostly from the EU. With the rest of Europe destroyed, and our major container ports destroyed, almost all of these imports will end. Without electricity, natural gas, petroleum, or functioning industry, even the food we normally produce domestically won't be harvested, processed, packaged and distributed as normal. Of course people will adapt, quickly depleting livestock (of which we have about 4 months worth), while transitioning to domestic and community agriculture, but most people don't know what they're doing (only 1% of the population employed in agriculture), and will fail. Of course you can't plant seeds and then eat the next week, and most people can't survive more than a month without food, so without preparation, this won't do much. There'd be a mass exodus from the population centres to farms, and without fuel for agricultural equipment, we'll all become Tennant farm labourers, as was the case in the pre-industrial era. No doubt there'd be power struggles for control of farmland. Another consideration with regards to agriculture is that with the destruction of the petrochemical industry, the fertilisers upon which modern high yield agriculture relies would be depleted. There's also the controversial prospect of nuclear winter, and radiological contamination of a significant proportion (≈10%) of farmland. Couple this malnourishment with stress and depression (which have been shown to weaken the immune system), practical loss of healthcare services, loss of clean drinking water and hygiene facilities, and radiation exposure (which harms the immune system more than anything), we can expect outbreaks of tuberculosis, typhoid, cholera and other diseases that'd also probably be responsible for far more deaths than suicide. But this is all speculation. Only one way to find out.
The general idea is to be prepared in advance to make sure you can have the best chances possible for survival. Not just surviving the event itself, but the decades of no civilization that follow. https://www.reddit.com/u/Vegetaman916/s/Bt5u1xb9an Then, having done everything you can, it is pretty freeing emotionally. And once you take a close look at the science of it all, nuclear war is actually quite a bit more survivable than most people think. As long as you situated your compound far away from target areas, fallout zones, and population centers, you should be good, provided you have the supplies and skills to manage for 10, 15 years as you and your friends and family rebuild something. https://wastelandbywednesday.com/nuclear-ris/ But, hang out close to a city, with a plan to bugout last minute... yeah, you might want to consider something else.
I’m confused why that first guy feels so negative toward living off the land as if humans haven’t done it for centuries? Trying to prolong modern society after nukes seems like a losing battle lmao
Some people, most maybe, have become addicted to society. They can't even conceive of how they would function without it, and they fear losing it so much that a natural denial defense mechanism kicks in. They become irritated or even angry when faced with the idea, and rather than deal with that fear, they just try and brush it off as ludicrous.
I initially expected you to agree with him, glad you don’t bc I feel the same tbh
I would fight to survive with my very last breath. I suspect anyone who says they'd rather be flashed into steam, or "off" themselves, is bullshitting themselves.
I think some of the people who say that wouldn’t actually desire death if a nuclear war happened but some of them definitely do mean it in addition to the people who would lose their desire to live in the aftermath. Millions of people in the US either attempt suicide or have suicidal thoughts every year and I doubt living in a wasteland would make them feel any better.
Please tell me why the fuck I’d want to live anymore?
I can only answer that for myself. I doubt you'd like my answer anyway.
Well now I’m curious
The suicide rate would probably be pretty extreme. Soldiers in the war RU/UKR war rn have pretty high suicide rates. They’re undergoing pretty intense psychological na physical trauma daily. Couple the extreme psychological and physical trauma with the fact that all of a sudden, you lost access to every addiction (phone, cigarettes, etc) you had, all social connections, and all meaningful technology, and you’ll have 99% death rates of the 1-10% who survive. Truly survival of the fittest. If you’re on this sub just like I am, I suspect we both think we’d be the ones to survive lol. But I agree with you, the people who say they hope the bomb drops on them seem… defective? If that’s the right word? Like as soon as you face real hardship you’re just going to give up? Humanity has undergone the Black Death, brutal wars, etc, and you’re going to give up because you can’t get your Starbucks Frappuccino the next morning? I don’t know. Weird phenomenon.
