Asked By: Lewis Harris Date: created: Feb 07 2023

Which country can do World war 3

Answered By: Jose James Date: created: Feb 08 2023

Hypothetical scenarios – Russian president Vladimir Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons during his country’s invasion of Ukraine, In 1949, after the unleashing of nuclear weaponry at the end of World War II, physicist Albert Einstein suggested that any outcome of a possible World War III would be so dire as to revert mankind to the Stone Age,

When asked by journalist Alfred Werner what types of weapons Einstein believed World War III might be fought with, Einstein warned, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. As for the extermination of the human race as a consequence of atomic war, Leslie A.

White challenged Einstein, “this too may be admitted as possibility, and all we can say is that if it is to come, it will come. Extravagant expressions of horror will not alter the course of events.” Crane Brinton also doubted the psychological pacification of Einstein: “Teachers, preachers, educators, even politicians are telling the growing generation that there must be no war and, therefore, there will be no war.

  • I have doubts as to whether this is wise teaching” In spite of the atomic bomb, there will be another general war and humanity will survive it.
  • James Burnham of Office of Strategic Services (the precursor of CIA ), also believed in survival: The uniqueness of the atomic weapons is commonly found in that they can totally annihilate human life, including through climatic and geological chain reaction, but such is not the case.

The great principles of military strategy stand unaltered. An atomic war will look different from older wars but it will be decided by the same combination of resources, morale and strategy. A 1998 New England Journal of Medicine overview found that “Although many people believe that the threat of a nuclear attack largely disappeared with the end of the Cold War, there is considerable evidence to the contrary”.

  • In particular, the United States – Russia mutual detargeting agreement in 1994 was largely symbolic, and did not change the amount of time required to launch an attack.
  • The most likely “accidental-attack” scenario was believed to be a retaliatory launch due to a false warning.
  • Historically, World War I happened through an escalating crisis; World War II happened through deliberate action.

Hypothesized flashpoints in the 2010s and the 2020s include the Russo-Ukrainian War, Chinese expansion into adjacent islands and seas, Chinese-Indian border dispute, Chinese threat of military operation against Taiwan and foreign involvement in the Syrian civil war,

Other hypothesized risks are that a war involving or between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Israel and Iran, United States and Iran, India and Pakistan, Ukraine and Russia, Poland and Belarus, South Korea /United States and North Korea, or Taiwan and China could escalate via alliances or intervention into a war between “great powers” such as the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China, India, and Japan; or that a “rogue commander” under any nuclear power might launch an unauthorized strike that escalates into a full-blown war.

According to a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature Food in August 2022, a full-scale nuclear war between the United States and Russia, releasing over 150 Tg of stratospheric soot, could indirectly kill more than five billion people by starvation during a nuclear winter,

More than two billion people could die of starvation from a smaller-scale (5–47 Tg) nuclear war between India and Pakistan. In the event of a nuclear war between Russia and the United States, 99% of the population in the belligerent countries, as well as Europe and China, would die. Some scenarios involve risks due to upcoming changes from the known status quo.

In the 1980s the Strategic Defense Initiative made an effort at nullifying the USSR’s nuclear arsenal; some analysts believe the initiative was “destabilizing”. In his book Destined for War, Graham Allison views the global rivalry between the established power, the US, and the rising power, China, as an example of the Thucydides Trap,

  1. Allison states that historically, “12 of 16 past cases where a rising power has confronted a ruling power” have led to fighting.
  2. In the first book devoted to the subject of military globalization, historian Max Ostrovsky argues that World War III is precluded due to unipolar distribution of power and unipolar alliance configuration, unless the Second American Civil War erupts and goes global.

If we ever have World War III, he says, it would be USNORTHCOM fighting USPACOM and USEUCOM, In 2020 and 2023, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists advanced its Doomsday Clock, citing among other factors a predicted destabilizing effect from upcoming hypersonic weapons,

Emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, could hypothetically generate risk in the decades ahead. A 2018 RAND Corporation report has argued that AI and associated information technology “will have a large effect on nuclear-security issues in the next quarter century”. A hypothetical future AI could provide a destabilizing ability to track “second-launch” launchers.

Incorporating AI into decision support systems used to decide whether to launch, could also generate new risks, including the risk of an adversarial exploitation of such an AI’s algorithms by a third party to trigger a launch recommendation. A perception that some sort of emerging technology would lead to “world domination” might also be destabilizing, for example by leading to fear of a pre-emptive strike.

Cyber warfare is the exploitation of technology by a nation-state or international organization to attack and destroy the opposing nation’s information networks and computers. The damage can be caused by computer viruses or denial-of-service attacks (DoS). Cyberattacks are becoming increasingly common, threatening cybersecurity and making it a global priority.

There has been a proliferation of state-sponsored attacks. The trends of these attacks suggest the potential of a cyber World War III. The world’s leading militaries are developing cyber strategies, including ways to alter the enemy’s command and control systems, early warning systems, logistics, and transportation.

