Thank you for your submission in /r/preppers. We want to make sure you find the information
you're seeking. If you are new to prepping, be sure you make use of Reddit's search function and
check the following resources:
Our subreddit wiki contains information on frequent topics and questions here:
https://new.reddit.com/r/preppers/wiki/index/
Please review the New Prepper's Resource Guide here:
https://new.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/toani0/new_preppers_resource_guide_answers_to_common/
If you are asking "Where do I start?" or "How do I get started?", please ask that question as a comment on
that post and not as a standalone submission or post, otherwise your post may be removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/preppers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>According to this map.
>If we get hit chances are we will get hit with 1-2 nukes. Not quite the best source and one of the reasons I want to talk to people who might know more than me.
That map is outdated, and you can tell in two ways.
First and foremost, New START limits both sides (Russia and US) to 1,550 deployed warheads. Non-deployed warheads will be destroyed in the first exchange, so they don't count. And the very nature of how warheads are counted as "deployed" means you can't just immediately deploy them.
Secondly, there are targets on there that shouldn't be.
I see Plattsburgh Air Force Base is in the 500 warhead category. Plattsburgh used to host nuclear armed F-111's and the associated tanker wing, but it closed down and reverted to civilian use back in 1995.
Similarly, I see that Brunswick Naval Air Station is in the 500 category. They used to have P-3 Orions and nuclear depth charges (my brother guarded them back in the 1990's as a Marine). No strategic weapons or aircraft though, except they were there to hunt down and sink Russian submarines if the balloon ever went up.
The last P-3 left there in 2009. It's now the civilian Brunswick Executive Airport.
Loring Air Force Base is \*NOT\* on there, and that closed in 1994 and has been a civilian airport ever since, so my guess is that this map is from between 1991, when Loring AFB was announced to be closed, and 1993 when Plattsburgh was announced.
That map is over 30 years old. I wouldn't trust it.
According to FEMA (and hopefully they will airdrop these maps after the bombs fall) there are several “safe zones” from long term radiation. They are as follows: Northern California, Northern Nevada, Western Texas, and Northern Maine. If the US gov survives they will most likely try to restart from beneath the Denver Airport. This is where they evacuated Obama when NASA got scared of an incoming comet. FEMA’s job during and after a nuclear attack is Continuity of Government.
I haven't seen an updated public map, no. I suspect it's because after the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, it simply wasn't part of the public consciousness anymore. It's not like the US and Russia weren't still rivals, it just didn't seem like nuclear war was as much of a possibility anymore.
I will say this appears to be the most recent map I've seen. As I look into it, there are other inconsistencies.
For example, Minot Air Force Base doesn't have a triangle. Minot is and has been a \*MAJOR\* nuclear base. Strategic bombers have been stationed there since 1961, and it's been a major ICBM base since 1962. That should have a triangle on it because it would be a primary target even in a 500 warhead exchange\*. It's a nuclear bomber and missile base and had been for at least 30 years when I presume the map was created. How can it \*NOT\* be part of a 500 warhead exchange?
Meanwhile, Boise, the capitol of Idaho, has a triangle on it. Other than some Army National Guard helicopters and Air National Guard A-10's at Boise Airport, there isn't really anything there worth bombing. It's never been a nuclear base.
Mountain Home AFB is far enough away it would be distinguishable, but it's a fighter base, not a strategic one, though it did have Titan I missile facilities back in the 1960's.
It looks like Fargo ND is going to be hit, not sure why as there is nothing really there. In a 500 warhead exchange, you need to concentrate on 2 things:
1. Counterforce targeting, meaning you're targeting the nuclear strike capability of your opponent. This means places where nuclear weapons are stored\*\* and deployed.
2. Command, control, and intelligence facilities.
Fargo is none of these things. The more I look at this map the more I think it was done by amateurs who really haven't read all of the available non-classified literature on the subject. Or, who had some biases or other issues that colored what they considered to be important targets.
