Which are the safest and most dangerous countries to be in if World War III starts?

[ウスラトンカチ]

[I throw ball at you]

Originalmente postado por Darkie:

Originalmente postado por The Ghost of Stephen King:

St. Helena
Tuvalu
Nauru
Paulu
Antigua and Bardua
Dominica
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Marshall Islands
Seychelles
Micronesia
Kiribati
Tonga
Samoa
Saint Lucia
Sao Tome and Principe
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Grenada

Those are some of the most dangerous countries in the world, if WW3 happens.
I reckon most of those would sink.

I doubt countries with nuclear capability would care enough to put a nuke on it

[AdahnGorion]

Originalmente postado por Vendicator Senpai:

Safest: probably one of the Island countries like Samoa

Most Dangerous: The US, China, and Russia

So you think Samoa is safe? it would be not just attacked, but my sink in the aftermath

[AdahnGorion]

Originalmente postado por The Ghost of Stephen King:

Originalmente postado por Darkie:

Those are some of the most dangerous countries in the world, if WW3 happens.
I reckon most of those would sink.

I doubt countries with nuclear capability would care enough to put a nuke on it

That is not why they would be dangerous.
They would still see action (due to naval fights) and be used. They might sink due to the aftermath of the events of WW3.

You also have to factor in your access to nutricient etc.

[Xero_Daxter]

New Zealand.

[I throw ball at you]

Originalmente postado por Darkie:

Originalmente postado por The Ghost of Stephen King:

I doubt countries with nuclear capability would care enough to put a nuke on it

That is not why they would be dangerous.
They would still see action (due to naval fights) and be used. They might sink due to the aftermath of the events of WW3.

You also have to factor in your access to nutricient etc.

Not all islands are going to get destroyed. The Naval thingy are kind of complicated but not "destroyed islands"

The people in the land can handle themselves unless the nuclear winter strikes them

[☎need4naiim☎]

Only God knows in what condition those rotten soviet nuclear warhead controllers are now.

The ones sent for London can detonate over Beijing. The one shot for Kiev may end up inside Kremlin.

You better pray once it starts. So that he MAY mercy you and your family.

[Edge_Master]

im just glad no one here has yet to find the real safest place in the event of global nuclear war and i know where it is but im not telling.

[AdahnGorion]

Originalmente postado por The Ghost of Stephen King:

Originalmente postado por Darkie:

That is not why they would be dangerous.
They would still see action (due to naval fights) and be used. They might sink due to the aftermath of the events of WW3.

You also have to factor in your access to nutricient etc.

Not all islands are going to get destroyed. The Naval thingy are kind of complicated but not "destroyed islands"

The people in the land can handle themselves unless the nuclear winter strikes them

My point is that they are not safe, just because they are small islands.
Again you have to take everything into account, their location, their access to food, population, etc etc.

[apathy]

Originalmente postado por ☎need4naiim☎:

Only God knows in what condition those rotten soviet nuclear warhead controllers are now.

Same as America's nuclear arsenal - its why Uncle Sam forbids the world to shut down nuclear "power" stations, and frowns upon India for having the brains to develop safer cleaner Thorium reactors, as these weapons all have a shelf life.

I imagine a lot of nukes would malfunction as well and fail to detonate, hence why both powers make so damn many, to ensure some of them will go off as intended, to ensure Mutually Assured Destruction is upheld.

[Xero_Daxter]

Question…. Why can’t we just blow up the nukes in mid-air before they even hit? United States has a more than capable Air Force.

[☎need4naiim☎]

Originalmente postado por apathy:

Originalmente postado por ☎need4naiim☎:

Only God knows in what condition those rotten soviet nuclear warhead controllers are now.

Same as America's nuclear arsenal - its why Uncle Sam forbids the world to shut down nuclear "power" stations, and frowns upon India for having the brains to develop safer cleaner Thorium reactors, as these weapons all have a shelf life.

I imagine a lot of nukes would malfunction as well and fail to detonate, hence why both powers make so damn many, to ensure some of them will go off as intended, to ensure Mutually Assured Destruction is upheld.

I mean, we saw Russian armory, weapons and tanks out there and they were in terrible shape. Everyone got shocked, including Volodymyr and Vladimir.

I didn't see same problem in US.

This doesn't lessen the danger though, because once you see a giant mushroom, it doesn't mean much where it came from, where its original destination, why it is detonated.

[Grim Reaper]

the most dangerous would be Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, Baltic States and Finland since that's where the fighting would take place (sorry Russia if you are having trouble with a secondary power you can't even think about taking on Europe and the US) , also China and Taiwan if they get involved.

the safest would be places nobody cares about so places in Africa and Central America.

[Grim Reaper]

Originalmente postado por the vampire of time and memory:

america is the safest because they're like the good guys!!! and unbeatable and the coolest and most epic country!!!!

Not even untrue lol, the US Navy has the 1st largest air force in the world, while the US air force has the 2nd largest air force in the world, I also believe the army has the 4th or 5th largest air force so beating the US is pretty much impossible since nobody has as many planes as them.

[Angel]

The Vatican and New Zealand are safe from places I've visited.

I won't say which are dangerous since I don't want to offend anyone here.

[kilésengati]

Everywhere but where I am.