The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has sparked concerns about a large-scale cyber attack, with Russia having previously launched cyberattacks to compromise organizations across Ukraine. Nearly 40 discrete attacks were launched by Russia which permanently destroyed files in hundreds of systems across dozens of organizations, with 40% aimed at critical infrastructure sectors in Ukraine.

Russia’s use of cyberwarfare has turned the war into a large-scale “hybrid” war in Ukraine.

How to survive ww3?

However, some tips on how to survive a nuclear war include staying underground in a bunker or shelter, being as far away from the blast site as possible, and having supplies of food and water.

Asked By: Jackson Morris Date: created: May 08 2023

Who will win World war II

Answered By: Antonio Murphy Date: created: May 08 2023

Aftermath – Ruins of Warsaw in 1945, after the deliberate destruction of the city by the occupying German forces The Allies established occupation administrations in Austria and Germany, both initially divided between western and eastern occupation zones controlled by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, respectively.

However, their paths soon diverged. In Germany, the western and eastern occupation zones controlled by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union officially ended in 1949, with the respective zones becoming separate countries, West Germany and East Germany, In Austria, however, occupation continued until 1955, when a joint settlement between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union permitted the reunification of Austria as a neutral democratic state, officially non-aligned with any political bloc (although in practice having better relations with the Western Allies).

A denazification program in Germany led to the prosecution of Nazi war criminals in the Nuremberg trials and the removal of ex-Nazis from power, although this policy moved towards amnesty and re-integration of ex-Nazis into West German society. Germany lost a quarter of its pre-war (1937) territory.

Among the eastern territories, Silesia, Neumark and most of Pomerania were taken over by Poland, and East Prussia was divided between Poland and the Soviet Union, followed by the expulsion to Germany of the nine million Germans from these provinces, as well as three million Germans from the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia.

By the 1950s, one-fifth of West Germans were refugees from the east. The Soviet Union also took over the Polish provinces east of the Curzon line, from which 2 million Poles were expelled ; north-east Romania, parts of eastern Finland, and the three Baltic states were annexed into the Soviet Union, Defendants at the Nuremberg trials, where the Allied forces prosecuted prominent members of the political, military, judicial and economic leadership of Nazi Germany for crimes against humanity In an effort to maintain world peace, the Allies formed the United Nations, which officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, and adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 as a common standard for all member nations,

The great powers that were the victors of the war—France, China, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and the United States—became the permanent members of the UN’s Security Council, The five permanent members remain so to the present, although there have been two seat changes, between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China in 1971, and between the Soviet Union and its successor state, the Russian Federation, following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991.

The alliance between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union had begun to deteriorate even before the war was over. Post-war border changes in Central Europe and creation of the Communist Eastern Bloc Besides Germany, the rest of Europe was also divided into Western and Soviet spheres of influence, Most eastern and central European countries fell into the Soviet sphere, which led to establishment of Communist-led regimes, with full or partial support of the Soviet occupation authorities.

As a result, East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, and Albania became Soviet satellite states, Communist Yugoslavia conducted a fully independent policy, causing tension with the Soviet Union, A Communist uprising in Greece was put down with Anglo-American support and the country remained aligned with the West.

Post-war division of the world was formalised by two international military alliances, the United States-led NATO and the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact, The long period of political tensions and military competition between them, the Cold War, would be accompanied by an unprecedented arms race and number of proxy wars throughout the world.

In Asia, the United States led the occupation of Japan and administered Japan’s former islands in the Western Pacific, while the Soviets annexed South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, Korea, formerly under Japanese colonial rule, was divided and occupied by the Soviet Union in the North and the United States in the South between 1945 and 1948.

Separate republics emerged on both sides of the 38th parallel in 1948, each claiming to be the legitimate government for all of Korea, which led ultimately to the Korean War, David Ben-Gurion proclaiming the Israeli Declaration of Independence at the Independence Hall, 14 May 1948 In China, nationalist and communist forces resumed the civil war in June 1946. Communist forces were victorious and established the People’s Republic of China on the mainland, while nationalist forces retreated to Taiwan in 1949.

In the Middle East, the Arab rejection of the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine and the creation of Israel marked the escalation of the Arab–Israeli conflict, While European powers attempted to retain some or all of their colonial empires, their losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful, leading to decolonisation,

The global economy suffered heavily from the war, although participating nations were affected differently. The United States emerged much richer than any other nation, leading to a baby boom, and by 1950 its gross domestic product per person was much higher than that of any of the other powers, and it dominated the world economy.

The Allied occupational authorities pursued a policy of industrial disarmament in Western Germany from 1945 to 1948. Due to international trade interdependencies, this policy led to an economic stagnation in Europe and delayed European recovery from the war for several years. At the Bretton Woods Conference in July 1944, the Allied nations drew up an economic framework for the post-war world.

