Safest Countries to Hide Out if World War 3 Starts
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 22. 03. 2022
- If World War 3 breaks out, where will you go? Check out today's video that reveals the safest countries to wait out the next world war!
đ SUBSCRIBE TO THE INFOGRAPHICS SHOW âș czcams.com/users/theinfograp...
đ MY SOCIAL PAGES
TikTok âș / theinfographicsshow
Discord âș / discord
Facebook âș / theinfographicsshow
Twitter âș / theinfoshow
đ Find more interesting stuff on:
www.theinfographicsshow.com
đ SOURCES:pastebin.com/cmY33xUY
All videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise noted.
"Older men declare war. But it is youth that must fight and die." -Herbert Hoover
thats the same guy that gassed the WWI veterans for protesting against not getting any relief for their fighting
And presided over the Great Depression
@@impalehilch1450 do you think you could have done better?
@@crazyd4ve875 the Bonus Army protests yes. That was actually MacArthurs doing on killing a few of them. Patton was also involved. This is hardly if ever mentioned. Thank you.
@@impalehilch1450 then the socialist FDR turns around and unlawfully steals everyone's (not 100% everyone) gold. Personally i consider FDR much worse with his New Deal and such. Honestly the Great Depression was Woodrow Wilson's doing since the Federal Reserve manipulated the market and caused the crash to begin with. Not much different than what they're doing these days with printing trillions of debt which causes high inflation and buying up major assets.
The funny thing is;
As citizens, (of any country) all of us have absolutely no problem with each other, for the most part.
The governments and elected officials on the other hand..........
true
Yeah
Governments should take their wars to Another planet not on earth.
Thats actually pretty accurate. Well said!
I think it is so naive to put it like this
To everyone reading this, I sincerely pray for that whatever is causing you pain or stress will pass. May your negative thoughts, excessive worries and doubts disappear, replaced by clarity and understanding. May your life be filled with peace, tranquility and love
The safest thing is not where you can hide. But to stop it happening!
Fine.. go ahead and stop it while I go hiding.. Soldiers die, leaders survive. Coward is clever.
Agreed đ€
Agreeđđœ
Right on ! If motherâs had any say,there would be NO wars.We would never send our Sons and Daughters to fight. At least,most mothers. Some would be happy to see there kids become.martyrs! Not me, I want to hug them, not put flowers on their grave. Parents should not outlive their children. I know.
Yes đ
You guys overlooked the fact that Switzerland has enough nuclear bunkers for its entire country's population
Do they also have enough food and water for their entire population to survive a nuclear war?
@@wolfmobile3693 just eat other people
You'd have to worry about all the nuclear clouds above you and radiation from Europe being bombed. You don't have enough food in any bunker to make it 100+ years.
thats not true. propaganda. im swiss.
@@wolfmobile3693 also fake. i am swiss and know they made this up
âIt comforts me to think that in the darkest days of war. Absolutely nothing is happening in most parts of the world.â Bryden âThe Blackfishâ Tully
Hasn't World War 3 already started? I forgot the countries, but there are countries fighting
@@tacoMIW Russia and Ukraine and No ww3 hasn't started
@@tacoMIW if WW3 started major cities, such as London, Washington, New York, Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo, Cairo, Ottawa, and others, would be in flames.
@@lindsayaskew8628 not necessarily..not like that anyways lol..
Those places would certainly be targets. But they aren't just going to erupt into flames. They would first have to be attacked. And the attacks would also have to be successful too. Some of those attacks may fail, with the targeted city successfully defending itself, and then retaliating with its own counterattack. While im sure that a conflict of that magnitude will bring about death and destruction on a truly unimaginable scale..theres no guarantee that WW3 will bring about the destruction of all major cities, and theres no guarantee that WW3 would bring about a nuclear Armageddon either.
@@mattjack3983 no obviously wars make citys instantly explode
You could mention also Nepal, Bouthan, Argentina, Uruguay, Samoa, Tahiti, Christmas Island, Seychelles, Mauricius, RĂ©union, Madagascar... Plenty of safe places.
Being a Nepalese citizen I do agree
The big omission here is that you have totally ignored is the disruption to the financial system. You might escape to a Pacific island but you would likely end up as a penniless refugee.
Silly optimism. If a third world war broke out, it would likely escalate so fast that none of these locations or travel to them would even be remotely possible.
Right theyâd most likely issue a no fly zone or people leaving the country before it even happened
@don't be silly Yeah true but donât you think the fall out,radiation and effects on the planet would be so extreme that you would inevitably be effected
I don't think anything will be safe after the world gets nuked! It definitely would affect you because the oceans will be radiated. No sun be ause of fall out. We will be gone.
That is why you go before it starts đ
Speak for yourself. Glad I have my own plane.
My only concern about living on a remote tropical island is that it's so remote that if something bad were to happen there it would be hard to escape the area in time.
yeh...keep the recent massive volcanic explosive eruption amd tsunami in tonga recently.
and dont forget New Zealand is well overdue for its every 300 year magnitude 9 or greater earthquake.
There's no where to go-radiation kills everything
Hard to get supplies as well
...plus how sure is one would be to have enough food wharever???
