What’s the best spot to survive WWIII?
I found myself scrolling through Reddit to start this wonderful Friday morning in America.
What better way to get the day going with a mug of straight black cold brew coffee and the craziest people on the internet all coming together?
Well, I can promise you it was time well-spent after stumbling across an awesome thread.
Reddit users debate best spots to ride out WWIII.
I found a thread titled, “If World War 3 broke out, which three countries would be the safest to live in?”
No hesitation.
Immediate click.
Check out some of the answers below, and then, as always, we’ll unpack it:
- There was a guy in 1980 that thought WW3 was coming so moved to the safest place he could find: the Falkland Islands, which became a war zone in 1982.
- New Zealand and Hawaii have the highest number of bunkers from the rich elite/billionaires. That’s their escape plan if the world falls into war.
- This was studied New Zealand, Tasmania and some parts of South America where modelling to be least affected by a nuclear winter and unlikely to suffer direct hits in a nuclear barrage.
- New Zealand, definitely. Not sure which other two.
- Germany! Three times in a row is highly unlikely.
- Switzerland will just lock the doors, hoard every can of beans, and pretend neutrality means ‘not sharing.’ lol.
- I never seen anyone touch Madagascar in any movie, not even in the movies like 2012
- Switzerland, idk the rest
- New Zealand but it would be overrun by refugees and the place would turn into a survivalist wasteland with everyone fighting for any little thing. Think I’d rather go down with the rest of the world.
- Rural Sweden and the caves in Norway, at least thats what they told us in the German Army back in my day for a worst-case scenario.
- Australia, New Zealand and Iceland
- Uruguay, Chile and Argentina.
- Probably Canada as long as you’re not within 50 miles of the US border. Like, no one is dropping bombs on Whitehorse.
- The northern/central part of Canada
- The US… Because of our geographic isolation and military/naval dominance, the US basically doesn’t have to worry about anything but nukes. Add in Canada for the same reasons as the US (even if orange man actually tried to annex canada, there probably wouldn’t be much of a widespread shooting conflict), and Australia ft. New Zealand for similar reasons.
- Finland has a massive bunker system designed to shelter large portions of the population in the event of a nuclear war. A lot have been converted into public use facilities, but they’re still there.
FINLAND’S PARLIAMENT VOTES TO LIFT DECADES-OLD BAN ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN HISTORIC NATO DEFENSE SHIFT
- New Zealand for sure.
- Australia or New Zealand
- New Zealand and any two countries in South America
- Wouldn’t it be Switzerland? Asking for a friend
WOULD THIS SURVIVAL POD MAKE YOU FEEL SAFER?
Lots of interesting answers and one very common theme:
New Zealand as a top choice.
While it’s impossible to accurately map what might happen in the event of WWIII kicking off (I’d expect the worst), the problem with New Zealand is how is anyone going to get there?
It’s not like airlines are going to be operational if missiles are flying across the globe, the grid is attacked and military aircraft need priority and the space cleared.
Could you take a ship? Good luck given how much naval activity will be going on. Sure, if you can get to New Zealand, it’s probably a very solid option. Getting there will be next to impossible.
SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY OUTKICK NEWSLETTER
Personally, I’d get to the most isolated and rural area of America I could. Those plans are actually already drawn up and finalized for specific options and the code messages for alerts, but you’d have to be on drugs to think that’s information I’d share here.
OUTKICK IS NOW AVAILABLE ON THE FOX NEWS APP: CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD
Where would you go in the event of WWIII? Let me know at David.Hookstead@outkick.com.
Read the full article here