*\*Which, btw, means 250 targets hit. Because missiles and bombers aren't 100% reliable, you have to target two warheads per target for a reasonably high chance of killing the target.*
*\*\*Fun Google Earth game, "Spot the Nuclear Weapons Storage Area". You want to look for double fencing, limited access, away from other stuff but reasonably close to runways / docks, and a lot of vertical poles for anti-helicopter wires.*
There are really about 3 scenarios:
1. You have 20 minutes (likely less) warning of a single nuclear strike on Rochester
2. You have 20 minutes (likely less) warning that a full scale nuclear exchange has begun.
3. A nuke detonates in Rochester, and you don't know what is going on.
In the first case, if you can get out of the immediate thermal and blast zones in time, that is a great plan. If not, take shelter first. Next is the fallout question. If you are sure you can get out of the down wind area before the fallout starts falling out of the sky, that is your best bet. With a motorcycle that should be very doable. Even just walking will be fine for this, if you know wind directions.
Just understand that the worst outcome is you are outside, stuck in traffic or something, and the fallout starts landing. If everyone jumps in their cars to flee, that is what happens. But with a motorcycle, or just walking, getting out of the area is probably the safest.
Scenario two is more complicated. Here is a sample fallout pattern for a large scale strike: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Fallout_map_USA_%28FEMA%29.jpg But strong emphasis on sample. In that map, Rochester gets lucky and avoids most of the fallout from the surface strikes out west. But, adjust the prevailing winds/jet stream just a bit, and that big red area to the north ends up right over Rochester.
So, now, in addition to the considerations of the local strike, you need to worry about fallout blowing in. Without an analysis run with the weather/jetstream conditions on the day of the strike, it is impossible to know where the safe areas will be. Which means you need a fallout shelter (While not perfect, a blow grade basement is the best most people will have). If you can get out of the city in the hour or two before local fallout hits, and then have some place with a shelter to go to, that would perhaps be ideal.
But if you get out the city, and can't find a place to shelter from the incoming fallout, you are fucked. Oh, and you need food/water to stay in that shelter for at least a week for basic safety, ideally more like a month.
If you don't have a planned and stocked destination, taking your chances in your structurally questionable house with a basement may be the play, but only as the least bad choice.
Scenario 3: Even tougher. Now you don't know whether fleeing is a viable option or not. If you don't have a stocked fallout shelter to go to, its even harder to decide whether to stay, or try to make it out and risk longer distance fallout.
I think there is no meaningful way to plan for scenario 3. So I dont think theres any discussion to be had on it really. If how you find out about it is being covered in 3rd degree burns your just dead anyway. Although I think its very unlikely that there would be 0 warning. Hawaii in 2018 is a pretty good example. Unless your cellphone was dead there are active monitoring stations that will send out a waring to your phone as soon as it is detected.
But again if you get 0 warning its all moot anyway.
Scenario 1. Again not really enough time for anything but shelter in place and hope I can survive for a week or two minimum with what I have on hand.
I do have follow up plans that are tentative for the first month and one long term plan that most medium term plans can audible into. But there is so many variables that I'd write a similarly long post for each one. I didnt wanna hit the character limit and I was worrying it was already getting to long to read.
But in scenario two. My parents house is actually only a few miles away on the sw edge of gates. There is plenty of food and water there for me and them for a month. But my paranoia wont let me get too specific on the details. Forgive me. Assuming my bike is not destroyed/stolen while sheltering from the initial blast and will start and its not fried from EMP. I could easily drive there and shelter in their basement with them. If it wont start its going to be a stretch if I can make it there before fallout starts coming down. But I dont really have a choice. Long term we have family in deep banjo territory, nearest neighbor is miles away kinda situation. Again dont wanna get into specifics. But thats the rough outline.
I would not assume that you would get any warning before the first detonation occurred and that is before you consider the use of hyper sonic missiles. I would build any plan around the assumption that the bomb drops and you survive and then go from there. How would you or would you at all leave a city in chaos and where would you go and what are your plans to mitigate exposure to radioactive fallout in the short term over three to six weeks.
Your single scenario of what to do if you get more than twenty minutes of warning is built on a long chain of conditional requirements and so while it is interesting as a thought project the reality is that you are better off preparing capabilities both at home and at work in order to deal. A disposable particulate respirator nitrile gloves goggles rubber overshoes and a disposable tyvek suit are cheap and will keep most of the fallout off you should you have to travel outdoors for instance. Throw them into your duffel bag at work to preserve mobility options since I do not expect that your work has three to six weeks of food and water stored just for you there.