Would make no difference where you were, a NUCLEAR WINTER would affect the WHOLE planet
Radiation from nuclear weapons would spread throughout the planet by the currents destroying crops everywhere, and so millions would die of starvation even if they survived the nuclear destruction. Very few places is really safe unfortunately
Yeah. People forget a book written years ago, ironically called On The Beach.
Where it is true that we have already detonated enough nuclear weapons in tests over the years to have literally already had WWIII, they were not all exploded in mass, which would set up a situation, to say the least, that makes nowhere safe.
Then thereâs the whole NBC thing.
No. Nowhere safe. Donât kid yourself. piña Coladas... LOL!
Nah not really. It only lasts for about 3 months before half life makes radiation ok due to the new nukes are different than old nukes. The nuclear winter would be brutal
You might have forgotten that US actually have an Airbase in northern Greenland, Thule airbase, which plays a rather important part of your missile shield, so Greenland is actually a high priority target, together with Iceland, for strategic reasons. And US also have Keflavik AFB on Iceland
That's an unfortunate name for an air base.
@@luciparadise6781 Thule or KeflavĂk? And why is it unfortunate?
Cos its 1313 usa base across the globe.
Itâs a well known fact here in New Zealand that plenty of wealthy and powerful people from around the world have dooms day bunkers here in the mountains. People like to make fun of prepers until billionaires start preparing.
Jokes on them I already live in New Zealand
When it comes to billionaires, men greatly outnumber women. I think they have other plans for the sheep than the ones mentioned in the video.
@@KaiserZERO Ive got my young set up ready to go in the otago area. It wasnt for doomsday just for outdoor fun but still works good.
@@KaiserZERO me too
Also itâs buitiful I also live there
I'm currently in thailand, I'll take my chances here. During WW2, Thailand managed to survive without ever been occupied by any country by playing both sides. As of today, Thailand is still friendly with both sides, such as US, EU, UK, Russia, China
Thatâs ally of U,s
@@camilomadrigal6762 They are more like neutral, they are also an ally of Russia and China. I don't think they have any enemy at all. Thailand is one of very few countries can enter Russia visa-free. Thailand also buys weapons from and does military exercises with both US and China.
Keep rolling the dice and eventually you'll roll snake eyes.
I'm half Thai...I'll be applying for my citizenship and move there if WW III breaks out.
In WWII, Thailand was invaded by Japan, but the Thai prime minister told the military to stop fighting and the two countries forged an alliance, thus making Thailand a member of the Axis powers
I agree with most of your list. I do see all the islands on your list being good pit stops for military migrations and stations. This happened in WWII as well in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. The same goes for the tip of Chile and South Africa. The Panama Canal would not be accessible to all parties in a WWII scenario. So, many ships and carriers will have to go around continents (ie, around South Africa and the tip of Chile). Those parties will want to stake a claim on those ship routes.
They may not have direct battles on their lands (maybe) but they would have allies that will "ask" to port and land on their shores for military stations and etc. Anyways, it's interesting to think about.
Puerto Rico haves a bunch of smaller islands all around like desecheo , Mona , monito, caja de muerto vieques and culebra those are a great hiding spot đđŸ trust me I grew up there
@@lulumolina755 I would agree that smaller islands sprinkled around the globe would be ideal.
Agreed, moreover the presenter does not even consider the question of whether China would also be in WW3. Therefore Fiji and New Zealand are not good locations. The US military used Fiji as a base of operations after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour and New Zealand was heavily involved in both World Wars.
@@lulumolina755 Do they like gringos?
Hello beautiful
Forgot Tasmania, the most southern separate island state of Australia, it has the cleanest air in the world. Has a small agricultural industry for food, some of the cleanest water in the world coming from world heritage area, has hydro power, also much high ground, no volcanoes (not on the pacific ring of fire), some great wine and beer, the isolated island is accessible very some of the roughest seas and by air.
As a Tasmanian I agree, we are in the middle of nowhere, who would want to invade all the way down here or nuke an island mostly populated by animals. But hey, the weather and environment is pretty nice.
Yeah and one of the worst to be in a plandemic
The safest place is actually space, and plus you can enjoy the "view" from up there
without supplies from Earth you'll die a slow death... or quickly if you run out of CO2 scrubbers
Hmmm. Until it's time for you to comes back down before the war is actually over.
Unless an EMP is set off
@@nacho71ar or from a panick attack when you realize no one is coming for you it will increase your stress levels making your heart beat faster which might trigger cardiac arrest but it's not guaranteed.
If all that fails I guess we taking the long way "starvation " depending on the type of person you are the effects will vary because some people can go on for 4 days without feeling the effects of hunger some it's takes hours but it's unfortunate for both parties floating helplessly as your body is slowly consuming its self from the inside.
No way.
Not only would you run out of supplies but several world powers have demonstrated capabilities to shoot down satellites.
We should all hope that the tension in the world doesn't reach the point of war, but if it does, I'll be thanking the infographics show when I'm booking a one way ticket to Iceland.
Hate to be a bearer of bad news, but iceland is actually a NATO member, a MINOR detail they forgot to mention, meaning they are kinda skrewed.
Well it's actually Greenland not Iceland that's the barren, barely even inhabited tundra of ice that I'm guessing you'd want to get to in order to try n avoid a major war...but if that's not the case, then why Iceland? Is that where u have family or where you're from? Or did u just watch that other Infographics show Ep. where they said Iceland would be safe during a WW because it's pretty self sufficient?
or to Fiji đ«đŻ
Better plan on sailing a boat
You're making the VERY HUGE assumption that international travel would even be possible in a world war.