The agreement created the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), which later became part of the World Bank Group, The Bretton Woods system lasted until 1973. Recovery began with the mid-1948 currency reform in Western Germany, and was sped up by the liberalisation of European economic policy that the U.S Marshall Plan economic aid (1948–1951) both directly and indirectly caused.

The post-1948 West German recovery has been called the German economic miracle, Italy also experienced an economic boom and the French economy rebounded, By contrast, the United Kingdom was in a state of economic ruin, and although receiving a quarter of the total Marshall Plan assistance, more than any other European country, it continued in relative economic decline for decades.

The Soviet Union, despite enormous human and material losses, also experienced rapid increase in production in the immediate post-war era, having seized and transferred most of Germany’s industrial plants and exacted war reparations from its satellite states.

Which is the safest country if ww3 happens?

Iceland – Iceland remains the most peaceful country in the world, according to the Global Peace Index, a position it has held since 2008. The country is far removed from the rest of the world so it could be left out of any conflict and even if it was involved, it has a mountainous terrain to take shelter in.

Who save the world from ww3?

Fifty years ago, in October 1962, the world teetered on the brink of nuclear war. On October 22, 1962, after reviewing photographic evidence, President John F. Kennedy informed the world that the Soviet Union was building secret missile bases in Cuba, just 90 miles off the shores of Florida.

For the next 13 days, the world held its breath as the Soviet Union and the United States confronted each other about missiles stationed in Cuba. While politicians sought a resolution to the standoff, no one was aware of the events taking place inside the Soviet submarine B-59 in the waters off the coast of Florida.

As we commemorate the 50 th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, Secrets of the Dead chronicles how the actions of one man, during arguably the most dangerous moment of the Cold War, averted nuclear war. The Man Who Saved the World, premiering Tuesday, October 23 at 9 pm ET on PBS (check local listings), tells the unsung story of Soviet naval officer Vasili Arkhipov, the Brigade Chief of Staff on submarine B-59, who refused to fire a nuclear missile and saved the world from World War III and nuclear disaster.

For decades, Arkhipov’s story was hidden, only emerging in recent years. The events depicted in The Man Who Saved the World unfolded over four hours on October 27, 1962, when fear over the Cuban Missile Crisis was at its highest. It combines dramatizations – set in a claustrophobic submarine running out of air – with eyewitness accounts and expert testimony to reveal the terrifying events happening beneath the waves.

Four Soviet submarines were sent on a mission known only to a handful of Communist party officials. Their destination was a mystery to be revealed once they were at sea. Under their orders, each submarine was to travel 7,000 miles from a top secret naval base in the Arctic Circle across the Atlantic to be permanently stationed in Mariel, Cuba where they would serve as the vanguard of a Soviet force a mere 90 miles from mainland America.

  1. The commander of each submarine had permission to act without direct orders from Moscow if they believed they were under threat.
  2. Each of the four subs was carrying what the Soviets called a ‘special weapon’, a single nuclear torpedo, comparable in strength to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
  3. The torpedo could only be fired if the submarine captain and political officer were in agreement.

Each had one half of a key which, when joined, unlocked the firing mechanism. Ryurik Ketov, who is interviewed in The Man Who Saved the World, commanded one of the four subs. “I had a written order that I could release it,” says Ketov. “And if there was an order to fire the torpedo I would do it without a second thought.

  1. For the first time in life a commander of a submarine had a nuclear weapon and had the authority to fire the missile at his command.” However, aboard the B-59, three men—not two—needed to be in agreement.
  2. As commander of the entire submarine fleet, Arkhipov had the power to veto firing the missile and was one of the only men who knew about the mission in advance.

Fifty years later, The Man Who Saved the World recounts Arkhipov’s courageous story and how, with a single act, he stopped the destruction of life as we know it. Secrets of the Dead: The Man Who Saved the World is a Bedlam Production for THIRTEEN in association with WNET and Channel 1 Russia.

Which country is least likely to go to war?

Key Trends in Global Peace Index 2021 – • Since 2008, the level of global peacefulness has deteriorated by 2%, with 75 countries recording a deterioration, while 86 improved. • The average level of global peacefulness has deteriorated for nine of the past 13 years.

The gap between the least and most peaceful countries continues to grow, Since 2008, the 25 least peaceful countries declined on average by 12.1%, while the 25 most peaceful countries improved by 4.3%. • Iceland remains the most peaceful country in the world in 2021, a position it has held since 2008.

It is joined at the top of the index by New Zealand, Denmark, Portugal, and Slovenia. • Conflict in the Middle East has been the key driver of the global deterioration in peacefulness since 2008. • Of the three GPI domains, two recorded a deterioration, while one improved.

  • Ongoing Conflict deteriorated by 6.2% and Safety and Security deteriorated by 2.5%.
  • However, Militarisation improved by 4.2%.
  • The improving trend in Militarisation was widespread, with 111 of the 163 countries covered in the GPI improving.87 countries reduced their military expenditure as a percentage of GDP, although military spending increased in absolute terms.
You might be interested:  Who Is Jellyfish On Masked Singer?