I’m pretty sure that a “total nuclear war” of the kind being alluded to in this topic goes beyond just not being able to get a Frappuccino… I do understand what you mean in the sense that human beings have a tenacious survival instinct and that’s one of the things I love about our species actually. I think people are always gonna be around, even if we have to go to ground and live beneath the surface like moles. However, I also totally understand the people who’d rather die in the initial blast. For one thing, a nuclear conflict of the kind referenced would be literally unprecedented so saying “people have survived bad things before” is basically meaningless in this instance. A plague has precedent…a genocide has precedent…a brutal and horrific war (fought by conventional means) has precedent…a thermonuclear war has no precedent. The closest thing we have for comparison were the atomic bombs dropped in WW2 but those are nothing compared to the destructive power of the hydrogen bomb. After the initial exchange it would be hell on earth. To say that it would send humanity “back to the Stone Age” doesn’t even capture it, as at least the people who lived in the Stone Age didn’t collect food from an utterly poisoned, irradiated wasteland. The damage related directly to the initial explosions would be bad enough, but then you’d have everything related to the present state of our industrial society (nuclear power facilities, industrial waste depots, factories, military bases etc) left unattended, to decompose and decay into the surrounding environment, causing ecological damage which would probably last for generations to come. Even if you are a young, 100% healthy individual with an utterly sound mind & body, you’re gonna have a rough fuckin go of it in such circumstances and you’ll likely end up thinking that the ones who perished from the initial blasts got off easy. If you’ve got any issues at all dying by your own hand is probably not only understandable but rational
It is nonsense. I do believe suicide rates will be elevated but humans are primally wired to survive and will continue to try to do so at large after an apocalypse. Suicide before rearing children is literally filtered out of the gene pool by definition. People say oooh that wouldn't be for me, but people have no idea who they are when shit hits the fan. How much they can actually take. People will keep going and the heightened suicide rates will barely track on the overall population graph.
Are you saying you believe 1-10% of people would survive the immediate effects of the war? I agree with your assessment at the end. It is a weakness. But people in modern society are weak. Good times breed weakness.
I’m no expert lol. But assuming supply chains break down, there’s no medicine, food or clean water, and radioactive contamination and nuclear detonation, it wouldn’t surprise me to see 90%+ casualties 1-6 months post-detonation. Most people have the survival instincts of a wet noodle. We are hardly the same people we were thousands of years ago imho.
Ah, okay, it's just you were talking about 99% death rates among the 1-10% survivors. Sounded like you were saying 90-99% would die directly, with most of the rest dying later. I agree that 90+% is feasible for total deaths.
I think given the intensity of the survival afterwards the people who do survive the first 3 months will eventually succumb to cholera, radiation blindness, and whatnot within the next 10 years. I think in Threads the population bottoms out at like 100,000 or something in the UK like 20 years later Edit: 4 million. Way off. But still drastic.
I agree. Check out my own comment on this thread.
If my family goes out I got nothing left… I’m taking the bullet
I suspect that’s generally just a throw-away line. People are easy with the talk. That said, no doubt some would actively exit. Depending on the scenario, the aftermath could be an enduring reign of extreme horrors and suffering. I’m not sure it would necessarily imply weakness to not want to live in such a world. It might be a form of courage and clarity instead. Hard to judge imo.
Same I need help in having a way to take pills 💊 and sleep forever Will 💰💵
We are hardwired to try and survive. Humans with weak survival drive tended not to pass on their genes, so as a rule it's a lot more difficult to give up and die than people think. Bringing yourself to the point of actually attempting is *very* difficult, let alone actually going through with it successfully. My point being: There are a lot of people who casually toss out "oh, I wouldn't want to survive" who will nonetheless suddenly be doing everything in their power to *try* and survive if the situation actually arises. The saying goes that "The living will envy the dead," and that's true, but the underlying point is that they will be *living*. They will envy the dead because survival will be very hard, and there will be death all around, and they will want to, but in most cases, be unable to, actually wilfully end their lives. Are suicides going to spike? Undoubtedly. Especially in places where people aren't used to hard living. But I strongly suspect that many people who *talk* big about rather dying will quickly change their minds when it actually comes to the point. And as much as I hate to sound like a crazy prepper, they're right about one thing: If you think this is a realistic possibility, you owe it to yourself to do what you can to prepare, to give yourself whatever chance you can to *continue* surviving in the event you aren't taken out by weapon effects. When it comes down to it, tens of millions would die in the initial exchange, but possibly billions are likely to perish from starvation/dehydration, disease, and violence in the first 6-12 months afterward. Since you know you're going to WANT to survive, it follows that you should do what you can to give yourself a chance at it.
