Follow the sheeple or head for the hills?

[w00dsmoke]

To put a slightly different slant on things,
in the latter stages of the cold war, most of Europe was geared up to fighting or just surviving the worst case MAD scenario. I in my youth was totally anti war yet decided to join the ROC in order to assist the population by ensuring my own survival first by having at least in theory a place in a small concrete hole in the ground.

I've practised weekend long drills where the scenario was multiple groundburst and airbust attacks across the UK and as part of the UKWMO, it was my duty to survive and play a role no matter how small to help firstly the governement, military and lastly the civilian population by doing my job. The prospect of it actually happening for real was very real us. It was a terrible time to live through. But it taught me that in any major event that threatened the general population, then their needs were ultimately last and although on paper there were very minor plans in place to assist the population, the sad fact was that it was deemed unrealistic/expensive to have a civil defence force. Sure the Scottish Home and Health department on paper stockpiled respirators for some of the population near Stirling and they had various stockpiles from the EU market such as butter and corned beef in warehouses throughout the land. But in the end, the population were advised to stay at home. Why? To keep the roads clear for the military and to make it easier to govern a terrified population. NO OTHER REASON . YOUR WELFARE WAS NOT PARAMOUNT TO THE GOVERNMENT!

The only other assistance that the governement said it would provide would be the green goddesses to put out fires. Fire Stations were advised to relocate their vehicles and equipment to secret holding places (layby's in sheltered Glens), the police were to stay by the towns and maintain order aswell as to relocate to key bases and sensetive sites.
Nurses and doctors were to stay in their hospitals. The list goes on.
Today the situation is even worse, the government do not even have regional survivable command and control centres like the old disbanded RSG's that are now museums.

So at the end of the day in any event be it a terrorist attack, breakdown of somekind, whatever. I am preparing to protect my immediate family in whatever and reasonable way I can and to with what the government wants us to do for the reasons previously explored. I think for folk to do this then it's their right to do so and in no way can it be seen as some romantic survivalist fantasy. I hope the brutal realities of a breakdown never happens, it's my worst nightmare but until we have society that is as responsible to it's citizens like many European countries then I will carry on and prepare.[/FONT="Comic Sans MS"]

 

[Eric_Methven]

Follow the sheeple or head for the hills?

One question

What makes you think you'd be welcomed in the hills?

They may look empty but there not and the people who live there will fight for what they have.

If you wont help your neighbour way should they help you.

Nobody's talking about invading the hills, just finding somewhere safe for the family for a few days.

Eric

 

[Greg]

To put a slightly different slant on things,
in the latter stages of the cold war, most of Europe was geared up to fighting or just surviving the worst case MAD scenario. I in my youth was totally anti war yet decided to join the ROC in order to assist the population by ensuring my own survival first by having at least in theory a place in a small concrete hole in the ground.

I've practised weekend long drills where the scenario was multiple groundburst and airbust attacks across the UK and as part of the UKWMO, it was my duty to survive and play a role no matter how small to help firstly the governement, military and lastly the civilian population by doing my job. The prospect of it actually happening for real was very real us. It was a terrible time to live through. But it taught me that in any major event that threatened the general population, then their needs were ultimately last and although on paper there were very minor plans in place to assist the population, the sad fact was that it was deemed unrealistic/expensive to have a civil defence force. Sure the Scottish Home and Health department on paper stockpiled respirators for some of the population near Stirling and they had various stockpiles from the EU market such as butter and corned beef in warehouses throughout the land. But in the end, the population were advised to stay at home. Why? To keep the roads clear for the military and to make it easier to govern a terrified population. NO OTHER REASON . YOUR WELFARE WAS NOT PARAMOUNT TO THE GOVERNMENT!

The only other assistance that the governement said it would provide would be the green goddesses to put out fires. Fire Stations were advised to relocate their vehicles and equipment to secret holding places (layby's in sheltered Glens), the police were to stay by the towns and maintain order aswell as to relocate to key bases and sensetive sites.
Nurses and doctors were to stay in their hospitals. The list goes on.
Today the situation is even worse, the government do not even have regional survivable command and control centres like the old disbanded RSG's that are now museums.

So at the end of the day in any event be it a terrorist attack, breakdown of somekind, whatever. I am preparing to protect my immediate family in whatever and reasonable way I can and to with what the government wants us to do for the reasons previously explored. I think for folk to do this then it's their right to do so and in no way can it be seen as some romantic survivalist fantasy. I hope the brutal realities of a breakdown never happens, it's my worst nightmare but until we have society that is as responsible to it's citizens like many European countries then I will carry on and prepare.[/FONT="Comic Sans MS"]

I think at present (And this is only my opinion!) that the greatest threat at the moment is a terrorist attack on a major city with a dirty bomb, and although the government are seen to be carrying out various exercises I truly believe that if it happened there would be pandomodiem with mass panic amongst the populace which would seriously overwhelm any emergency services no matter how prepared they think they are. So finding and preparing somewhere safe to move to prior to something like this happening IMO would be a sound exercise.