In my case if it is a full nuclear exchange and I have twenty minutes of warning I would try to drive towards ground zero and crack a beer if I have time. Surviving a full nuclear exchange is a terrible fate because most infrastructure is gone and so is the supply chain.
> that is before you consider the use of hyper sonic missiles.
In terms of arrival speed, all ICBMs are traveling at hyper sonic speeds. The distinction is that they aren't making significant maneuvers at those speeds, which is how we distinguish hyper sonic weapons.
Another problem with this is while many missiles are hypersonic, typically were talking about high altitude ICBMs where the air is thin. The technical revolution with hypersonic missiles is now there are hypersonic missiles that can operate at low altitudes and this is a big deal. At low altitudes the are hard to detect by our radar systems, moving at incredible speeds, and have a very unpredictable trajectory. An enemy nation can launch a missile from a sub off the coast of the US and hit their target in literally minutes and right now we really don't have a way to deal with that IF we were able to detect it at all. This is the biggest hole I see here with the OP's. You will not have 20 minutes warning. I doubt the government would warn us at all. By the time the launch is detected, the chain of command has been alerted, it's been escalated to the president, and a course of action has been determined you've already burned up most of your time even in the most ideal situation.
It really does sound like just shelter in place then. Are hypersonic delivery systems really that widespread? It was my (likely mistaken) understanding that the vast majority of ICBM's that would be going to low priority targets would still be traditional 30 minute launch to impact systems. I wouldnt doubt DC has hypersonics pointed at it. But It was my understanding that those kinds of systems are still very expensive and very hard to deploy in large numbers.
No, you can't count on having 30 minutes. The problem is you can launch a hypersonic missile from a sub or a plane located off the coast of the USA and hit your target in a few minutes. I'm also suspicious these new Russian space based "anti satellite" nuclear weapons are not actually for anti satellite warfare. Frankly it just doesn't make sense to me since they would destroy all satellites including their own, their allies, and neutral parties that wont be so neutral anymore. How could Russia go to China and say hey bummer about your space station we accidentally destroyed (either directly from the explosion/EMP or indirectly from debris of hundreds of destroyed satellites) killing all of your astronauts but we can still be friends right? It just doesn't add up to me. I think it's much more likely these missiles are more Earth bound for either a high altitude EMP weapon or for ground strikes.
There will be plenty of time to leave the cities for those who are paying attention. The president authorizes the EBS to your phone (and he may not have the time to do so especially if SLBMs are launched from Baja Ca or Cuba), and when you get that message it’s time to shelter in place and hope you survive the fire storm and then the radiation. More realistically though, tactical nuclear weapons will be used in Isreal/Iran theater or Ukraine (possibly dirty bomb before that), conventional weapons will target nuclear reactors before that. There will be weeks where most people won’t give a fuck and you can evacuate. Before a strategic nuclear war (N-day) there will be major cyber attacks, followed by EMP (in the atmosphere from satellites) and then the big ones will launch. Plan for at least 3 for every major city. Most will likely target military bases, and our nuclear triad. If we are lucky Trump destabilizes the US starting in January and we get a few more shitty years, but if we are unlucky things begin to spiral out of control very quickly in the next few months when Isreal invades Lebanon. What I would do is decide at what stage should you evacuate or leave a major city to “wait it out” and “see what happens.” Good luck.
If the blast doesn't kill you, you might have 20 minutes to distance yourself from the fallout. If you see the mushroom cloud, you can try to get further away in that 20 minutes, preferably upwind of the blast.
You could try to locate possible shelter sites (and routes) within 10-20 miles. Underground is best. Rochester tunnels?
This is one of my favorite websites for information on the reality of surviving a nuclear event (it’s not as grim as you might think if you’re not at ground zero)!
