The War Game

[King Nuts]

Now would be an apposite time to mention this 1965 film, made by the BBC. It was one of their first drama-documentaries, and depicted a nuclear attack on the UK, when a small (one megaton) bomb exploded over Rochester in Kent.

The film was deemed too scary to broadcast at the time, and so it was shelved until, at least, I think, the early 80s. You can now watch it on YouTube and elsewhere.

For all those people egging on NATO from the comfort of their armchairs and laptops, I'd suggest a good look at this film. Even a 'minor' attack on the UK would entirely devastate the country, not just from the immediate blast and fallout, but from the mass panic that would ensue and the likely and immediate collapse ot the economy as well as law and order in general.

We are not, as a people, equipped to deal with this. We get anxious when the internet goes down or there are queues for petrol. Even if you escaped any direct attack by living in the mountains of Wales or Scotland, the collapse of civilised society as we know it is not something any of us want to contemplate.

[pewpewpew]

Apposite is a fun word. Must use this more often

[lostandfound]

There's a thread for politics.

[spiralnotebook]

The film was deemed too scary to broadcast at the time, and so it was shelved until, at least, I think, the early 80s. You can now watch it on YouTube and elsewhere

Thanks for that must download it later.

[Dickled]

I remember this.
A few years later there was a play called "Threads" set (I think) in Sheffield about a nuclear attack.
That was pretty terrifying as well.

[robsmith149]

I remember this.
A few years later there was a play called "Threads" set (I think) in Sheffield about a nuclear attack.
That was pretty terrifying as well.

Threads is much better,  there is a US film about this called "The day after" as well.

[King Nuts]

There's a thread for politics.

You think the possibility of us getting bombed back to the Stone Age is 'political'?

[Blackpool Rock]

You think the possibility of us getting bombed back to the Stone Age is 'political'?

You don't 

[Doc Holliday]

The film was deemed too scary to broadcast at the time, and so it was shelved until, at least, I think, the early 80s. You can now watch it on YouTube and elsewhere.

I'm not sure the actual documentary is available on YouTube unless you have a link?

It is available here External Link/Members Only and here External Link/Members Only

The award winning drama/doc is well worth a watch for nostalgic reasons alone. My father was in the Civil Defence Force (industrial division) and trained as a first-aider. I was somewhat fascinated (and proud) as a young lad when in the early sixties he took part in simulation exercises with mass casualties etc.

Of course it would have been a waste of time as the documentary portrays, although he remained a first-aider for the rest of his working life. The Civil Defence was disbanded in the late sixties, as by then the futility of it all was recognised. It is generally agreed now that should it happen you would hope you are killed in the blast zone. There was another thread recently about nuclear bomb shelters which were built and mostly now redundant. In fact this all added to the deterrent effect which has held ever since. Nobody in their right minds etc ...

I can see why it was controversial though. The content is very powerful and the scenes of firing squads and shooting the injured who could not be saved, would not really have been deemed acceptable in that era.

[badsin]

Unfortunately I believe the bombs have moved on considerably since the time this film was made. We might all be 'lucky' enough to die at first strike   

[Thephoenix]

I'm not sure the actual documentary is available on YouTube unless you have a link?

It is available here External Link/Members Only and here External Link/Members Only

The award winning drama/doc is well worth a watch for nostalgic reasons alone. My father was in the Civil Defence Force (industrial division) and trained as a first-aider. I was somewhat fascinated (and proud) as a young lad when in the early sixties he took part in simulation exercises with mass casualties etc.

Of course it would have been a waste of time as the documentary portrays, although he remained a first-aider for the rest of his working life. The Civil Defence was disbanded in the late sixties, as by then the futility of it all was recognised. It is generally agreed now that should it happen you would hope you are killed in the blast zone. There was another thread recently about nuclear bomb shelters which were built and mostly now redundant. In fact this all added to the deterrent effect which has held ever since. Nobody in their right minds etc ...

I can see why it was controversial though. The content is very powerful and the scenes of firing squads and shooting the injured who could not be saved, would not really have been deemed acceptable in that era.