Read more: Global Peace Index 2021 Summary and key findings

Will I be drafted for ww3?

A draft is defined as a mandatory enrollment of individuals into the armed service. According to, the United States military has been all-volunteer since 1973, but ‘ an act of Congress could still reinstate the draft in case of a national emergency.’

What would happen if World War 3 broke out?

What Would Happen If World War 3 Started? – In the event of World War 3, what would World War 3 look like? The global landscape would undergo drastic and irreversible changes. The conflict could potentially be sparked by several flashpoints, such as the continued invasion of Ukraine by Russia, an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities followed by an Iranian response, or a Chinese attack on Taiwan.

  1. Each of these scenarios involves powerful nations with significant military capabilities, making the potential for a global conflict very real.
  2. The repercussions of such a war would be catastrophic.
  3. Widespread destruction and loss of life would be inevitable if World War 3 happened, because modern warfare capabilities far exceed those of World War I and World War II.

If World War 3 were to happen, the world’s economy would likely collapse under the strain of sustained conflict, leading to a global recession or even a depression. Political structures would be upended, with alliances shifting and new powers potentially emerging.

What should I prepare for ww3?

(2022 Update) We previously wrote this article in response to the rising tensions between US and Middle East back in early 2020. We are now revisiting this article to discuss the ever present possibility of WW3 as the Russia-Ukraine crisis transitions to a full blown invasion.

  • It seems as if these global tensions are becoming more prevalent.
  • This fact leads us to reiterate the need to prepare for catastrophe.
  • By the time you NEED protection, it is likely too late.
  • So, it’s time to revisit prepping for “Doomsday” once again.
  • Doomsday preppers are far and wide for good reason; each day another conflict appears to arise around the globe.And unfortunately, WW3 will most likely come at a nuclear cost.

So, what are some essentials you need to survive a potential WW3 and nuclear blast breakout? We broke it down into 4 sections – how to prep for nuclear war, what you need in your survival kits, how to survive a nuclear blast, and what to do after a nuclear attack.

And remember to get your gear today BEFORE a blast occurs. Better to be safe than sorry. A nuclear blast can and will be devastating. The doom and gloom is why a lot of people don’t prepare for it. However, in today’s climate, we have enough advancements in technology to start anew, should we ever come under attack.

But you must be prepared for worse. Three things to look into TODAY:

Start preparing your emergency survival kit. Now there are tons of stuff you can hoard for a bad day. This may include non-parishable goods, water, battery powered radio, secluded energy source, flashlights, batteries, etc. See our next section to get an in depth look at what you may need and where to buy them, Locate a safe place to stay during the blast and to store your goods. Now this is going to be more difficult than the first one. See if your community has designated fall-out shelters. Identify these and look into getting on a “list” to make sure you can go there in case of an attack. This website has great insights into finding shelters near you, If there are none, next best option are windowless structures and basements / cellars. Create an Emergency Plan with your loved ones. Make sure everyone is aware of where each of you will be and where to meet up after a nuclear event. Sometimes not knowing if your family is OK is worse than enduring the event yourself. Strategize and figure out each person’s nearest shelter to their home, local grocery store, work, or school. Keep the plan with your emergency supplies and update often (1 to 3 months).

What to do if war starts?

Download Article Download Article War is a dark part of our world history, and unfortunately, something we continue to face in the 21st century. Military conflict is extremely dangerous, so we’re here to help you prepare for the worst and survive a war as a civilian. We’ve got advice on everything from how to survive an invasion and escape a war zone to how to find shelter and supplies, protect yourself, treat injuries or illnesses, and stay strong.

  1. 1 Move to an area far from the fighting if you can. Unfortunately, your home may become unsafe in the event of a war or invasion. If your area is no longer safe, do your best to relocate and find another place to live. Where you end up settling depends on the progress of the war. Stay updated on the fighting so you can know which areas are safer.
    • Try to find areas that aren’t near the main fighting. These could be rural areas or strategically unimportant towns.
    • There may be designated civilian safe zones set up. Travel to one of these if there is one nearby.
    • Rural areas may be safer because fighting is often focused around cities and population centers. However, remember that you’ll need wilderness survival skills to stay safe here. It may also be more difficult to receive aid, since relief organizations also focus on cities.
  2. 2 Gather information from trusted sources. Having information about what areas are free of active conflict, where you can get supplies or medical care, and how you can escape dangerous situations is crucial to your survival. Only believe information provided by trustworthy NGOs, journalists, or authorities in your region.
    • During an invasion, disinformation can be used as a tactic to frighten or otherwise destabilize the population. Be careful believing news you hear from unverified accounts on social media or by word-of-mouth.


