[quote mumwon]@Dottdoo 2 weeks ??? If they started a war there would be a hell of a lot more than 1 bomb which means much higher radiation - (think Chernobyl why do you think they still have an exclusion zone nb they also have one in Japan) radiation may have gone down but 2 weeks is really being optimistic (misguided) & a decrease in radiation doesn't mean its safe. Think months minimum[/quote]
But then which one of us is being the dramatic doomsdayer here?
Also remember that the number of deaths from Chernobyl was 31 (maybe 50 some squabbles over the number internationally).....afterwards that increased because of cancer rates but that was a nuclear power plant. Thousands of people were evacuated from Chernobyl and they were OK. Hundreds got cancer particularly thyroid but they still lived for 10-20yrs+
People survived hiroshima and nagasaki. Chernobyl was 400 times more powerful in terms of radiation than hiroshima because it wasn't a bomb. Hiroshima was far more immediately destructive. Two completely different nuclear incidents. Here we are talking about nuclear bombs specifically.
Survival can be achieved if you're outside the radius. People live in Hiroshima now but you can't in Chernobyl. It's different. So you can't use Chernobyl as an example as the effects and fall out for a nuclear bomb.
A nuclear bomb is devastating but it doesn't mean the entire country dies if people don't have a lead enforced bunker to live in for years. That's just not how radiation from a bomb would work.
Even a nuclear war doesn't necessarily mean that. It would be catastrophic but it doesn't mean end of world for everyone.
I'm not being optimistic - I'm just stating facts. Also you're quoting hiroshima as an example of why everyone in the UK would die suddenly makes no sense - did everyone in Japan die? No. Just those within the radius of the blast. Japan continues, life did not suddenly end throughout all of Japan. It was horrendous but two nuclear bombs didn't wipe Japan off the map, did it?
You're making an awful lot of assumptions that one nuclear bomb would mean all NATO countries would suddenly go on self destruct and start nuking everywhere. That makes no sense either.
So if someone wants to turn a basement into a second bedroom but also a potential place to hold up in a disaster more generally it's not that ridiculous.
It's more ridiculous to say one nuclear bomb is end of the world.
I think my view is more balanced and less doomsday.
If London got nuked and you're up in Manchester or Newcastle in a basement and you can ride it out for a good few weeks - you stand a decent chance of survival depending on the nature, scale and quantity of bombs.