Well thanks, thatâs cheered me right up đ
As an Aussie, theres been a rising heat between China and our country. I very much doubt that we'll be left alone since we are geographically close to Asia. For example even in WW2, we were bombed by Japan in Darwin and Sydney- which unfortunately is overlooked information when anyone brings up the wars. (I love japan though, we can't keep the hatred from the past like our grandparents)
Besides that my guess is if anything happened Australia would be a target as the Chinese gov has seen our soil as very profitable and desirable. I just hope that our Allies come to help us if we ever do get attacked- our big brother the US and our mother country England. Im glad we have strong ties, it makes all the difference in a war.
it would help if you had lots of firearms.....
â@@corerltNo it wouldn't. We need to keep our opinions to ourselves.
I think parts of Tasmania could be a safe place.
dont expect help from britain, like ww2 they would desert us to look after themselves .
@@corerltno. This is not Murica. Not guns.
You know... without telephony or the internet there is still a cheap and easy way to get information- short wave radio. For around $10-20 you can get a radio capable of receiving transmissions from thousands of miles away. They used to be very common, but now they are only owned by people in remote places...like Fiji.
I had a ham radio bout 20 years ago we used it to bug a certain cop who had a habit of mistreating people, we decided to hassle him on his radio.
@@HashknightGaming tell us more, please
@@ymmis03 3rd world is talking about a short wave radio receiver. hashknight is talking about a uhf vhf transceiver. He is also talking stupidity.
Fascinating are these what American truckers used to use cb Radios they'd Ltalk to ea h in on long journeys
@@lindsayives4915 yes the old CB radio breaker breaker, what's your handle
6:41 NZ definitely wouldnât stay out of ww3, weâd help our allies and the ANZACs would be an important force.
NZ doesn't have a Military, its protected by the Australians who are protected by the US
@@ggboysadams9591 Helen Clark scrapped our air force's combat wing 20 years ago.
Yeah sycophant Cindy seems to be champing at the bit to get us militarily involved with her NATO 'friends'. The Chinese navy will likely eventually pay us a short, sharp visit... Don't hold your breath for the cavalry to arrive, With Taiwan and the rest of the pacific at stake, they won't.
I had to laugh at "working at making themselves self sustainable for decades" bit, shutting down our refineries etc would suggest the complete opposite...
we might have some involvement but it would be very unpopular. We are more independent these days and not under the UKs thumb. If we got involved it would be for strategic reasons to maintain our ties with allies.
Also like to highlight they're part of Five Eyes and ANZUS. They'll be involved whether they like it or not.
I'll take new Zealand, they speak english, they're not too far from a bigger island (Australia) and it won't run out of basic necessities as fast as a tropical island.
I'll be surprised if it gets any radioactive fallout btw
Don't forget on a tropical island you can grow food so if new Zealand can't grow food but only import then you're in trouble.
@@Neema825 oh well i'll grow potatoes, that never went wrong did it ?
@@Neema825 North Island is a "fruit bowl"
Australia is a continent.
@@cheriewilson8191 Huh Oceania is a continent, Australia is a country đ
Most of the places you mentioned are net importers of food, food security could be a major concern and seafood alone is not a healthy diet. Preparing and foraging skills would help but you wonât be alone gathering.
Iâm from Chile, we have so many Germans, Armenians, Jews, Palestinians Italians etcc, most of the countries in conflict in the past seems like many of the people there decided to move as far away from war as they could, my own grandpa from Armenia, he said I rather have earthquakes than genocide.
Mapuches
lol, yeah I miss the earthquakes
fascinating. thank you for sharing this insight
How is it now? Between israelis and palestinians?
â@@sheer-leetalijongbloed Not all israelis are okay with the war, because you're part of a country that is in war with another it doesnt make you evil or that you're with the war. I'm not justified them but it's something with commmon sense.
I like the casual honesty about a nuclear war and itâs consequences for the world at the end. If world war 3 is coming, i donât think Iâm going to be able to just enjoy life in a remote country. I wouldnât be mentally capable of it, I assume. But I respect those who would be able.
WW3 = Metro 2033
Or
WW3 = Fallout.
All I heard was, no internet. I'd rather be dead.
@@rickeon2397 bro
@@rickeon2397 that might not be bad bro, youâll discover new hobbies.
@@rickeon2397 Bro you sound like an *addict* đ§
These suggestions might work if WWIII was a limited, part nuke part conventional conflict. With a total war, we might well see the "On the Beach" scenario where even the safest countries are eventually destroyed by fallout.
Wow ... I remember that movie ... the little girl in the white dress at the end, if I remember right. It was sad.
Some good points there, However during world war II some seriously fierce fighting broke out in the Pacific Islands due to Naval Strategies and the control of bases to attack shipping lines. Also Iceland is the home to massive data centres for companies like Google which would make it a prime target in the event of a nuclear strike. Added to that are the possible North Atlantic skirmishes for shipping again as it's location puts it in the path of both North America Northern Europe and Russia.
And the Assure islands are also home to massive military bases, they also served as the main rally points for the battle between Argentina and the UK over the Falkland island due to their position and ability for them to refuel jets and bombers.
Well there would be rise
There would be a rise of the sea level.
