A lot would depend on if only 4 to 6 population centers were targeted in Russia and US, or if massive strikes took place everywhere. I would like to know what level of bombing was calculated for the 13 degree temperature drop. With such a severe temperature drop much of Russia and Canada might become unsurvivably cold. The levels of food consumption to survive severe cold are far higher than those needed for “normal” living, typically set at 2,000 calories.
I just read about the failure of the Scott expedition in 1912 to return from the South Pole. It was calculated the 4 men would need 4,500 calories a day. In fact the need was at least 7,000 calories a day and they added one more person at the last minute. They literally starved and failed to make the last 11 miles to a food cache on the way back.
We cannot forget that large numbers of people would be sick and dying from radiation. Again the severity depending on how widespread was the bombing. Early survival would depend on being able to stay underground with a food and water supply for a while, while protecting resources. Fifty years ago my father’s brother was proudly showing off his brand new bomb shelter in Pennsylvania. My husband asked, “Let me see your weapons?” He fought in Korea. My uncle responded, “We don’t have any.” My husband then said, “Well how the heck do you expect to keep your food?” Dumb looks from that family.
My own survival strategy includes already having a 3 month supply of food, 2 firearms and ammunition. and a place in West Virginia with only a few neighbors. The vacant property next door has a root cellar dug into a hillside. Instant fall out shelter, enlarge it for winter living. In autumn gather many white oak acorns. I’m planting Ginco trees, from seeds at city property. They are edible. Plan to plant more nut trees and persimmons if we don’t go intercontinental nuclear over Ukraine. I would bring my extensive vitamin and mineral collection and trade medical knowledge and supplements for food. Tactical nuclear is the more likely nuclear option, if any?
Tactical nuclear is the more likely nuclear option, if any?
—
Back when, all tactical nuclear strikes lead to full strategic strikes eventually
My original comment was based on a continent-wide firestorm which was the 1970 Soviet plan of attack. Some challenged that wanting links which obviously do not exist.
Others claimed its impossible to make a firestorm where there are no buildings, forests an so on. I think they do not realize how a gigantic firestorm would work when burning at thousands of degrees across a broad area where oxygen becomes the primary fuel.
If any of that would happen, having supplies would do no good. You and they would be consumed above ground and asphyxiated below ground.
East of the Mississippi would be the very worst place to shelter, as it would be sure to be the hardest hit. All those WVA trees are fuel.