‘Be Ready’ campaign - just in case
Comments
-
why would i want to do what the authorities are telling me? if my arse is about to be toast they're the last people i'm listening to, i'm gonna be kicking a zombie in the bollox.Hex said:
So that the authorities can tell you what is happening and what they want you to do.EugenesAxe said:Why is a wind up radio the most important important thing?If we enter an apocalyptic situation we aren't going to need three days of supplies we're going to have to learn a whole new way to survive, so i'm not sure hoarding supplies will do much more than delay a slow painful death, but we are used to that every Saturday ay 3pm hey?1 -
...or the flaps if it's a girl...3
-
Got 64 tins of caviar and half a freezer of Foie gras.So I think we will be fine.0
-
I just hope those in charge have let the radio importers, toilet roll makers and canned food bods know before such announcements so they can increase supply.2
-
Why do you keep your cans in tins?shirty5 said:Candles
Matches
Batteries
Tinned Cans
Water
Beer
Vodka
Pringles4 -
It's something the Octopus CEO proposed some time ago. He reckoned you could run a house from the car battery for about a week. You can also do similar by buying large batteries (16kW or larger) but you also have to have an inverter of suitable capacity etc etc. Then you need somewhere to put the battery - new regs mean they can't go in the loft, in cupboards or against an outside wall within 1m of a door or window.Weegie Addick said:I read an interesting article the other day that says modern cars have a 60kw battery. That’s a huge amount of storage. It was in a self-build magazine article about how solar (which if you’re lucky charges up 10-20kw) could integrate a household supply. The supposition was that potentially you could charge up the car battery overnight on a cheap tariff then send power from it round the house during daytime.
Makes loads of sense, of course, until you realise the power companies don’t like that idea.0 -
I think there might be too much emphasis on the end of days scenario. Up to three days' worth of supplies would be hugely beneficial on some minor, predictable or unpredictable inconveniences. In other words, it's the surprisingly "ordinary" issues that make it worth while. Localised flooding, a prolonged power cut, a burst water main or contaminated water, severe storms, severe winter precipitation, a transport shutdown, a telecommunications breakdown, temporary disruption to retail supply chains, a local hazardous industrial accident, a public health incident. Many, many others.
It's easy to frame the government guidance as being a last-resort against doomsday scenarios. But when you look at the number of "lesser" issues that might cause two or three days' worth of problems, it makes the case for being ready quite clear.10 -
Chizz said:I think there might be too much emphasis on the end of days scenario. Up to three days' worth of supplies would be hugely beneficial on some minor, predictable or unpredictable inconveniences. In other words, it's the surprisingly "ordinary" issues that make it worth while. Localised flooding, a prolonged power cut, a burst water main or contaminated water, severe storms, severe winter precipitation, a transport shutdown, a telecommunications breakdown, temporary disruption to retail supply chains, a local hazardous industrial accident, a public health incident. Many, many others.
It's easy to frame the government guidance as being a last-resort against doomsday scenarios. But when you look at the number of "lesser" issues that might cause two or three days' worth of problems, it makes the case for being ready quite clear.Agreed. Supplies for maybe max 7 days to cover the eventualities you list is probably sensible. Water, tinned/dried foods, torches, batteries, candles, maybe a small solar battery pack (3kw) to keep the lights on and charge a phone, wind-up radio, gas cannister for a camping stove/BBQ supplies and the like.None of that works in the end of days scenario as anyone who has survived and has supplies will be very quickly looted. As others have said, if the bomb goes off I want to be right under the first one but having supplies for say a 3 or 4 day blackout gives some assurance.0 -
My wife started panicking about 2-3 months ago and our wine cellar has been part converted into a small convenience store. Enough food and water to keep us going for bloody months.
I did notice the leader of the opposition in her budget response yesterday mentioned that intelligence suggests Russia will be attacking Nato within the next 3 years...0 -
Sponsored links:
-
every bloody chance isn't it!shine166 said:JohnBoyUK said:
I did notice the leader of the opposition in her budget response yesterday mentioned that intelligence suggests Russia will be attacking Nato within the next 3 years...