All these islands have the risk of getting submerged
As a South African I can legit say Cape Town would be the worst place to hide, in general all the coastal cities in general, in land south africa provides more coverage and better resources. Rural South Africa in general, although it lack some of the basic infrastructure, it does provide an abundance of natural resources and people still thrive in such areas
If one is Black, as you are.
I would opt for Oraniađ or karoo dorpie. The more uncivilized the better
New Zealand is a really closed ally of the UK. It is possible for the country to be invaded.
Iceland and Greenland despite not being that valuable, they were all invaded during WW2.
New Zealand wasn't invaded during ww2
@@SPACEHARICE But it can be invaded. New Zealand even had a plan if it was invaded by Imperial Japan. It is not safe at all.
@@khangnguyenthaiduy9129
Usa has plans for zombie invasion
Plans are just incase
@@SPACEHARICE read again.....
Australia had the same plan as did British Mandate Palestine.
But NZ has a very small Defence Force. If I remember correctly NZ has no airforce but a Navy Air Wing. (correct me if I am wrong)
In Europe: Ireland first (isolated and not in Nato), then Portugal, Spain, Switzerland. I don't think Malta and Iceland are so safe. For the rest of the world it depends. You can go to New Zealand but if it is participating in the war, it may not be a good idea, while instead a country like India could be better if it stays neutral. So for non-Nato countries it all depends on the war scenarios. Probably South America is a good choice though.
Both Spain and Portugal are part of NATO. Forget it.
Wows wows wows amazing session yr'll thank you đ
It's ironic, my Mother was from Switzerland đšđ. I have been there twice since leaving
Europe. There are vaults in the mountains.
However, the radiation can spread world wide as in the late 1950's movie, On the
Beach, where it did spread to Australia đŠđș
I from Swiss too.
But it didnât spread to New Zealand!
@@creator4413 We hope.
It's actually the safest place that info graphics will travel that's why he did not mention it
@@F4re defence +1,000,000
Hey Infographics you guys have taught me a lot Iâve been watching for a while! love the content have a good day
This is hilarious! Thanks for bringing some levity to a frightening scenario.
Problem with Tuvalu: it's literally sinking. There are different projections as to if and when this could "finally" happen, but it's not unimaginable that before it's safe to go somewhere else, it will become impossible to live there.
Problem with Iceland: US airforce bases. Sometimes the island is even called a "unsinkable aircraft carrier". Malta, actually, as well, so I'd scratch that one off the list too.
Problem with Greenland: it's been confirmed officially that US has been allowed to build several underground military bases there, so I'd wager there are at lease few nukes aimed there.
Problem with Antarctica (and closeby): it's actually quite likely that some nations might want to grab some of that sweet unclaimed as of yet land. Normally there are treaties preventing that, but in times of war? While not as rich in resources as Arctic, there's still some oil and other stuff.
problem with all of those is that the sky would be blacked out for months to years. depending on the extent of the nuclear exchange. if it is full scale, the whole world will feel the effects.
@@anthonyvanbohemen Less so in the Southern Hemisphere.
@@elielfi4572 depends, if there is a full scale nuclear exchange, no part of this earth will be spared. if its less here, maybe? truth is no one really knows. and thats why no one has used them, lets keep it that way.
So where would be the best place to go if ww3 happens?
@@BobbyWindo2 nowhere
Thank you for posting such a awesome content about my country .it really means alot to us .......love you all â€
Love From fiji đ«đŻ â„
I am from Azores and the info shown on this video is very accurate! Thanks đ
You do realize that we have an American military base in Terceira as a strategic midway point between America and Europe. I'm in Pico and since the current conflict started we've been hearing lots of planes and helicopters on our airspace. Coincidence? I think not...
Sounds good thank you.
I live in Canada. In Québec city, the capital of Canada's easternmost province. Troops would probably come from the Atlantic ocean but I have family hundreds of kilometers north in small town that are of no interest for war. It's sad but I reached a point where I already have a plan if WWIII breaks out. Didnt think I'd live to see a world war but here we are.
Totally right about the entangled alliances scenario. That is exactly how WW1 started. WW1 caused WW2 by power vacuums. Now, the major powers have nukes.
Exactly now the only difference is that Germany/Japan have switched sides with Russia and China joined the red army. I would like to think they could come into an agreement on not using nukes but a country with it's back to the wall my resort to that. Even without nuke there would still be so much destruction.
@@dackbowland1876 I am in San Diego, and there are probably more military targets here than anywhere else on west coast. So, ill either get vaporized or die from radiation. If I get blasted with lethal radiation, I might just have to end my dog then myself if that happens. Radiation poisoning sounds like a horrible way to go.
No, WW2 was started because o the treaty of Versailles and the economic bullying of Germany.
@@paladinsmith7050 yeah, which helped create the power vacuum in Germany
@@paladinsmith7050 and that pesky way Germany invaded Poland
Agree for the most part, but I have really bad news about Iceland. Its a no-go as far as refuge. The airbase and resources at Keflavik would be hotly contested. Iceland is strategically placed in the GIUK gap and cold war era scenarios have shown the country's port and airfield to be vital to re-supply, convoy protection, and air umbrella. Its clear that Russia would resume its old role and so would NATO, meaning that Southern Iceland would see heavy fighting and air battle. I don't think either side would nuke it though.