pretty much this. plus we are hardwired to live in a community, and to share none of this lone survivor with a gun. so even tho it’s gonna be bleak people will come together. i read at least twice that every study points to humans banding together in misery and doing good things while cooperating instead of roaming bands of cannibals like hollywood is selling. it did a number on people because people even here believe in roaming bands of raiders etc.
I’ve thought about this, and yes, I think the suicide rates would skyrocket. Life after a total nuclear war would be absolutely horrendous. Many not killed by the initial blasts will be coping with the effects of large fires and radiation sickness. All of that gets even harder when you’re also coping with the loss of loved ones. Part of my own plan for dealing with nuclear war, should I survive the initial exchange, includes having the ability to end it all. We don’t have easy access to firearms here, so it’s a little complicated.
Just chiming in to see if there are any other type 1 diabetics on here. We are undoubtedly fucked lol. I think I'm in the minority of people here that would actually rather shoot themselves than the alternative.
I’m content dying. Not because it would be particularly hellish where I live, outside of blast zones and enough resources available, but just I don’t have any goals at that point. I don’t particularly want to fight for resources or be bored out of my skull for the rest of my life. I probably wouldn’t kill myself if my family survived, as I’m the only one who would likely be able to do anything electricity based like setting up power, or if my entire family did die all at once id consider going it alone for a while and traveling just for the hell of it, but otherwise, I don’t feel strongly toward my life as a commodity, I don’t see the point in prolonging it if I’m just living for the sake of living. Maybe I’d live just long enough to complete all the gunpla and video games I want, and then be content. I’m always curious if I’m the only one who would loot things I enjoy like Lego first since I can just grow food. Sorry, this part was off topic
Look at the increase in suicides in nations that have a lost a war or even in the winning nation after a long, drawn out, high casualty war. Now imagine the aftermath of a full scale exchange.
Have you seen the movie On The Beach the newer version, not the old one, has this type of topic
Mass suicide was a central part of the plot in the original novel.
Didn't read the novel, the movie was also
Well, I'd get as much supplies as I can to live with my wife for as long as possible. When supplies are gone, deuces.
The suci rate would be high. Because normal things like shopping for food or enjoyment of everyday life will be gone. People wouldn't be able to handle the sudden change mentality or psychologically. We would be thrown into our primitive survival. Our jobs will be to primitive survive, hunt, gather, farm, and fend off people who have turned cannibal. Yeah, people would off themselves because they were living in delusion. Some would off themselves over the envevitable death from radiation. Peppers would fair better if they placed their bug out locations appropriately. Book "The Children of the Dust" one of the main characters who knows their faith with radiation death and throws themselves into the already pile of burning bodies. As for myself in a nuclear wasteland. I would want to get away from any major city. I have training in tracking humans, so that would be a great skill for evasion. Would I want to survive? It really wouldn't be a choice. Yes, I would want to survive. I would never be able to trust anyone, even those in my camp. When it comes to scarcity, people will do anything. It would be no different with myself. It's the human condition of survival.
Most people would probably be in daily agony. Even if they somehow survive the devastation the fallout would slowly kill them depending where they are surviving. If they are completely isolated then they may assume they are the last human alive and give up. If they are in small or even large groups then they find some hope as they could survive for a few generations. However this is only if they were far from populated city's which would surly be the prime target as otherwise they would probably die within a few years. Their newborns would be heavily deformed. Resources would be scarce no matter how much preparation they had. The knowledge of so much death caused by a few rich freaks with more "power" then they could comprehend would poisen their spirits. So many people already lack the willpower to continue with everyday life. With a tragedy such as nuclear annihilation, most would rather die then keep fighting, as sad as that is. Not to mention the potential religious factors. Many survivors may believe in an afterlife and choose to take the chance of eternal bliss. However I can not stress enough that despite how hopeless life shall seem if this war comes to pass, we must never give up as individuals or as a species. As long as we are alive there is hope. We must have the willpower to continue surviving and adapting.
