So errrr what is the UK doing right now to enable its citizens to prepare for an attack from Russia?

[EvangelicalAboutButteredToast]

Are we just going for the head in the sand approach or are we going to get a pamphlet or something?

@JohnnysMama - where is the evidence regarding China being on Putin’s side. I doubt it, more like middleman, like India. These growing economies aren’t interested in getting into Putins little fights.

Why would China want to wipe out one of its hugely important markets? Who’s going to buy all the Temu shite while they’re stumbling around in clouds of radioactive dust?

I can't remember where I read this recently but China will not be part of a war in Europe/America. They might well help stir one up, but then they will sit back and wait to be the only power still standing.

Probably hoping the US will make up the shortfall

Good luck with that come January ...

Pamphlets have no other purpose other than as a way to garner political support, usually for a countries right-wing parties.
They're propaganda to say 'look at us, aren't we good at keeping you safe.'
In reality, the world is being run by war-mongering male psychopaths, and if any of them decide to hit the nuclear button, we're all screwed.

Russia is unlikely to nuke any Western power. The ones to worry about are the trigger happy nut jobs who run Iran. And they won't target London, but Tel Aviv. Then we have all had it, I'm afraid - and the US evangelical nut jobs will be cheering it all on, brandishing Revelations.

“China is willing to work with Russia to make new contributions to the maintenance of world and regional security and stability,” Li said, according to the [CCTV] report.

He said ties between Russia and China “surpass the military-political alliances of the cold war era”, in translated remarks broadcast on Russian TV.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/17/chinas-defence-minister-and-putin-vow-to-strengthen-military-cooperation

I don't think any advice will get you through a nuclear winter, no sun, no crops, no heat, no electricity, no communications. Or waiting a hundred years for land to be suitable for edible crops again. Radioactive fall out would cover every inch of the world if there was a significant nuclear war, Russia and the US have hundreds of nuclear warheads each, it would be nothing like the local affects of the very few nuclear events so far.

How long do you think you could survive in the Russian mobile bunkers? A week a month, a year? Nothing like long enough, you would be talking about staying in a bunker for generations before it was safe to come out.

Conventional war would be much like the last one with bigger bombs, sheer luck needed to not be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Have enough food and water for a few days or longer and then it will be day to day depending where you are living. But someone would almost certainly get tempted to press that button.

This thread is making me think though, prepping for an infrastructure breakdown is probably very sensible.
Composting toilet anyone?

You might look up Neville Chamberlain and how well his policy of non-interventionism went...

That's the "Neville" that poster was talking about.

Those who don't read history are doomed to repeat it, and you clearly haven't read it because you didn't understand the reference to "Neville".

"The truth is different. If Putin's aim was to occupy the whole of Ukraine, he could have done so in no time. Remember, he has China, Iran, and North Korea on his side." No - he tried and he failed. Could he have succeeded? Probaby, pretty sure it would have worked if Zelenskyy had fled or been assasinated. Could he have tried harder? Also possible. But the result is that the suprise attack failed and that the russian army was not in a position to win it conventionally after that.

https://archive.org/details/ManualOfCivilDefenceVol1Pamphlet1NuclearWeapons
predecessor of Protect and Survive - which has had so much mockery that the gov would be daft to try again.
Mind you, I remember arguments with WVS about whether you should take down your nets because they would be a fire hazard, or keep them up because they would protect you from glass shards.

Seriously, the best preparation for emergencies seems to be to buy a decent power bank, given Putin's predeliction for targeting power supplies. Ukraine has found EcoFlow to be the best. Cheap ones may catch fire.

I propose the name for the group to be CLITORIS.

With a name like that, it might actually get something useful done because only the women would find the meeting room.

The problem is that many people don't understand the broader context of the situation. This isn't just about "Putin's little fights"; it's part of a much larger and more complex conflict. Our Western governments share responsibility in this as well. Conflicts never arise out of the blue, nor do they stem from a madman waking up one day and deciding to conquer the world. To view things in such simplistic terms is to miss the bigger picture.
For those who are genuinely interested and want to understand where it all began, I suggest looking back to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Following that, pay attention to Putin’s request to join NATO, which was refused. Then consider events like the Orange Revolution in 2004, the Maidan protests in 2014, and more. But when researching, don't rely on just one source like the BBC. Our governments have played a significant role in the unfolding of these events, and now they seem determined to drag us into a war that benefits only a few while causing harm to the many.

This. The dissolution of the Soviet Union yes, but you can also go hundreds of years before that even to see the role of the archetypal strongmen in Russia, as well as the roots of the historical fear of enemies at the border.

There’s a huge amount of history and complex geopolitics that has created the current situation.

We'll be dead before a politician can say "next slide please"

That's for sure

I seem to remember a rather humiliating traffic jam of tanks that got stuck in the middle of nowhere at the beginning of the war as he headed further west into Ukraine. Not exactly a blitzkrieg, was it!

This is scaremongering nonsense. Fallout is dangerous for 2-14 days. Then it's safe to be outside again.

Humanity have recently endured the equivalent of a 100 year long nuclear winter and we're all still here. (The explosion of Krakatoa)

Same. I have wasted so much energy fretting about the danger of nuclear war, starting back in the day. Now I am so much older I have realised there is no point in worrying, what will happen will happen regardless of whether I worry. Take each day as it comes and enjoy it.

Well that’s handy to know. But which is it? 2 days or 2 weeks, there’s a bit of a difference.

Depends on lots of variables such as the weather, upper atmospheric conditons, proximity, size of bomb etc. You're supposed to stay sheltered until you're told it's safe or 14 days if you don't hear anything.

It goes back even further. I suspect that the Ukrainians would be less concerned about becoming a Russian puppet state if they hadn't endured the Holomodor.

I wouldn't waste time thinking about it, given that it's not going to happen.