Very true i was surprised
Well. This explains everything. I served in the US Army. A fellow soldier was originally from Russia, like barely understand him. His WHOLE Plan was to get a Medical VA disability discharge....and move to Fiji. He KNEW what was coming. That was in 2014.
In WW III his VA payments will stop.
Thank you
God bless you
Cape Town is a vital hub for naval shipping, especially when someone takes over Suez Canal. China has some influence over it but itâs definitely a strategic point.
... with civilization in South Africa dwindling by the day as they practice genocide on the remaining whites ... things do not look that great. The current thieving corrupt government in S.A. has destroyed a once thriving economy, all in the space of 30 odd years.
I really hope this isnât gonna turn into one of those âthis aged poorlyâ moments
Who would be alive to say it
@@fatmanjstyle5306 me
Sorry to say it, but I'm doing it. This is aging very poorly. Russia has been issuing daily promises of nuclear anilitation for the USA and Europe on their national news for quite some time.
It's odd though. I always expected people to be more concerned as the big one approached.
Meh... it's not like we can do anything to stop it from happening. Might as well stock up on popcorn, sit back, and watch the show.
Hopefully this will all blow over like all the previous scary situations have.
When you hide in south africa remember to bring candles for loadsheding (no electricity for upto 6 hours a day everyday)
Going to fight for a war we didn't chose must be the craziest thing ever!
Given the effects of nuclear winter and the pattern of radioactive fallout, the southern hemisphere at tropical latitudes would be ideal. Places that are already cold would become uninhabitable, and the winter effects would be more concentrated over the northern hemisphere than the southern
Yeah,but since the upper parts of the world sabotaged our lands so much why should we let people come here?
I'd say don't come to Brazil.
Nuclear winter is a myth a full blown Nuclear exchange would drop earth's temp by a couple degrees
What, and with the treatment they endure, they'll welcome the Western world? Doubt it.
No
Carl Sagan made the nuclear winter theory popular in the 80s cold War era, but there were plenty of people against this theory at the time. To my knowledge not much more research had gone into the subject since then.
I'm not denying the possibility of nuclear winter from dust forced into the atmosphere, but I am saying both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are both habitable and have not been dangerously radioactive since 2-3 weeks after they were bombed.
Note to the maker: the inevitable destruction of mainland locations makes previously unstrategic islands suddenly strategically valuable during WW3 just by virtue of their lack of strategic value.
The olligarchs want WW III in 2022....
Ww3 plot twist :')
The movie "On the Beach" is based on the premise that a nuclear war would spread toxics throughout the world. In the book, winds bring deadly radiation to Australia, a country not originally involved in the war.
WW3 Starts:
Switzerland : bout to wait this whole career
I hear a lot of very wealthy Americans are having luxury homes with onsite bunkers built in New Zealand. And the prime minister there has approved the building permits and land sales aggravating the residents in towns nearby who though the lands were a protected park area and now protected by armed security. But then again, the Prime Minister there is a graduate of Laus Schawb's Global One World government School.
When I was in the Air Force and was a Flight Engineer, we had to do operations in the simulator based out of Iceland I know we have some presence there plus it would be an excellent staging ground form control over the Atlantic. I hear a majority of their food is imported and food produced there is from the Ocean. I don't think Iceland would be totally out of any conflict.
In regards to Antarctica, that continent was never involved in WWI and WWII because penguins just don't give a f*ck.
đœđœđœ We have bases there, so we do care. đœđœđœđœ
Unless you're military, paid scientist, president and so on Antarctica is off limits for the regular public....
Thereâs also Samoa, Tahiti, Mauritius, La Reunion, Les MarquisesâŠ. because the Kiwis will want you to make sure youâre very rich before they allow you in. Immigrating to New Zealand is notoriously difficult - same as Canada and Australia.
But yeah, Figi is the place to be. People there are lovely.
Thanks for Mentioning Mauritius my Country â€ïž
If tahiti was safe, then dutch prediction of tropical paradise harvesting mangoes, was true
DUTCH
I can see why Dutch wanted to go to Tahiti..
*Fiji
The Kerguelens. French territory but remote, small research & military settlement. Subarctic but there's some food resources, fish, reindeer, local cabbage, rabbits, sheep, seals, penguins. But it's hard to get to, there'd be limited accomodations and you'd need to speak French.
NZ would probably be the best bet. (it's not in between locations that emit nuclear radiation) -> faster recovery
Should I be concered at the amount of videos this channel has done about Ww3 in less than a year
Cashing in on the hysteria I'd say
Yes
Nah they been doing this
You never know. Let one of those have an itching finger or become more unreasonable and.... well..... the rest is up to your imagination
Theyâve had vids like this for years dw
Still, good work TIS. Your content is helpful in many ways. Keep it up and let's hope a WW3 Event won't happen to soon
Let's hope and ensure that WW3 will not happen in our lifetime or ever.
Hopefully never
Putin is crazy for attacking a nuclear site. Iâm sure of it now. He may use nukes.
@@josegarza7719 See STAR TREK 2 THE WRATH OF KHAN if you want an idea of what a narcissistic power hungry tyrant will do when they are mostly defeated and have no other options. Just substitute nuclear missiles for the "Genesis Device".....