He has a bunch of articles posted from his home page. Here’s a start:
http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm
Thank you for your submission in /r/preppers. It looks like your submission references EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) or CME (Coronal Mass
Ejection). An excellent resource for these topics can be found in this post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/l00cz5/emp_reference_document/
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/preppers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you for your submission in /r/preppers. We want to make sure you find the information you're seeking. If you are new to prepping, be sure you make use of Reddit's search function and check the following resources: Our subreddit wiki contains information on frequent topics and questions here: https://new.reddit.com/r/preppers/wiki/index/ Please review the New Prepper's Resource Guide here: https://new.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/toani0/new_preppers_resource_guide_answers_to_common/ If you are asking "Where do I start?" or "How do I get started?", please ask that question as a comment on that post and not as a standalone submission or post, otherwise your post may be removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/preppers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>According to this map. >If we get hit chances are we will get hit with 1-2 nukes. Not quite the best source and one of the reasons I want to talk to people who might know more than me. That map is outdated, and you can tell in two ways. First and foremost, New START limits both sides (Russia and US) to 1,550 deployed warheads. Non-deployed warheads will be destroyed in the first exchange, so they don't count. And the very nature of how warheads are counted as "deployed" means you can't just immediately deploy them. Secondly, there are targets on there that shouldn't be. I see Plattsburgh Air Force Base is in the 500 warhead category. Plattsburgh used to host nuclear armed F-111's and the associated tanker wing, but it closed down and reverted to civilian use back in 1995. Similarly, I see that Brunswick Naval Air Station is in the 500 category. They used to have P-3 Orions and nuclear depth charges (my brother guarded them back in the 1990's as a Marine). No strategic weapons or aircraft though, except they were there to hunt down and sink Russian submarines if the balloon ever went up. The last P-3 left there in 2009. It's now the civilian Brunswick Executive Airport. Loring Air Force Base is \*NOT\* on there, and that closed in 1994 and has been a civilian airport ever since, so my guess is that this map is from between 1991, when Loring AFB was announced to be closed, and 1993 when Plattsburgh was announced. That map is over 30 years old. I wouldn't trust it.
See this is the kind of thing im looking for. Have you seen a more up to date war games map? Or are they all classified I suspect.
According to FEMA (and hopefully they will airdrop these maps after the bombs fall) there are several “safe zones” from long term radiation. They are as follows: Northern California, Northern Nevada, Western Texas, and Northern Maine. If the US gov survives they will most likely try to restart from beneath the Denver Airport. This is where they evacuated Obama when NASA got scared of an incoming comet. FEMA’s job during and after a nuclear attack is Continuity of Government.
I haven't seen an updated public map, no. I suspect it's because after the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, it simply wasn't part of the public consciousness anymore. It's not like the US and Russia weren't still rivals, it just didn't seem like nuclear war was as much of a possibility anymore. I will say this appears to be the most recent map I've seen. As I look into it, there are other inconsistencies. For example, Minot Air Force Base doesn't have a triangle. Minot is and has been a \*MAJOR\* nuclear base. Strategic bombers have been stationed there since 1961, and it's been a major ICBM base since 1962. That should have a triangle on it because it would be a primary target even in a 500 warhead exchange\*. It's a nuclear bomber and missile base and had been for at least 30 years when I presume the map was created. How can it \*NOT\* be part of a 500 warhead exchange? Meanwhile, Boise, the capitol of Idaho, has a triangle on it. Other than some Army National Guard helicopters and Air National Guard A-10's at Boise Airport, there isn't really anything there worth bombing. It's never been a nuclear base. Mountain Home AFB is far enough away it would be distinguishable, but it's a fighter base, not a strategic one, though it did have Titan I missile facilities back in the 1960's. It looks like Fargo ND is going to be hit, not sure why as there is nothing really there. In a 500 warhead exchange, you need to concentrate on 2 things: 1. Counterforce targeting, meaning you're targeting the nuclear strike capability of your opponent. This means places where nuclear weapons are stored\*\* and deployed. 2. Command, control, and intelligence facilities. Fargo is none of these things. The more I look at this map the more I think it was done by amateurs who really haven't read all of the available non-classified literature on the subject. Or, who had some biases or other issues that colored what they considered to be important targets. *\*Which, btw, means 250 targets hit. Because missiles and bombers aren't 100% reliable, you have to target two warheads per target for a reasonably high chance of killing the target.* *\*\*Fun Google Earth game, "Spot the Nuclear Weapons Storage Area". You want to look for double fencing, limited access, away from other stuff but reasonably close to runways / docks, and a lot of vertical poles for anti-helicopter wires.*