 

[Tengu]

Highly unlikley....

....But of course it could be a purely imaginary attack, much cheaper and harder to defend against.

 

[wingstoo]

Highly unlikley....

....But of course it could be a purely imaginary attack, much cheaper and harder to defend against.

Hi Tengu,

Highly unlikely?

I know, it's the Sun...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007270789,00.html

man has pleaded guilty to conspiring to murder people in a series of bombings on British and US targets.
Dhiren Barot, of north London, planned to use a radioactive "dirty bomb" in one of a series of attacks in the UK, Woolwich Crown Court heard.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6044938.stm

Far fetched?

LS

 

[Eric_Methven]

It's only unlikely until someone tries it. Even an attempt at a dirty bomb will cause localised panic. The real thing, strategically placed in centres of high occupation will cause mass panic. I don't think 'if', but 'when'.

Eric

 

[mr dazzler]

Follow the sheeple or head for the hills?

One question

What makes you think you'd be welcomed in the hills?

They may look empty but there not and the people who live there will fight for what they have.

If you wont help your neighbour way should they help you.

That is a fair point. I mean if folks head off to the hills, are they still all going to get landowners permissions ? Will the folks who already live and work there take kindly to dribs and drabs of furtive people (or worse) roaming on their land taking fish and game, or forcibly taking it off anyone that does have anything useful, when they may well be attempting to do the same thing on there own land?? Isnt it realistic actually to assume that LOTS of people (not just bush crafters, they wont have a monopoly) will try to run to the hills, especially if a nuclear suitcase went off in the city and evryone wanted to get away from the aftermath. If anyone was still alive that is , especially if there was more than one went off or yet another was imminent so you have mass exoduses etc, and that all of a sudden there will be a surge of demand on natural resources (especially water reservoirs) and that the "wilderness" (I dont think there is such a thing in the UK) will get rather crowded? Or is it just the case that its evry man for themself, those resources are MINE if I get them first, ##### the rest? Hungry people do crazy things (I mean really hungry and desperate in a real dynamic panic flight or fight root hog or die situation) Or will the police/military impose military rule and shoot to kill anyone trying to leave or loot etc?

 

[w00dsmoke]

Justy out of curiosity

does anyone know about the strategic steam reserve that was denied for years? It was a massive reserve of steam locomotives kept in a huge ex plane factory underground near Bath. Apaprently only steam trains with no electronics to bugger up with the elctromagnetic pulse of a nuclear bomb could survive and be used to transport troops/goods across country if any lines remained. They were all cut up and smelted down in the 90's.

And does anyone know about the Computer Centre Corsham apparent new home of a government citadel underground called COBRA. Incidently COBRA is the new name of the government emergency planning committee...

 

[Tengu]

Please dont go into Box tunnel.....

 

[Brendan]

It's only unlikely until someone tries it. Even an attempt at a dirty bomb will cause localised panic. The real thing, strategically placed in centres of high occupation will cause mass panic. I don't think 'if', but 'when'.

Eric

I agree Eric and it wouldn't surprise me if we saw a dirty bomb attack in the USA within the next 3 months.
Has any one else noticed whenever there is a major attack the government is usually running exercises for just such an attack on the same day at the same time for the same location! True for 9/11 (NORAD) and 7/7 (Visor Consultants), go figure! It starts to ring alarm bells with me especially when you consider the previous false flag operations now admitted by the freedom of information act (Northwoods, Lavon, Ajax etc)

 

[Eric_Methven]

There are also supposed to be a large number of 'suitcase nukes' gone missing from Soviet locations. They are somewhere and someone has access to them. It's just a waiting game right now. I don't care if you all think I'm talking twaddle, it's possible it could happen (fact), there are some really nasty people out there who don't like us and want to kill us (fact). Put the two together when they think the time is right and BOOM.

Even if suitcase nukes are not available to terrorists, there's plenty of radioactive waste knocking about in hospitals. And we now know that certain doctors working in hospitals are sympathetic to certain extremist organisations. Yup, it's just a matter of time. (And yes, it's all doom and gloom, but I'm not letting it get me down, I just carry on as normal happy in the knowledge that what I know about stuff and having a preparedness mindset will stand me in better stead than Joe Average).

Eric

 

[Martyn]

Sheesh, here we go again.

 

[BlackPacker]

Follow the sheeple or head for the hills?

One question

What makes you think you'd be welcomed in the hills?

They may look empty but there not and the people who live there will fight for what they have.

If you wont help your neighbor why should they help you.