@@bladezx4880 I hope it happens
I want to witness a war and live to tell the tale
You must don't know how bad South Africa isđđ
Yea he said safe if ww3 breaks out. I'm thinking it's not safe now! wtf
As someone who lives in New Zealand, I see this as an absolute win.
You know, we all grew up in the shadow of the remote possibility of a third world war but no one ever really thought that would even come close to be true. Now, we are aboard of a crisis which day by day comes to be equivelant to the Cuban missiles crisis. Hope it doesnt end in the launch of the first of hundreds of nukes...
@@salahabdalla368 Rest of the army (98%) > Azov Batalion (2%)
Hundreds of nukes? The world, all of it, would go into nuclear winter
@@salahabdalla368 exactly & the weasel is trying every trick in the book to draw everyone into his problem/war.
It only takes 100 nukes to destroy Earth, but thereâs over 13000 ready to launch if necessary.
Nuclear fallout is why I would've crossed Greenland & Iceland off the list given how close they are to both NA & Europe, as well as the gulf/jet streams that would carry around fallout. Being one of them astronauts should nuclear war break out sounds especially terrifying as they would witness the end of civilisation and have nowhere to go back to. That would be a crazy end to life.
I thought about that as a concept for a sci-fi/ horror movie back when I was a teenager in the 1980's. I still feel that it could be a good antiwar movie.
Yep, and considering the strategic location for both NATO or Russian navies, Iceland could very well turn out to be a hot spot for invading armies. I'm really not sure if Iceland is such a good place to hideout.
We all living under the same atmosphere, you forget?
Even if you are very rich you can't escape your faith, nice.
No place in Europe or Asia will be safe
So US advisors saying the US would attack Russian assets if Russia used nukes in Ukraine is pure fukkery,have they really thought of the consequences of such action. Leaving Russia handicapped is asking for the end of the world as we know it. Would Russia give up if their Black sea Fleet is destroyed,that would leave vulnerable and open to any aggression without defense. Nukes solved would that situation.
Capetown,South Africa. Fiji, Tuvalu, New Zealand, iceland ,
South Africa is a part of BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Some other countries are lining up to join BRICS - a lot of countries in South America, Saudi Arabia and UAE as well.
Fun Fact: The chances of seeing an Albert Einstein quote is higher than the chance of WW3 starting.
Where'd you get this from lol
Not anymoreâŠcheck the doomsday clock. 100 seconds to midnight
We are closer to nuclear war than the Cuba middle crisis
@@youtubevideoswatching3866 the what? give link please
@@balala4641 commenting so i can get the noti too.. my paranoia wont allow me to pass it up.
Chile and South Africa makes the most sense to me.
Greenland? Iceland? Nah too close to the Frontlines and fallout
Chile and Argentina sound good. South Africa is just ridden with crime and it's not safe. Greenland and Iceland are out of the question for sure.
@@samme79 How about Uruguay or Paraguay?
@@samme79 well if you live in a suburban area it's safe I live here never had my life in danger before year there are a couple of house robberies
@@samme79 South Africa is safer than the USA for your info, no police brutality of any kind. Most countries are crime ridden, so please stop your lies. If it was not safe,why most eurocentric people visits it. It is one of the most visited African countries.
@@abigailnomsamndebele6351 safer?
-even the animals became thefts
-AIDS is rampant
-Apartheid still on
-corruption corruption
-racial problems
-Venezuela kind of Poverty
-etc...
I would rather die at home than going far away from friends and families and go to a country that i never i went before..
Any of the countries (Iceland, Greenland, etc) in the Northern Hemisphere would be bad options. South Africa would likely be involved in the conflict (due to its relations with Russia) and would not be a good option either. Fiji would be okay, but might become too resource constrained if cut off from the rest of the world. Location and resource-wise, New Zealand would be one of the better options unless they get involved in the war. Southern Chile would probably be good, but would be very cold, especially if there was a nuclear winter. The fallout from any nuclear exchange would more significantly impact the Northern Hemisphere, but the Southern Hemisphere would suffer some too.
As a South African, we are too useless to get involved and be of any use to be in a war, so I would just stay on my little spot on the planet.
If everyone used their nukes, then you're done. No where on earth would be safe.
That's wrong cuz most nuckes are unusable!
@@makisekurisu4674 Everyone gansta till the rules are gone
@@makisekurisu4674 So whats next, the earth is flat and the reptilians run the world?
OK LETS JUST NOT SEND THE NUKES, EASY SOLUTION
âAlthough exact figures are secret, the Federation of American Scientists estimates there are around 19,000 nuclear warheads, 95 per cent of which are Russian and American - the UK has around 200.
Their explosive power varies enormously: the strategic thermonuclear weapons of the superpowers pack a punch measured to be equivalent to several million tonnes of TNT (1 million tonnes of TNT is a megatonne), while warheads tested by India and Pakistan are around 100 times less powerful.
But assuming every warhead had a megatonne rating, the energy released by their simultaneous detonation wouldnât destroy the Earth. It would, however, make a crater around 10km across and 2km deep.â
It is kind of funny that even at the time of war, availability of alcohol is one of the prime considerations in deciding which place to go to.
how else are you gonna cope with just seeing the whole world getting destroyed?
@@duanejohnson599 drugs?
đđ€Ł Fuckin-A!