In those days the fire service worked very closely with the civil defence and joint exercises were regularly held in search and rescue techniques of casualties in collapsed buildings, often using volunteer live casualties with casualty make up etc....(obviously no elf n safety then).

Firemen were trained in radiation and the use of personal dosimeters, survey meters and decontamination although it was all very basic.

A little known fact at the time was that on the warning of an attack, all fire appliances and crews stationed in urban areas, would have to mobilise and drive as far away from built up areas as possible, with a view to forming mobile columns and subsequently return to the effected areas at some stage....to do what wasn't very clear.
It was a case of trying to do something, but no-one was quite sure what.

Also the idea of driving off into the countryside, leaving families and not even being able to notify them didn't bear thinking about.

[Dickled]

Not sure where I read it, but some wag suggested the 2020's resemble a movie based on a Stephen King novel, directed by Quentin Tarantino.

[billybobsmith]

I'll just follow the advice given in an episode of The Young Ones.  Can't go wrong with Neil's shelter.

Seriously, at the very least, I would expect an EMP burst in the atmosphere rather than a strike on a city or anything military.  That's going to cause far more issues Europe wide than hitting a single target.
Then again, tit-for-tat after that and everything would probably end up being nuked anyway.

[maxQ]

Its still a few months away IMO, by the time Poland/NATO send troops into Western Ukraine, you need to be finishing your prepping

Plenty of time for a few more punts

[Simmo87]

I'm sure somewhere on the internet there is a leaked copy of the 1970's post nuclear war planning. I remember reading it and feeling quite sick. I think its called OP ABLE ARCHER, or something like that.

Basically the government planed for the core 20,000 civil servants/military/ to have enough food/supplies for 6 months, the 200,000 that is left of military and surviving local government for 3 months then is was on to rations of 1400kcals only if you could work and if not, its was tough fend for yourself.

After 28 days from the last Nuclear blast, 2 million survivors would start been fed from soup kitchens at 1400kcal a day only if you could work, the sick, old and children would have to starve or fend for themselves. The 28days timeline was to make sure those who would die of radiation sickness had died already so they were not wasting rations.

I would guess its not far from the same now, so when the bomb goes off Boris and his buddy's scramble to the new bunkers they have hidden away to feast on stockpiles of rations they have stashed away, while us plebs have to decide to die in the blast, or live a few days longer in the nuclear winter by killing and eating the pensioner from down the road!

On a positive note, at least there will nobody left to get upset about Gender pronouns on twitter!!   

[Watts.E.Dunn]

External Link/Members Only

There you go, you can have a game of what if we nuked wherever and see the results:!.

Select a city and then a weapon air burst or ground burst etc see how many will be dead or injured...

OK the way I see this is as follows.

Putin will know or i bloody well hope he does!, that if he starts a full on attack on the UK then no matter how quick and or clever his missles might be, we still have a few nulclear submarines with IIRC around some of the 200 odd warheads we have so he is one way or the other going to get a very bloody nose. Let alone what the Yamks may or may not do in support plus the French may join the fun either way round it is a full on attack then its just about game over for the northern hemisphere.

One of the many problems for those who are left and yes not all will die, is that there will be so much shit blown in the the atmosphere that we'll have the massive problem of the Nuclear Winter the Sunlight we need to grow crops which in turn feed animals we eat will be severly obstruced for quite a time so if were now injured or irradatied  then we'll more likely than not starve unless the southern hemisphere can feed the survivors?. Whitch i very much doubt they will be able to. At best we'll have a very much pre-medival existance. Worse part is what will we all do with out the telly or smartfones and the like;!.

Therefore I just hope which i suspect he is Putin is just showing off what he might do. Hopefully if hes mad or daft enough then those who actually fire and launch the missiles might see some sense as they and their famliles relative etc will cop it along with everyone else.

The biggest danger is what if he fires off a battlefield weapon?, just because its a Nuclear weapon they don't come in just one size they do have small enough ones that can  be fired by field artillery that then may provoke a response by NATO as the Ukraine won't have one to hit back with. Even If  NATO can give the Ukraine a few then that can escalate very quickly may be a matter of hours before and all out exchange takes place?.

Not good that!..