Angus, good call. As one of those hill dwellers, living at the road's end in a gated enclave amongst about 60 people, I will say that I have no say on who gets to my house. My closest friends and family all have maps here, along with various other important emergency info. On the sheet, I tell them to contact me as soon as they can, so I can notify my neighbors that they are on the way. That said, almost all of my neighbors are outlaws of one sort or another, and they do have gardens, guard dogs and guns.

On a different note, earlier I mentioned the fact that it seems everyone on the hill likes it when the roads get blocked. On Saturday night, my fiance phoned me from the main gate to tell the that a two foot wide oak was blocking the road out. Just as I hung up, my phone rang again. One of my neighbors had heard me drive by (my truck makes a very distinguishable noise) and was inviting me to a party. I told him about the tree, and before I could borrow a chainsaw from the neighbor on the otherside of the tree, seven guys showed up in 4x4s, ATVs and a dirt bike, with a chainsaw with a three foot bar. Twenty minutes later, and LOTS of beer, the road was clear and various neighbors were getting their own saws to cut the refuse into firewood. This morning all that remained was saw dust and drag marks.

Yeah, If there is an emergency, I'll be staying put.

 

[mr dazzler]

it's possible it could happen (fact), there are some really nasty people out there who don't like us and want to kill us (fact).

This is the unpalatable truth as far as terrorists are concerned. And there seems to be 2 extreme ways of responce to it.

Remain in denial with a BBC humanist type mindset:-its OUR fault these otherwise "innocent" people want to attack us with bombs &c, because of OUR leaders and their horrid foreign policy's, if only WE would leave them alone THEY would respect and love us and not want to attack us As if giving the school bully your pocket money will make him go away
Or adopt the supremacist survivalist trust no one mindset, #### every one else, its me me me.

 

[wingstoo]

I was sent this a while back and today is a good day to put it here, I try to avoid the subject on this site having been slapped down over it on previous occassions.

LS

SURVIVALISTS

He who fails to prepare for the night, fails to prepare for the dawn.

I am a survivalist and by nature a survivalist is an OPTIMIST. I do
not have one pessimistic bone in my body. If what I just said sounds
odd to you then you are not yet a survivalist and you do not understand the modern survivalist at all. It has been very difficult to
communicate to the public and the mass communications media, the concept of an optimistic, hopeful survivalist.
A fireman is a fireman, not because he believes everything will burn,
but because he believes much can be saved. Doctors don't believe in
death, they believe in life, and a survivalist is not a survivalist
because he believes everything must be destroyed and everyone must
die, he believes that life can be saved, if people of good
will are prepared. A fireman does not start fires, a doctor does not make
disease and a survivalist does not make disaster. Crime, disease,
war, revolution, fire, flood, periodic financial collapse and famine are
the results of nature and the nature of man and unfortunately are not
within the power of anyone on this earth to prevent.
We all know that the sun will set each day, leaving us in darkness
and we all know that warm summers give way to cold winters and that we
can do nothing to keep the sun from setting or the cold winds from
coming, does this make us pessimistic? I think not! So then, why is the
survivalist called a pessimist when he makes ready to face events
that are just as much a part of history and nature as the sunset and the
changing of the seasons.

Another misconception is that survivalists
are predicting world disaster. On the contrary, we seem to be THE
OPTIMISTIC MINORITY that is predicting world survival. We are hard
pressed to find any well recommended historians, economists,
political scientists, sociologists or military strategists that can come up
with a scenario that gives even a fifty-fifty chance of avoiding a large
scale catastrophe, yet we survivalists dare to be OPTIMISTIC about the
future.
We survivalists do not need to predict the probability of disaster
anymore than we need to predict the sun setting.
Those who criticize survivalists, are like men who refuse to look at
a calendar, in the hope that through self-imposed ignorance they can
keep from aging another year. "You survivalists will be disappointed if
we don't have a world cataclysm." Here is another accusation that is
pure B.S. and I could not think of a milder phrase to describe it. We
survivalists have loved ones we don't want to see hurt or killed, we
have homes we don't want to see destroyed, we are not fools to think
that just because we are survivalists a world cataclysm would be fun
for us or that we would not experience danger, loss, hunger, injury,
cold oreven despair and death. We have spent time and money to improve our chances for survival and recovery from disaster, but we would have a great celebration if some day we could be assured that we had wasted our time. No, we will not be disappointed if there is no disaster to survive, anymore than the Red Cross is disappointed when there are no floods and storms or the man who buys an insurance policy is disappointed when his house faiIs to burn down. It may be said
that the survivalist would much prefer the pleasant (but unlikely)
surprise of being wrong to the (probable) deadly rude awakening that the
nonsurvivalist will face if he is wrong.