  3. 3 Take advantage of opportunities to learn how to protect yourself. During or preceding an invasion, there may be paramilitary groups or army personnel in your area that can teach you basic survival and combat skills. These skills can mean the difference between life and death, and joining a training session is an opportunity for you to learn new skills,
    • If you aren’t looking to learn how to fight, these groups can also give you survival advice tailored to the region you live.
  4. 4 Identify escape routes from your country. If the invasion has or is likely to spread across the entire country, learn what neighboring countries are open to refugees. The vast majority of countries are obligated under international law to accept refugees who have a reasonable fear that they could be killed in their home country. Making your way to a country free from war can be safer than staying put.
    • The journey to a conflict-free country can be challenging. Ideally, your home country will provide transportation services to help you escape the invasion. Otherwise, you may have to drive, sail, or even walk to the border.
    • When escaping your country, bring passports or other identification documents. It may also be wise to take small valuables that you can keep hidden and exchange for cash or supplies if needed. Without ID, other countries may prevent you from entering.
    • Getting in touch with friends or family members who live outside of your home country can connect you to opportunities to escape your country.
  5. Advertisement

  1. 1 Find a strong, brick building with a basement for shelter. These buildings types can withstand the most damage and remain standing. Look especially for a building with a basement. This provides added protection and a hiding place if you have to stay out of sight. Search your area for suitable buildings like these and move into one as soon as possible.
    • Try to find a building that you can seal up in case there is a chemical leak or attack. Look for windows still intact that you can close and block off with damp towels.
    • If there are multiple suitable buildings in your area, make a list of all of them and their locations. This will help if you have to flee your current shelter and find a new one quickly.
    • If there are no buildings like this, then find any structure that has a basement to protect you from the fighting.
  2. 2 Build an insulated shelter if you settle in a wooded area. If you flee the cities and hide in the woods, your biggest enemy will probably be the elements. Construct a suitable shelter as soon as you enter a new area to protect you from the cold, rain, and sun. Maintain this shelter by fixing any problems right away.
    • Locate the shelter in a spot that’s easy to hide in, just in case hostile people pass through the area.
    • To make the job easier, try to build your shelter around a natural feature. A fallen tree, for example, could provide support for a larger structure.
  3. 3 Avoid confrontations as much as you can. While a war probably makes you think of fighting, in reality, civilians usually survive a war by avoiding fights as much as possible. Unless you’re in the armed forces, in most cases you’re much safer avoiding confrontations.
    • If hostile troops enter your area, it’s best to hide or avoid interacting with them at all costs. Make it clear you aren’t a threat.
    • Don’t try to steal from people or hurt anyone except in self-defense. This will lead to confrontations as desperate people try to defend themselves.
    • Avoiding fights may also mean fleeing an unsafe area. Always be ready for this possibility to keep yourself and your loved ones safe.
  4. 4 Learn to use weapons to defend yourself or hunt, While you should try to avoid violence, always be prepared for its possibility. This is much easier if you already have weapons in your home and know how to use them. If not, then gather any weapons you may find and learn to use them. Keep them close at hand in your shelter in case you have to use them.
    • If you have a gun, ammunition might be scarce in a survival situation. Shooting for practice may also draw attention to you. Learn to use the gun as well as you can without firing if you’ve never used it before.
    • Don’t neglect other potential weapons like bows, axes, bats, or knives. These can all help you fight off attackers.
    • Train other members of your family or group to use the weapons as well. Your group is at a disadvantage if only one member knows how to fight.
  5. 5 Defend yourself if you have to. While you want to avoid violence, in some situations, fighting may be unavoidable. Some people try to hurt or exploit others during crises. If someone tries to hurt you or your loved ones, or steal supplies that you need to survive, fight back when you can. Try to drive off the people who are trying to hurt you.
    • Having some weapons at hand will help in this situation. Keep all weapons in a safe place, away from children, and grab them quickly if you need them.
    • If you do have to defend yourself or your family, having a good personal relationship with your community is a big help. The community could unite to defend itself from bandits or other people who want to cause harm.
  6. Advertisement