Is that the same intelligence source which lead to Iraq being invaded for WMDs ?1 -
Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destruction1 -
Far easier to have people hacking systems or bots scaring people online than sending troops. The kinda things that have a nation panic buying wind up radios and wet wipes 😆Carter said:Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destruction0 -
It is said that the attacks happening on various ‘infrastructure’ around the world are Putin/Iran seeing what happens best so that some time in the future Putin can flick a virtual switch and a bunch of coordinated attacks happen together with far more serious results than we’ve experienced to date.shine166 said:
Far easier to have people hacking systems or bots scaring people online than sending troops. The kinda things that have a nation panic buying wind up radios and wet wipes 😆Carter said:Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destruction2 -
Add China to that list. And us in the UK, and the USHex said:
It is said that the attacks happening on various ‘infrastructure’ around the world are Putin/Iran seeing what happens best so that some time in the future Putin can flick a virtual switch and a bunch of coordinated attacks happen together with far more serious results than we’ve experienced to date.shine166 said:
Far easier to have people hacking systems or bots scaring people online than sending troops. The kinda things that have a nation panic buying wind up radios and wet wipes 😆Carter said:Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destruction0 -
You are correct, in that I am not going to and explained why. Thanks for your apology!Gillis said:
I've not said anything about the impact of migration from Sub-Sahran Africa to the UK, so I'm not sure how you've gauged my knowledge, or lack thereof, on the issue. The post of yours I was replying to also didn't reference the impact of it, so it feels like you've shifted the goal posts somewhat (a bit more football there).PrincessFiona said:
'So many' doesn't have to be a high percentage of the total population - so my comment is still correct. With over 10 years Immigration experience (in the UK and overseas, including in Africa), I am very well aware of the issues 'so many' cause and the cost to and impact on the UK. But I am not going to waste any time discussing those with someone who clearly has no idea of the impact of 'so many'Gillis said:PrincessFiona said:
why are so many trying to get to the UK then?usetobunkin said:I doubt Sub Saharan Africa would notice if the World went to war.Most of the people live on less then $10 a day.
Seem to be happier than us living in a techno paradise.I don't know much about what life is like in Sub-Saharan Africa, or how happy people are there.I also don't know why people might choose to move from Sub-Sahran Africa to the UK. People are complicated and everyone's situation is different, so I imagine the motives of people making that move are varied and complex.I think I can answer the 'so many' part, though, because the answer there is that they aren't. The population of Sub-Sahran Africa is around about 1.3 billion. It's hard to find data for exactly how many people arrived in the UK from Sub-Sahran Africa last year (rather than a specific country), but it's maybe around 130,000. Or, to put it another way, about 0.01% of the population of Sub-Sahran Africa.To put that in a football context - as we're so often told this is a football forum, not a political one - about 0.01% of the population of England are professional footballers at all levels across the men's and women's games. If you were to ask the question, "Why are so many people in England professional footballers?" I think most people would reject the premise of the question, because in reality very few people in England are professional footballers.So to answer your original question - they aren't; very few people in Sub-Saharan Africa are trying to get to the UK.
usetobunkin said that people in Sub-Saharan Africa seem to be happier than us - maybe they are, maybe they aren't; I don't know, and I expect it's a very difficult thing to measure - and you responded by asking why so many people are trying to get to the UK in that case. I took that as you refuting usetobunkin's suggestion that people in Sub-Saharan Africa are happier than people here, the evidence being that so many people there are trying to get here. Maybe that isn't what you meant, but I can't see any other logical way of reading it. My point was that very few people from Sub-Sahran Africa are trying to get to the UK, so it doesn't really tell us much about whether people there are happier or not.