So, you see the survivalist can not lose because his survival
preparations will be of value regardless of what the future has in
store. In time of crisis, those who have not prepared to turn to
each other, will turn on each other.
It is most regrettable indeed, that many people consider
survivalists as a threat and regard them with suspicion and even hostility. This attitude is logically indefensible and is rooted in the
nonsurvivalists own sense of fear and guilt. Subconsciously, the nonsurvivalist may hate the survivalist for reminding him of how fragile his lifestyle is.
Now, let's get the facts turned around right. THE MOST DANGEROUS
PEOPLE IN SOCIETY TODAY ARE THE NONSURVIVALISTS. Every person who has not made provisions for surviving without food, water, fuel and other essential needs from the outside, is a mortal danger to his neighbors. What will a man do when he and his family are freezing, hungry, thirsty, sick and starving? He may ask or beg his neighbors for help, but when they have no extra fuel, food, water or medicine to give, will he just go back home to die with his wife and kids? What do you think? We survivalists who stock up on food and other supplies, now do a favor to society because what we now buy is replaced on the shelves, so there will be that much more available in an emergency. We survivalists
won't be looting and killing for food. We won't be a burden on the medical
facilities or a danger to the police. Since we will be able to turn
to each other, we will not need to turn on anyone and we may be able to
help at least some. Survival preparation should be regarded as a social obligation, one that every individual owes to his family and community and his nation. The nonsurvivalist is simply a poor and irresponsible citizen.
So the reality is, that survivalists are optimistic, self-reliant
individuals, who cannot help but see the imperative of preparing for
the worst possible events, while hoping sincerely, that they won't
happen.
Today's survivalist is an asset, to his community and to the world
and should be proud to be called SURVIVALIST.

 

[Greg]

Another possibility is a petrol tanker wagon with its temperature and pressure relief valves closed, if one of these is left out in the hot sun for just a few hours you can create what is known as a BLEVE - Boiling Liquid Evaporating Vapour Explosion which has an overpressure that is powerful enough to flattern (to use an american expression) several city blocks with just one vehicle so imagine if two or three were situated somewhere populated. It would also be like letting loose with the biggest flame thrower you could imagine.
Don't forget the most powerful non-nuclear weapon in the american arsenal is an air burst petrol bomb. SCARY!
Now this is where we are probably quite lucky in this country, although we do have some scorchingly hot days they are few and far between but for our cousins over the water in the southern states where it can get very hot it could be a viable weapon to be used by the terrorist.
But like Eric says we just have to accept that these threats are viable and have the confidence to know that we are in some way mentally and physically prepared to deal with the outcome of one or more of these threats.

 

[Sleepy Weasel]

Hi Guys
My first instinct would be to grab the boy, the bergen and the missus, in that order, throw them all in the Landy and bugger off to some high ground and settle in.

Then the calm and responsible side of me has a think and I would first tell the authorities my plan, assure them that I, and my family would be perfectly safe and will continue to check in at regular intervals. The I would grab the boy, bergen and missus and load the Landy, bugger off to some high ground and settle in.

Then the Mountain Rescue side of me has another think and goes, Right, load the missus and the boy on to the bus so at least I know they'll be safe, then report in to the team to see if I we'reneeded to help out anywhere.

Some friends of mine have what they call a zombie scenario, which they use to rate people they meet, would they be zombie fodder or zombie fighter? I think they might be taking it too seriously!

Sheeple, good word, must start using it more often.

 

[Womble]

Sheesh, here we go again.

Apologies to everyone else here, but I'm agreeing with Martyn.

 

[Tengu]

I still dont believe this nonsense about terrorists.

I have freinds who travel regularly in the Middle East, they say that things are so fragmented there there is not the organisation for anything serious.

All that may happen is a lucky attack. (as we have seen.)

If you had a suitcase nuke, you would save it for something interesting.

I had another friend who died many years ago. he died eventually from injuries sustained by failed bomb disposal.

He did a lot of this work...no publicity though the threat was very real. but the IRA were organised and getting a lot of support from outside.

(not all of the devices were very sophisticated though)

I think he must be laughing now.

(he took preparedness seriously though, and I remember what he said to me)

 

[Eric_Methven]

It's an emotive topic, and it's gone completely off track, but I'm not surprised it's started up again. I suspect it will continue to until one of the mods locks it down (hint, hint).

Martyn, if it bothers you that much why even click on the link? You obviously think we're nutters talking about such stuff. (Thinks: pot, kettle, black, there are probably more people in 'normal' society who'd think someone who dedicated themselves to collecting knives, and has even built a website where they are drooled and fawned over is the nutter) There's a reason I don't post over on BB. To me a knife is just a simple tool, there to do a job - end of! I don't glorify them, worship or praise them. I don't come onto BB and deride them and the people who choose to post there. Each to his own, different strokes and all that.

Eric