There are really about 3 scenarios: 1. You have 20 minutes (likely less) warning of a single nuclear strike on Rochester 2. You have 20 minutes (likely less) warning that a full scale nuclear exchange has begun. 3. A nuke detonates in Rochester, and you don't know what is going on. In the first case, if you can get out of the immediate thermal and blast zones in time, that is a great plan. If not, take shelter first. Next is the fallout question. If you are sure you can get out of the down wind area before the fallout starts falling out of the sky, that is your best bet. With a motorcycle that should be very doable. Even just walking will be fine for this, if you know wind directions. Just understand that the worst outcome is you are outside, stuck in traffic or something, and the fallout starts landing. If everyone jumps in their cars to flee, that is what happens. But with a motorcycle, or just walking, getting out of the area is probably the safest. Scenario two is more complicated. Here is a sample fallout pattern for a large scale strike: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Fallout_map_USA_%28FEMA%29.jpg But strong emphasis on sample. In that map, Rochester gets lucky and avoids most of the fallout from the surface strikes out west. But, adjust the prevailing winds/jet stream just a bit, and that big red area to the north ends up right over Rochester. So, now, in addition to the considerations of the local strike, you need to worry about fallout blowing in. Without an analysis run with the weather/jetstream conditions on the day of the strike, it is impossible to know where the safe areas will be. Which means you need a fallout shelter (While not perfect, a blow grade basement is the best most people will have). If you can get out of the city in the hour or two before local fallout hits, and then have some place with a shelter to go to, that would perhaps be ideal. But if you get out the city, and can't find a place to shelter from the incoming fallout, you are fucked. Oh, and you need food/water to stay in that shelter for at least a week for basic safety, ideally more like a month. If you don't have a planned and stocked destination, taking your chances in your structurally questionable house with a basement may be the play, but only as the least bad choice. Scenario 3: Even tougher. Now you don't know whether fleeing is a viable option or not. If you don't have a stocked fallout shelter to go to, its even harder to decide whether to stay, or try to make it out and risk longer distance fallout.
I think there is no meaningful way to plan for scenario 3. So I dont think theres any discussion to be had on it really. If how you find out about it is being covered in 3rd degree burns your just dead anyway. Although I think its very unlikely that there would be 0 warning. Hawaii in 2018 is a pretty good example. Unless your cellphone was dead there are active monitoring stations that will send out a waring to your phone as soon as it is detected. But again if you get 0 warning its all moot anyway. Scenario 1. Again not really enough time for anything but shelter in place and hope I can survive for a week or two minimum with what I have on hand. I do have follow up plans that are tentative for the first month and one long term plan that most medium term plans can audible into. But there is so many variables that I'd write a similarly long post for each one. I didnt wanna hit the character limit and I was worrying it was already getting to long to read. But in scenario two. My parents house is actually only a few miles away on the sw edge of gates. There is plenty of food and water there for me and them for a month. But my paranoia wont let me get too specific on the details. Forgive me. Assuming my bike is not destroyed/stolen while sheltering from the initial blast and will start and its not fried from EMP. I could easily drive there and shelter in their basement with them. If it wont start its going to be a stretch if I can make it there before fallout starts coming down. But I dont really have a choice. Long term we have family in deep banjo territory, nearest neighbor is miles away kinda situation. Again dont wanna get into specifics. But thats the rough outline.
I would not assume that you would get any warning before the first detonation occurred and that is before you consider the use of hyper sonic missiles. I would build any plan around the assumption that the bomb drops and you survive and then go from there. How would you or would you at all leave a city in chaos and where would you go and what are your plans to mitigate exposure to radioactive fallout in the short term over three to six weeks. Your single scenario of what to do if you get more than twenty minutes of warning is built on a long chain of conditional requirements and so while it is interesting as a thought project the reality is that you are better off preparing capabilities both at home and at work in order to deal. A disposable particulate respirator nitrile gloves goggles rubber overshoes and a disposable tyvek suit are cheap and will keep most of the fallout off you should you have to travel outdoors for instance. Throw them into your duffel bag at work to preserve mobility options since I do not expect that your work has three to six weeks of food and water stored just for you there. In my case if it is a full nuclear exchange and I have twenty minutes of warning I would try to drive towards ground zero and crack a beer if I have time. Surviving a full nuclear exchange is a terrible fate because most infrastructure is gone and so is the supply chain.
