History Repeats?

Back in the 50’s I can remember my soldier father teaching my mother how to duck and cover, tape up windows, and convert the cellar to a shelter. All because he was on 6 hour notice and couldn’t get time off to look after us. She went into instant denial.

Anyway, the cold war was hot, the enemy was Russia and communism.
Diplomacy ended that potential threat but it seems modern politics has restarted it.

Thus today, 60 years on, the enemy of peace is the US / US led NATO, and the object of their wrath is still Russia.
Cold War 2 (The sequel) seems to be approaching simmer heat.
It’s enough to worry me due to our location and the yeald of modern weapons.
Only this time there are no career diplomats to damp down the heat and defuse the situation, only foolish politicians.

So, the same discussion my father had with my mother was repeated to my (also a prepper) wife.
No fool, she gives us less than a 10% chance of surviving if nukes are deployed.
Know what?
I kinda agree with her with a high value target not 10 miles away from us.

60 years on. No one has learned a damn thing in that time have they?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in miscellaneous, prepping, survival and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to History Repeats?

  1. One thing few people, except (hopefully) those in charge of deploying them, get about nukes…

    It doesn’t matter if they even get close to hitting their targets. There is a finite limit to the number that can be exploded (anywhere on the planet) for the cockroaches and ants to be left large and in charge. If either the US or Russian launched a strike large enough to take out the other’s missile systems it’s all over. Period. Done. If either side even detonated 1/4 of their warheads in place (no launch, no interception) we all die.

    Between the damage to the protective layers of the atmosphere, the debris clouds and the resulting nuclear winter, the radiation, etc. we are ALL done.

    There are very few folks on the planet who would consider total annihilation as victory. For the most part they live in Islamabad, Tehran, and (maybe) Pyongyang and Ryadh…

    • I sort of agree but subscribe to the notion that it won’t be a winner that uses nukes, it’ll be a loser.

      Right now, today, with the erratic behaviour and changing of policy at the drop of the POTUS hat, with NATO still thinking thy can win a war against Russia, I’m adding both of them them to your list.

      With POTUS someone is pulling his strings, with NATO they still wear cavalry pants to work! Those old war horses need to be consigned to glass cases.

      • You could be right and Russia has been known to engage do a little “scorching of the earth” to stop invaders so they should be on the list of maybes as well. However, I don’t think either side has the military might for a victory complete enough to trigger such a response. The Russians might be able to take Europe if they were willing (and able) to unleash human waves of cannon fodder like they were able to do in WWII but a transatlantic invasion would be pretty tough to accomplish.

        I still think the main nuclear threat would be from the middle east or N. Korea. Any one of those crazies might be willing to take advantage of a Russian/American/NATO conflict to do something really stupid. Keep in mind it is possible (though unlikely) that India and Pakistan have enough nuclear firepower to end it for all of us should they start launching against each other. How likely is an escalation on that front? The Saudi’s hold the Pakistani leash…for now.

      • See, this is when it gets complicated.
        Now we include the Russians, Pakistan, and the Saudi’s.

        Personally I fear the Welsh. Crazy bunch they are. Comes with eating too much lava bread. 🙂

Comments are closed.