[King Nuts]

I'm sure somewhere on the internet there is a leaked copy of the 1970's post nuclear war planning. I remember reading it and feeling quite sick. I think its called OP ABLE ARCHER, or something like that.

Basically the government planed for the core 20,000 civil servants/military/ to have enough food/supplies for 6 months, the 200,000 that is left of military and surviving local government for 3 months then is was on to rations of 1400kcals only if you could work and if not, its was tough fend for yourself.

After 28 days from the last Nuclear blast, 2 million survivors would start been fed from soup kitchens at 1400kcal a day only if you could work, the sick, old and children would have to starve or fend for themselves. The 28days timeline was to make sure those who would die of radiation sickness had died already so they were not wasting rations.

I would guess its not far from the same now, so when the bomb goes off Boris and his buddy's scramble to the new bunkers they have hidden away to feast on stockpiles of rations they have stashed away, while us plebs have to decide to die in the blast, or live a few days longer in the nuclear winter by killing and eating the pensioner from down the road!

On a positive note, at least there will nobody left to get upset about Gender pronouns on twitter!!   

There was a time when certain elements of the US government believed that a nuclear exchange was not only survivable, but winnable. The notion was that the Soviet capability would've mostly been knocked out early, and that collateral damage would've been limited to Europe.

I daresay there are some boneheads in the US who still believe that.

But we've all seen the personal, human and economic damage the panic of Covid has caused. How any sane person can think a full-on nuclear exchange can somehow end up with a winner, is beyond me.

[Doc Holliday]

In those days the fire service worked very closely with the civil defence and joint exercises were regularly held in search and rescue techniques of casualties in collapsed buildings, often using volunteer live casualties with casualty make up etc....(obviously no elf n safety then).

Firemen were trained in radiation and the use of personal dosimeters, survey meters and decontamination although it was all very basic.

A little known fact at the time was that on the warning of an attack, all fire appliances and crews stationed in urban areas, would have to mobilise and drive as far away from built up areas as possible, with a view to forming mobile columns and subsequently return to the effected areas at some stage....to do what wasn't very clear.
It was a case of trying to do something, but no-one was quite sure what.

Also the idea of driving off into the countryside, leaving families and not even being able to notify them didn't bear thinking about.

It was bonkers looking back wasn't it, but as you say a case of trying to do something. Then there were the public information pamphlets External Link/Members Only

These continued right up until the final farce of 'Protect and Survive' in the seventies. External Link/Members Only

[PepeMAGA]

Threads is much better,  there is a US film about this called "The day after" as well.

Both great.
I think the smartest thing about threads is showing how it escalates into nuclear war. Its not the epic OTT all out attack most would expect, its creep from using a tactical nuke in the field.

[PepeMAGA]

On the beach, another good one.

[billybobsmith]

This is interesting on Youtube

External Link/Members Only

Spoof BBC news broadcast with nuclear escalation that has some similarities to what is happening, although we've seen Russian forces aren't quite as good as in this video.


External Link/Members Only

This is an another one in a similar vein, but might be better edited.

[Thephoenix]

It was bonkers looking back wasn't it, but as you say a case of trying to do something. Then there were the public information pamphlets External Link/Members Only

These continued right up until the final farce of 'Protect and Survive' in the seventies. External Link/Members Only

They were very worrying times, particularly coinciding with the Cuban missile crisis.
Probably one of the reasons I paid £10 and scarpered down under thinking it might be a safer option.

[WASA38]

External Link/Members Only

-from 2.01 min
Tom Lehrer , 1959

[MadMaxx1983]

I remember reading an article on an old report, were it said winning a nuclear exchange wasn't based on how many of your population survived the initial exchange compared to the other guy, but by being the first to reindustrialise. Basically the jist was you buried the heavy machinery/factories necessary to get the ball rolling, well out of the way so you weren't stuck banging rocks together.


Also threads terrified young me when I watched it since it was just things keep getting worse and general consensus is even though it was realistic, it was an optimistic take.

[smiths]

I remember this.
A few years later there was a play called "Threads" set (I think) in Sheffield about a nuclear attack.
That was pretty terrifying as well.

I rate Threads as the best and scariest about a nuclear attack. What the War Game had was a scary commentary if i recall which scared me with his voice.