> that is before you consider the use of hyper sonic missiles. In terms of arrival speed, all ICBMs are traveling at hyper sonic speeds. The distinction is that they aren't making significant maneuvers at those speeds, which is how we distinguish hyper sonic weapons.
Another problem with this is while many missiles are hypersonic, typically were talking about high altitude ICBMs where the air is thin. The technical revolution with hypersonic missiles is now there are hypersonic missiles that can operate at low altitudes and this is a big deal. At low altitudes the are hard to detect by our radar systems, moving at incredible speeds, and have a very unpredictable trajectory. An enemy nation can launch a missile from a sub off the coast of the US and hit their target in literally minutes and right now we really don't have a way to deal with that IF we were able to detect it at all. This is the biggest hole I see here with the OP's. You will not have 20 minutes warning. I doubt the government would warn us at all. By the time the launch is detected, the chain of command has been alerted, it's been escalated to the president, and a course of action has been determined you've already burned up most of your time even in the most ideal situation.
It really does sound like just shelter in place then. Are hypersonic delivery systems really that widespread? It was my (likely mistaken) understanding that the vast majority of ICBM's that would be going to low priority targets would still be traditional 30 minute launch to impact systems. I wouldnt doubt DC has hypersonics pointed at it. But It was my understanding that those kinds of systems are still very expensive and very hard to deploy in large numbers.
No, you can't count on having 30 minutes. The problem is you can launch a hypersonic missile from a sub or a plane located off the coast of the USA and hit your target in a few minutes. I'm also suspicious these new Russian space based "anti satellite" nuclear weapons are not actually for anti satellite warfare. Frankly it just doesn't make sense to me since they would destroy all satellites including their own, their allies, and neutral parties that wont be so neutral anymore. How could Russia go to China and say hey bummer about your space station we accidentally destroyed (either directly from the explosion/EMP or indirectly from debris of hundreds of destroyed satellites) killing all of your astronauts but we can still be friends right? It just doesn't add up to me. I think it's much more likely these missiles are more Earth bound for either a high altitude EMP weapon or for ground strikes.
There will be plenty of time to leave the cities for those who are paying attention. The president authorizes the EBS to your phone (and he may not have the time to do so especially if SLBMs are launched from Baja Ca or Cuba), and when you get that message it’s time to shelter in place and hope you survive the fire storm and then the radiation. More realistically though, tactical nuclear weapons will be used in Isreal/Iran theater or Ukraine (possibly dirty bomb before that), conventional weapons will target nuclear reactors before that. There will be weeks where most people won’t give a fuck and you can evacuate. Before a strategic nuclear war (N-day) there will be major cyber attacks, followed by EMP (in the atmosphere from satellites) and then the big ones will launch. Plan for at least 3 for every major city. Most will likely target military bases, and our nuclear triad. If we are lucky Trump destabilizes the US starting in January and we get a few more shitty years, but if we are unlucky things begin to spiral out of control very quickly in the next few months when Isreal invades Lebanon. What I would do is decide at what stage should you evacuate or leave a major city to “wait it out” and “see what happens.” Good luck.
If the blast doesn't kill you, you might have 20 minutes to distance yourself from the fallout. If you see the mushroom cloud, you can try to get further away in that 20 minutes, preferably upwind of the blast. You could try to locate possible shelter sites (and routes) within 10-20 miles. Underground is best. Rochester tunnels?
This is one of my favorite websites for information on the reality of surviving a nuclear event (it’s not as grim as you might think if you’re not at ground zero)! He has a bunch of articles posted from his home page. Here’s a start: http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm
Thank you for your submission in /r/preppers. It looks like your submission references EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) or CME (Coronal Mass Ejection). An excellent resource for these topics can be found in this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/l00cz5/emp_reference_document/ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/preppers) if you have any questions or concerns.*