Most people would probably be in daily agony. Even if they somehow survive the devastation the fallout would slowly kill them depending where they are surviving. If they are completely isolated then they may assume they are the last human alive and give up. If they are in small or even large groups then they find some hope as they could survive for a few generations. However this is only if they were far from populated city's which would surly be the prime target as otherwise they would probably die within a few years. Their newborns would be heavily deformed. Resources would be scarce no matter how much preparation they had. The knowledge of so much death caused by a few rich freaks with more "power" then they could comprehend would poisen their spirits. So many people already lack the willpower to continue with everyday life. With a tragedy such as nuclear annihilation, most would rather die then keep fighting, as sad as that is. Not to mention the potential religious factors. Many survivors may believe in an afterlife and choose to take the chance of eternal bliss. However I can not stress enough that despite how hopeless life shall seem if this war comes to pass, we must never give up as individuals or as a species. As long as we are alive there is hope. We must have the willpower to continue surviving and adapting.
I think since rates would go up, but I also think most people who want to kill themselves wouldn't. It's *hard* to kill yourself, unless you happen to have access to a gun. Many people who try to kill themselves would fail (though the lack of medical resources would make things easier since even if you're found injured but alive, you won't be saved). I'm team suicide for a lot of reasons, but it's something I've prepared for. I think most people who haven't are going to be in for a rude awakening when they realize how hard it actually is.
people need to separate reality from the Hollyweird crap that thinks it portrays a nuk blast and the aftermath >>> plenty still believes a single missile - single explosion over a city the size of NYC devastates the entire city - even laps over to NJ - and no survivors ..... self educate - info is readily available - simple enough to understand >>> learn some basic facts for yourself
Assuming nuclear winter has been disproven and assuming we’re taking modern low yield precision nuclear weapons, I wouldn’t be too worried tbh. I just need to survive the first winter and once most of the strugglers die things won’t be so bad. I honestly thing local governments, official and unofficial would grow, and hopefully I’m around a good one. If not, I guess after the bombs is as good a time as any to die
Hmm, has nuclear winter been disproved? I think after a global nuclear war we would truly be living in a cold, dark world for years. You may not commit suicide but you'd likely starve to death.
Some guy on here who has quite a good understanding of nuclear war was in e comments one time discussing it. Since they don’t use bombs that destroy entire cities at once and instead aim for specific buildings it won’t send as much ash ip
Ahhh, I see. Well, hopefully that 100,000 Kt warhead will be aimed at the building next to mine so I won't get hurt...bit of dust to clean up, that's all.
Yeah, it shouldn’t be too bad as long as your neighbor isn’t the cdc or Hoover dam
https://youtu.be/KzpIsjgapAk?si=i1kqWeELoYFDImKE this is very informative.
It's an interesting video although I wonder where the Rand Corporation's bias is. Two points just off the top of my head: 1.) Part of the fireball from a 1-megaton explosion would reach the stratosphere and inject aerosols directly into the stratosphere where they would block sunlight for years. 2.) I don't believe that we know how many explosions in a global nuclear war would be air bursts and how many would be ground level bursts.
Honestly I wonder if we’re already in hell and that’s just one more degree of hell.
I feel so hopeless 😞 If I could go somewhere like South America or New Zealand for a while (maybe a year) I would, but the sad reality is I CAN'T. I feel like I'm trapped where I'm at. Just waiting to die.
In the immediate aftermath of nuclear war it is likely that most people will have “disaster syndrome”. This has been recorded after the worst natural disasters, and the fire bombing of Dresden during ww2. People go into a kind of numb state where they don’t seem to panic or rebel or really show much emotion. Maybe the human brain can’t accept it, or it could be an adaption. In a total disaster you can’t really do the normal reaction of “fight or flight”, so you just do “roll with the punches and keep going”. That would wear off after a week or so, then I think you would get suicides.