2006-08-04 01:19:46 · 23 answers · asked by Wipper Snipper 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Greenland or Iceland
2006-08-04 01:22:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In case of nukes, bio, chemical warfare... there is no safe place. Their effects are far reaching and long lasting. Agent orange, Chernobyl, and anthrax are just some of the things we know about but government such as ours (the US) have enough of these things to kill every man women and child on the planet.
Nukes, bio, and chem affect the environment adversely as well. So even if you survive, life would be very hard.
In case of a strike, you want to be the first to go. You don't want to hang around on a polluted planet watching all the people you love die first.
2006-08-04 08:38:52 · answer #2 · answered by easywintoo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a toss up between Easter Island and Antarctica. I guess I'd go with Antarctica, because there would already be a large food supply stocked up, and when that runs out, plenty of penguins to eat. Also, the freezing temperatures would probably neutralize some of the biological or chemical agents.
2006-08-04 08:26:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of the nukes would land in the northern hemisphere. For me, I'd pick an island in the South Pacific or New Zeland.
2006-08-04 16:40:07 · answer #4 · answered by Tower of T 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If any country uses nukes against another ,the other country is going to answer back,and others also ,so I think the nearest place that would be safe will be the moon ,if you take enough Oxygen that is.
2006-08-04 09:38:20 · answer #5 · answered by nicky 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
South America, Australia, New Zealand
2006-08-04 09:07:13 · answer #6 · answered by erlish 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Air pollution affects everyone, air does not know frontiers. So countriees who provide others with weapons for war "contribute" to your health absolutely. Even if this every day contribution dos not cause sudden death.
And bon appetit by eating cheap imported fruits from war zones! And from zones of nuclear accidents.
Some talk about neutral countries, Grenland, etc. But even northern animals die now from liver cancer caused by chemical pollution of water. Ocean water mix all waste, which comes frompolluted rivers and boats.
2006-08-04 08:30:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most likely, the Northern Hemisphere will be the source and destination so you'd want to go South.
Head as far south as you can say Argentina or Australia. If it's nuclear(and big); this would keep you alive longer. If it's something else, it probably wouldn't affect you down there.
2006-08-04 08:24:45 · answer #8 · answered by molex77 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pitcairn Island
2006-08-04 08:47:07 · answer #9 · answered by Dave B 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Switzerland or Sweden, as they stay neutral from EVEYRTHING.
But I'm guessing Antarctica would be the best, if you could so much as live there. But then the radiation and crap might damage the ozone causing everything to melt....
So then probably Switzerland or Sweden or Greenland. Maybe northern Canada.
2006-08-04 08:25:10 · answer #10 · answered by lecarz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Porto Rico
2006-08-04 08:23:00 · answer #11 · answered by Tom 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