  1. 1 Hoard all of your resources and valuable items as soon as war starts. There is often little advanced warning about a war breaking out, so you may not have the opportunity to stock up on supplies. Work quickly as soon as you get the news. Take all of your valuables, money, food, and water and store them safely.
    • Especially store your canned or wrapped food and bottled water. Save these resources for emergencies, in the event that clean water and fresh food become scarce.
    • Look for medicine and hygiene products as well. These are important for maintaining your health in stressful situations.
    • Remember to store all of your important documents as well. Hold onto birth certificates, marriage licenses, Social Security cards, and any other documents that prove your identification.
    • Withdraw money from the bank to have cash on hand. You may not have access to your bank electronically.
  2. 2 Locate a clean water source, Water is the most important resource for humans, and clean water may become scarce in wartime. Bottled water sources will only last so long. As soon as the war starts, find all of the potential water sources in your area. Do the same for every new area you move into.
    • Nearby lakes and streams are potential water sources, but you may have to purify the water before drinking it.
    • If you live near the ocean, do not drink saltwater. It’s difficult to resist, but saltwater will cause serious illness.
    • If you do find a clean water source, use that and try to preserve your bottled water for emergencies.
    • If no other water sources are near you, collect rainwater for drinking and bathing. Leave out buckets and tubs to catch the rain when it falls. Remember to purify all rainwater before you drink it.
  3. 3 Gather canned and nonperishable food items. Your regular supply of food may be interrupted, so nonperishable items are essential. Once you get news that war has broken out, gather as many canned and nonperishable items as you can. Get them from the store or any other source you come across. This ensures you’ll have a steady supply if food starts running out.
    • After the war has been going on, canned items may be available in abandoned grocery stores. Whenever you find an unopened can, take it. You don’t know when you’ll come across more food.
    • Try to avoid foods with high salt content that will make you thirsty. These will make you drink more water than you would normally.
    • Ideally, you should have 3 days’ worth of nonperishable food in your home at all times in case of natural disasters or other emergencies. If you have a stockpile already, you can avoid the rush to the food store that will occur once the war starts.
  4. 4 Learn to hunt and fish for extra sources of meat. If food becomes unreliable, you’ll be at an advantage if you know how to hunt and fish. Work on your tracking and hunting skills to find other sources of meat. Practice fishing for a steady supply of nutritious fish. Both skills can help you get through times of food shortage.
    • Learn how to properly skin, bleed, and dress an animal so the meat doesn’t go bad before you can eat it.
    • You don’t have to be in a rural area to hunt. There are plenty of animals in city settings. Try setting up traps to catch small animals.
  5. 5 Stockpile hygiene products if you find them. While hygiene may not be high on your list in a survival situation, it is more important than you may think. Practicing good hygiene can prevent illness and infection, and also help you feel better. When you’re gathering supplies, always include as many hygiene products as you can carry.
    • Important hygiene products to have are toilet paper, hand sanitizer, toothpaste and toothbrush, soap or liquid soap, feminine products, and disinfectant.
    • Less critical but important products include combs or brushes, razors, shaving cream, and deodorant. These won’t necessarily save your life, but keeping up a good appearance can help you feel much better in stressful situations.
  6. 6 Determine which plants in your area are edible. Almost all areas have local plants that may be edible. Knowing which ones you can eat could save your life in a desperate situation. Study your local area and find these edible plants. Then gather them regularly for a steady supply of food.
    • If you don’t know what a plant is or if it’s edible, smell it first. If the smell is terrible, it’s a good bet that it’s not edible. Then hold the plant on your skin for 15 minutes and see if you feel any itching or burning. If not, place the plant on your lips for 15 minutes. Then take a small bite of the plant. If you don’t feel any burning or stomach pains after 15 minutes, then the plant is probably safe to eat.
    • If possible, you could also start a garden on your property for extra produce. Try to keep this hidden, though. If food is short, people will almost certainly try to steal your produce.
  7. 7 Avoid wasting anything. All resources are precious in wartime, so preserve everything you can. Reuse old rags to make clothes. Use food scraps to make stock. Catch rainwater. Don’t let anything go to waste.
  8. 8 Loot supplies if you have no other choice. Unfortunately, people sometimes have to do desperate things to survive. If you come across supplies or stores that no one is watching or look abandoned, then take everything you need. This might be ethically wrong, but you and your family have to survive.
    • If you live in a populated area, you may come across many abandoned stores. Don’t hesitate to search them for supplies and take what you need.
    • If you’re on the move, stop and check any buildings you come across. You never know what the previous residents left behind.
    • Don’t try to steal food or supplies that people are guarding. You could end up injured or killed for this.
  9. Advertisement

  1. 1 Learn basic first-aid to treat minor injuries. Injuries are unfortunately inevitable, and they can range from minor to serious. Develop at least a basic knowledge of first aid to treat the injuries you or a partner may encounter. When searching for supplies, take any first aid gear you may find and build a basic first aid kit,
    • Wash all wounds with clean water only. Never use dirty or unfiltered water.
    • Keep all wounds covered with clean bandages. If possible, replace the bandage with a clean one regularly.
    • Learning CPR can also save someone’s life in an emergency situation.
  2. 2 Stay away from any weapons and ordnance you come across. Unexploded mines, bombs, and other ordnance are a major cause of civilian injuries and death in war. If you’re near a fighting zone, there may be dangerous materials strewn out everywhere. Don’t touch anything. At best, you could give yourself a cut. At worst, this could be an unexploded weapon that could seriously injure you.
  3. 3 Keep yourself clean to avoid infections. While it may be difficult, washing yourself regularly is an important way to stay healthy. Take quick showers if running water is still available. If not, then use one of your water capture methods to gather enough water to clean yourself.
    • Try catching some rainwater in a bucket. Then dip a towel in that bucket and rub some soap on it. Run the towel around your body, then rinse with the rainwater.
    • Try not to waste your bottled water on bathing. You can use unfiltered water for bathing unless you have open wounds. In this case, purify the water.
  4. 4 Purify any water you drink that isn’t from a sealed bottle. A waterborne illness can be life-threatening in a survival situation. If need to use any unbottled water for drinking, always purify it first. The most common method is boiling the water for 1 minute to kill any pathogens. Then filter out larger objects by pouring the water through a fine net or cloth.
    • It isn’t always obvious if a water source is contaminated. Boil all water from streams and rivers anyway, just as a precaution.
    • If you’re desperate, you may be tempted to drink unclean water to quench your thirst. Do not, under any circumstances, drink dirty water without purifying it. You could contract a disease or parasite that may be fatal.
  5. 5 Eat as healthy as you can. This isn’t always possible and you have to survive on whatever food you can find. But if at all possible, keep your health up with nutritious food. A steady supply of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and fatty acids will help keep your immune system up and fight off sickness.
    • Try to keep your meals as balanced as possible. Include fresh vegetables, fruits, and proteins if they are available.
    • Find nutrient-dense foods like leafy vegetables, fish, potatoes, and nuts. Foods like these pack as many nutrients as possible into your meals.
    • If you can’t find fresh food, try to find dietary supplements to boost your nutrient intake. These may be available from abandoned stores and homes.
  6. Advertisement