But you've told me you're right and you're not going to discuss it further due to my apparent ignorance. It's a shame that so much discourse is like this now: make a comment, make no concessions and refuse to discuss it further. It seems that discussing, listening, trying to understand different points of view - even sharing expertise - is old-fashioned now. Apologies for wasting your time.2 -
-
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:2 -
Ukraine has done a good job infiltrating Wildberries so I imagine this type of ‘warfare’ is built into a lot of nations strategies and will ramp up in the years to come.Carter said:Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destructionI fully expect one of their/Iran’s attacks to succeed in future years, it’s only a matter of time. Putin is probably itching for a NATO state to retaliate directly so he can justify the rhetoric to his people that we are the enemy, I was right etc3 -
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Trump wants to bring down Nato from within so he, Russia and China can divide the world into three.Carter said:
Add China to that list. And us in the UK, and the USHex said:
It is said that the attacks happening on various ‘infrastructure’ around the world are Putin/Iran seeing what happens best so that some time in the future Putin can flick a virtual switch and a bunch of coordinated attacks happen together with far more serious results than we’ve experienced to date.shine166 said:
Far easier to have people hacking systems or bots scaring people online than sending troops. The kinda things that have a nation panic buying wind up radios and wet wipes 😆Carter said:Attacking can be an abstract word. Russia has been attacking us for a while in terms of infrastructure disruption and thats what it pays to be prepared for. A breakdown in supply and logistical chains can really mess society up very quickly, fucks us economically especially if a state-backed actor got into the delivery system for the power grid.
For more effective than jets, bombs, troops being involved. I doubt Putin will have learned a lesson from the mess he has made in Ukraine but he does understand the value of infrastructure destruction1 -
Is that a serious question ? Makes a big difference if its our own intelligence or say mossad.PrincessFiona said:
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:
I do like idea though, that Putin has a notebook laying around with dates of all his future war plans for the next decade.1 -
You made the initial comment, so it was a reasonable.shine166 said:
Is that a serious question ? Makes a big difference if its our own intelligence or say mossad.PrincessFiona said:
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:
I do like idea though, that Putin has a notebook laying around with dates of all his future war plans for the next decade.
There are multiple intel sources. I don't see the relevance of the source re WMD2 -
Wars on bs info is the relevance. Although if we are told Putin will attack Nato in 3 years we definitely shouldn't question that narrative and keep sending Ukraine billions which could be better spent at home.PrincessFiona said:
You made the initial comment, so it was a reasonable.shine166 said:
Is that a serious question ? Makes a big difference if its our own intelligence or say mossad.PrincessFiona said:
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:
I do like idea though, that Putin has a notebook laying around with dates of all his future war plans for the next decade.
There are multiple intel sources. I don't see the relevance of the source re WMD0 -
If Ukraine falls to Russia, more countries will fall. Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine.shine166 said:
Wars on bs info is the relevance. Although if we are told Putin will attack Nato in 3 years we definitely shouldn't question that narrative and keep sending Ukraine billions which could be better spent at home.PrincessFiona said:
You made the initial comment, so it was a reasonable.shine166 said:
Is that a serious question ? Makes a big difference if its our own intelligence or say mossad.PrincessFiona said:
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:
I do like idea though, that Putin has a notebook laying around with dates of all his future war plans for the next decade.
There are multiple intel sources. I don't see the relevance of the source re WMD6 -
We better give them another 25b thenME14addick said:
If Ukraine falls to Russia, more countries will fall. Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine.shine166 said:
Wars on bs info is the relevance. Although if we are told Putin will attack Nato in 3 years we definitely shouldn't question that narrative and keep sending Ukraine billions which could be better spent at home.PrincessFiona said:
You made the initial comment, so it was a reasonable.shine166 said:
Is that a serious question ? Makes a big difference if its our own intelligence or say mossad.PrincessFiona said:
But why is the source of intelligence relevant?shine166 said:
Because its more bs to justify actions. Whats the point in pumping more billions into Ukraine unless there is a threat to us ?.PrincessFiona said:
I do like idea though, that Putin has a notebook laying around with dates of all his future war plans for the next decade.
There are multiple intel sources. I don't see the relevance of the source re WMD0 -
Why would Putin attack anyone else beyond Ukraine? The fact he is struggling in Ukraine is already embarrassing for him, and the Russians are losing a lot of men to the extent that they're drafting in people from the DPRK.
I don't think that strategy would do him any favours.0 -
Considering every single major conflict we've ( the west) got involved with over the last decade or so, has turned into a massive shit show in one way or another, id be very wary about the facts being shared to suck us into another.
Funded Al quaeda and Bin laden against Russia and gave up
Killed suddham for WMDs and that whole area went to shit and spawned isis in the power vacuum.
Killed gaddafi and Libya is a failed state
Walked out of Afghanistan and left them god know how many weapons.
Then we (Boris) talked Ukraine out of Russia negotiations and here we are.
Thats without even looking at the Iran situation.
Are we really the good guys ?
2