đ how do you think AA came to be. It was during the great depression post warđ
singapore is also a safe country to be in because singapore has many tanks and jets so if you live in singapore you are very safe unlike many countrys in aisa and norway,ice land,switzerland,fiji,singapore,more ->________,
yep
and TUVALU
I am so attentive that I even watch the whole video! So entertaining!!!
I'm so happy that my country NZ is finally appreciated by the media!
Hi Neighbour
Same
Is there a lot of crime in New Zealand?
Yeah until the people start hunting down the elites as NZ..
@@mysticpaths7751 most police round here don't carry firearms so I think that says something. but yea crime is still present
I absolutely love Fiji, but just to be a stickler on this particular topic, it reminded me of the 4 coups by the fijian military, and actually quite an active military for its size, so i cant imagine it wouldnt get involved in ww3. Vanuatu perhaps?
Even if Fiji military forces join ww3 it wouldn't change the fact it will still be safe...our people have been living in Fiji for thousands of years in self sustaining lifestyle. The military size is soo small it's insignificant.
Its not safe
For a tsuname of 50meters once
The
Pacific is hit
By a nuclear weapon
The average elevation of Fiji is over 2000ft. As long as you dont live on the beach youd be fine
Not western society, Chile mch way better
But the Pacific Islands are very strategically important so most likely you're going to get invaded so I would advise you to search for uninhabited Island
Somehow this video starts getting more and more significant as 2023 gets closer.
Living in a bunker built deep in the Andes Mountains in Chile would be the best chance of surviving a nuclear war especially if you have millions to spend on the Bunker and it will have everything you need to survive for years.
maybe but chile would just close its borders to foreigners
hint,hint đđ€«đ€
The problem with depending on the oceans for food during WW3 is that most of what we eat from the seas depends on plankton. Which won't be happy with radioactive fallout.
Could Fiji and the islands nearby still be effected by a nuclear fall-out because those clouds can travel at long distances indiscriminately?
Probably but the best bet is still the best bet, I guess.
I think northern Canada like the Yukon and Nunavut and also remote parts of Newfoundland would be safe. There are also islands like Pitcairn because of the remoteness.
"The world is getting to be such a dangerous place, a man is lucky to get out of it alive." - W. C. Fields
This sounds very good in theory. But (imo) the problem is that unless the 'big guys' fighting ww3 wipe each other out pretty quickly, as more main combat areas become uninhabitable/unliveable/unfightable they will gradually have to 'move' their war to other places. Eventually going to places that they would not originally need to.
Unstable variable
*ITS JUST A GAME THEORYY*
I think the one thing that we've learned from history is that the war would be fought on European, northern African, and Asian territories. Even now all of the fronts are in Eastern Europe. As long as the major powers avoid using nuclear weapons, most of the world will remain untouched. Unfortunately, the areas where the war would be fought are extremely populated.
@@jasonschwartz9481 do you think countries would refrain from using nuclear weapons?
I am quite sure if world war starts it will be started due to nuclear explosion and once started then why would other countries stop themselves from using nuclear weapons on each other...?
@@aparnarai3708 if they do start using anything more than tactical Nukes than it doesn't matter where you go...no where will be livable.
Iceland is a founding member of NATO and the US has Keflavik naval station there. Although Keflavik Airbase has been closed for years it would probably be reactivated very quickly in case of WW3. I don't think it would be a safe place at all since it could be used as a strategic staging area for NATO thus making at least the southern part of the nation a target for the other side.
The problem will comes with Svalbard Islands which are inhabited by Russians and Kola Peninsula which are the home of important nuclear weapons of Russia. Iceland could be perfectly tagget by those lands.
I love New Zealand. Been many times and would be happy to stay there forever
Agree with the part where it says no where is actually safe, dying instantly may not be a bad idea.. I rather get it over with it then slowly dying due to lack of food ,water ,air or having to endure seeing loved ones passing away before me or seeing their reactions if I pass away before them.
đ
I agree 100% w/ "Ace Liu." We have so much beauty in our world. Yet, mankind insists on destroying it. I don't believe anywhere will be safe. Especially w/ cyberspace that would be a key component. As it is noted in video. God is supreme over all. I choose Heaven w/Him. He will decide "when" & my destiny is determined by His rule. THAT'S the option for me. God Bless.
Iâm driving right into it while people trying to get away will be stuck in traffic
My kind will survive and re-populate the earth with liberals and live in peace once the commies and fascists are all eliminated.
You will be clever if you see their faces if you pass first đ€Łđ€Ł
So firstly get to one of these places outside of the war zone, then make sure you have access to a decent nuclear bunker or at worst an extensive cave system preferably with drinkable water like an underground spring, which might still need distillation to be safe. Do we know how long the radiation will last before itâs safe to go out? About a couple weeks to a month? So I guess make sure you got supplies for 2-3 months at least or even better stuff you can grow underground, some sorta hydroponics? For more long term.
If weâre talking about all our nuclear war, â1 or 2 monthsâ would be about as good as stepping outside and your skin melting off within the day. Weâre talking about decades, maybe longer. The end of human civilization. All in the power of a couple of evil men. 8 billion peopleâs lives, in the hands of >100 men. Think of that.
You'd have to stay underground for at least 5 years to be safe, maybe even longer. That's to make sure most of the nasty stuff carried by the air and in the atmosphere is gone and when the Earth would most likely start recovering from nuclear winter. The ground radiation and lack of resources would be the next problem to overcome. No one knows what permanent changes to the Earth might occur from an event like this.