  1. 1 Keep up personal relationships with family and neighbors. These personal relationships will help you get through the crisis. Having family members around helps to ease your stress. Protecting them also gives you a purpose, which can drive you to push yourself harder in stressful situations.
    • If you move to a new area, introduce yourself to locals. You don’t have to become best friends with them, but don’t remain a stranger. You may have to rely on these people for help if fighting reaches your area.
  2. 2 Build a positive mental attitude, In any survival situation, maintaining your composure and ability to think logically is key. Letting despair and grief take over your mind will make logical thinking much harder. This will be especially difficult in wartime, but it’s extremely important to keep a positive mindset. Do all you can to think positively.
    • Developing and refining emergency plans can help you stay positive. It ensures that you’ll always have a procedure in place if something goes wrong.
    • Take steps to reduce anxiety and keep your head clear in stressful situations.
    • Building and maintaining personal relationships can help you keep your composure.
  3. Advertisement

Add New Question

  • Question What if I lost all of my family and friends? Felicity Rubiano Community Answer It would be hard to survive without them (since you’re probably young and have close ties to them), but staying self-sufficient is important. By protecting yourself and restoring your sanity, it will be easier to plan what you should do after the war.
  • Question How long does a war usually take, and if it takes a long time, how much food will we need? There is no timeline for the duration of a war. They can last a few months to several years, such as both World Wars and the current conflict in Syria. Following news reports will give a person some info into the situation. As the political situation deteriorates, begin preparing, if you haven’t done so already. Stock non-perishable foods, as they will not be affected (so long as the container/packaging remains intact). The more you are able to have on hand, the better.
  • Question How will I survive if I’m homeless? You may want to try and find other people to stay with so they can keep you safe (and vice versa) until the war is over.

See more answers Ask a Question 200 characters left Include your email address to get a message when this question is answered. Submit Advertisement Thanks for submitting a tip for review!

Remember, this isn’t a movie or video game. Don’t try anything that you’ve seen in a movie. Survival requires realistic solutions and strategies.

Advertisement Article Summary X War can be an incredibly dangerous and stressful time, but you can increase your chance of survival by gathering supplies and finding somewhere safe to take shelter. If your home is in an active war zone, relocate to somewhere safer, like a rural area or small town away from the fighting.

  • Or, if traveling isn’t safe, find shelter in the basement of a strong, brick building, which will be able to withstand damage.
  • Stay away from fighting as much as possible and don’t touch any strewn materials, since they could be unexploded weapons.
  • Bring essential supplies with you like your valuables, non-perishable food, water, medicine, hygiene products, and a radio to stay updated on the news.

Additionally, you’ll want to have a first aid kit on hand if anyone gets sick or injured. To learn how to stay positive during a war, read on. Did this summary help you? Thanks to all authors for creating a page that has been read 239,141 times.

Did Russia win WWII?

Stalin’s victory? The Soviet Union and World War II Published in,,, Ribbontrop, the German foreign minister, signing the Nazi–Soviet pact on 23 August 1939. Soviet foreign minister Molotov and Stalin stand in the background. (Interfoto) When World War II ended in 1945 few doubted that the victor’s laurels belonged mainly to Joseph Stalin.

  • Under his leadership the Soviet Union had just won the war of the century, and that victory was closely identified with his role as the country’s supreme commander.
  • World War II was a global conflict of immense proportions in which 50 million people died, but at its heart was the epic struggle between Stalin and Hitler on the Eastern Front.

The war began with Hitler’s attack on Poland in September 1939 and was followed by the stunning German defeat of France in summer 1940. Not until June 1941 did Hitler launch his invasion of the Soviet Union—a state that posed a strategic threat to German domination of Europe as well as being an ideological rival and racial enemy.