@don't be silly hey, donât be silly⊠đ
Closest continent: *Australia*
Ah yes my favorite continent, Australia
It is a continent
@@Sayetov Australia is in the continent Oceania
@@lord_sinister7026 it is a subcontinent google it
It depends on where your taughr
@@lord_sinister7026 Oceania isnât a continent, itâs an area, a continent is a large land mass surrounded by a large body of water, Australia fits this definition while Oceania doesnât
There is a US base in Iceland this Would Not be a good place to ride out the war. It would more likely become a staging ground for equipment,personnel etcâŠ.
Can you do a video on how we're supposed to get to a country on these lists (esp if planes arent an option) and become a citizen or at least a legal worker such as fisherman or farm hand (assuming higher level skill jobs arent an option)?
A ship, along with a bunch of other people, all heavily armed.
I planned on Fleeing To Mexico then south
Another advantage of Chile⊠in the case of a nuclear winter, the Andes range should protect most cities from contaminated winds
It wouldn't, that wind would makes its way there and you would die. No place on earth above ground is safe if they decide to drop nukes. Only the Ă©lite billionaires will survive in underground bunkers. But they'd have to spend the rest of their lives living in a bunker and could never come back up to the surface do to everything being contaminated with radiation
Huge downside of Chile, they now have a socialist government. Have you seen socialist countries out there? Better fight in the war...
@@gilson_jr_ when the war start, this comment will age so bad
The only problem with that is that Chile is one of the most dangerous places to live right now due to high crime and unemployment.
@@albertosuarez2195 also earthquakes and tsunamis are normal things in chile wich makes it way less safe
Forgot Tasmania, its a great place to go down to. :)
That's what she said.
Iâm from an island, and a lot of food is imported. There are about a million people on Fiji and you would have no family or friends to turn to for local support. Thatâs a lot of months to feed when imported food drops to zero. You may want to rethink that strategy outsider.
Iâm just imagining someone living on an isolated Fiji island while a Nuke detonates in Australia and the guy who sees the mushroom cloud is just like âoh yeah thatâs all still happeningâ
Lol I'm just imagining it too. I'll be back in Australia if we don't move to Fiji where it will be safer. I'll probably be blown up by a bomb in Melbourne, because Australia is near China and North Korea.
Why would anyone Nuc Australia? It has no Nuc capacity, no real navy or air force to speak of, relatively speaking. It would most likely not be a target.
@@markhill9275 why did it get bombed in WW2? (Or WW1 Idk)
@@markhill9275 Australia has a very decent military, they are a close allies with the usa. usa have strategic bases in the north of Australia. Also Australia could quite possibly become a very powerful country if there was a war because of its location, there for a country world attack them as a strategic measure just to stop that from happening.
You can forget Iceland. The strategic location of that island means KeflavĂk Airport, which has military facilities, would be a first strike target if World War III goes nuclear.
Really?
@@tutsecret499 Really. Iceland's strategic location makes it ideal to based anti-submarine aircraft there to monitor the northern Atlantic. In fact, during World War II a lot of planes were based there to hunt for U-Boats prowling the North Atlantic.
Iceland is a NATO member therefore drawn into WW3 automatically by article 5, therefore a target too. I live in New Zealand and we are not NATO members, and has already been said we are too far away to make a military conquest viable during a time of direct combat in Europe and Asia
Yes, with temperatures dropped more than 10 degrees Celsius in northern hemisphere, Swiss as well as Iceland and will be feeling great in a new ice age.
that's usefull for right now or might later in the year
I have been to Fiji...it is a very crowded, crime-ridden small island with little agriculture, so I imagine they import most food. It is very hot and humid and you would have to do without air conditioning. You won't have many options there.
I'm from Fiji Islands . Not all places are crime infested as you mentioned . Leave aside tourist destinations like Nadi, Suva and outer Islands , there are other places in Fiji which is safe . We have enough agriculture around here to sustain us . The only ones we import are the ones which we cannot grow .
Pretty sure Fiji are sea food people too
Nobody would have any options anywhere, radiation kills everything and will travel the world with the weather.
Hearing u say this just makes me feel like youâve never been to Fiji đ
@@jordanazif64 It's been 10 years since I was there...flew from New Zealand to Suva to Taveuni with my son after my contract in Antarctica was done. Great snorkeling, kayaking and diving on Tavenui. Wouldn't want to spend time in Suva, though.
There are a few other things to consider like internal/smaller conflict that could make Africa or South America less attractive than less say New-Zealand.
Also given that the war would most likely wage in the northern hemisphere safe haven might not be as safe there if some yahoo decide to use "reasonnable" amount of nukes, you know not enough to put the whole world into a nuclear winter but enough to ruin thing in a more regional fashion.
With those consideration added the best places would be in the south pacific, like around Fiji or New-Zealand. Chile might be a viable alternative if they can manage to keep people from their less stables neighbors out.
Yes, New Zealand is much better! Let's keep Chile for us Chileans :)
Those wild Tigers in south africa man! *Sarcasm about the Graphic image slip up*
Iceland is too close to Europe and North America to be âsafeâ ⊠and also midway between Europe and North America which means it could be caught the crossfire and/or be used as a staging post for intercontinental invasions.