At first all went well for Operation Barbarossa—the codename for the German invasion—as Hitler’s armies penetrated deep into Russia, reaching the outskirts of Leningrad and Moscow by the end of 1941. In 1942, however, the Soviets turned the tables on the Germans and won a great victory at Stalingrad that spelled doom for the Wehrmacht.

In 1943 and 1944 the Red Army expelled the Germans from the rest of Russia and then began an invasion of Germany that culminated in the capture of Berlin in May 1945. Eighty per cent of combat on the Eastern Front Eighty per cent of all the combat of World War II took place on the Eastern Front.

  1. During the four years of the Soviet–German struggle the Red Army destroyed 600 enemy divisions (Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, Finnish, Croat, Slovak and Spanish as well as German).
  2. The Germans suffered ten million casualties (75% of their total wartime losses), including three million dead, while Hitler’s Axis allies lost another million.

The Red Army destroyed 48,000 enemy tanks, 167,000 guns and 77,000 aircraft. In comparison, the contribution of Stalin’s western allies to the defeat of Germany was of secondary importance. Even after the Anglo-American invasion of France in June 1944 there were still twice as many German soldiers serving on the Eastern Front as in the West.

On the other hand, Britain and the United States did supply a huge quantity of material aid to the USSR that greatly facilitated the Soviet victory over Germany. Even so, victory did not come cheap. Red Army casualties totalled sixteen million, including eight million dead (three million in German POW camps).

Adding to the attrition was the death of sixteen million Soviet civilians. Among these were a million Soviet Jews, executed by the Germans in 1941–2 at the beginning of the Holocaust. Material damage to the Soviet Union was equally staggering: six million houses, 98,000 farms, 32,000 factories, 82,000 schools, 43,000 libraries, 6,000 hospitals, and thousands of miles of roads and railways were destroyed.

In total, the Soviet Union lost 25% of its national wealth and 14% of its population as a direct result of the war. When the Red Army captured Berlin, the full extent of Soviet war damage was far from clear, but there was no doubt that the Soviets had fought a brutal war against a barbaric enemy and that the cost had been astronomical.

Some saw the Soviet victory as pyrrhic—a victory won at too great a cost. Others worried that German domination of Europe had been replaced by a Soviet and communist threat to the continent. But for most people in the allied world, Stalin’s victory—whatever the costs and problems it brought—was preferable to Hitler’s dream of a global racist empire. The structure of Soviet military and political decision-making during the Great Patriotic War. Stalin at war Stalin shared the military glory with his generals—above all with his deputy supreme commander, Marshal Georgi Zhukov—but Stalin’s role was political and economic as well as military.

As supreme commander Stalin decided on military strategy and supervised all the big battles and operations. As People’s Commissar for Defence and chairman of the State Defence Council he was responsible for the country’s mobilisation for total war. As head of government Stalin represented the USSR at summit meetings with its British and American allies and corresponded on a regular basis with Winston Churchill and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

As leader of the Communist Party it fell to him to rally the Soviet people for a patriotic war of national defence. (See diagram, p.43.) Stalin’s public image was that of a benign dictator, and hopes were high that his regime would evolve into a more liberal and democratic state.

But it was no secret that he was a ruthless dictator who presided over an authoritarian communist state that terrorised its own people. During the war the harshest discipline was imposed, and Stalin brooked no wavering in the face of the enemy: some 170,000 Soviet military personnel were executed for treason, cowardice or ill discipline.

Whole communities and ethnic groups, accused of collective collaboration with the enemy, were uprooted and deported. At the end of the war millions of returning Soviet POWS were screened for disloyalty, and a quarter of a million of them were executed or re-imprisoned. The Nazi–Soviet non-aggression pact, August–September 1939. At the time much of this repression remained hidden, and public attention focused on Stalin’s image as a highly successful and very effective war leader. The contemporary impression was summed up by one of his earliest biographers, Isaac Deutscher, writing in 1948: ‘Many allied visitors who called at the Kremlin during the war were astonished to see on how many issues, great and small, military, political or diplomatic, Stalin took the final decision.

He was in effect his own commander-in-chief, his own minister of defence, his own quartermaster, his own minister of supply, his own foreign minister, and even his own chef de protocol, Thus he went on, day after day, throughout four years of hostilities—a prodigy of patience, tenacity, and vigilance, almost omnipresent, almost omniscient.’ The Nazi–Soviet pact But Stalin’s reputation soon began to take a battering.

When the wartime grand alliance with Britain and the United States gave way to the Cold War in 1947 the Soviet role in the Second World War was criticised by western propagandists. A particular target was the Nazi–Soviet non-aggression pact of 1939–41.

  1. This was a deal between Stalin and Hitler that gave the German dictator a free hand to attack Poland and to fight the British and French.
  2. In return for a promise of Soviet neutrality Stalin was given a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, including territory in Poland.
  3. In accordance with this agreement the Soviets invaded Eastern Poland on 17 September 1939 and occupied the territory allocated to them by the pact.

(See map, p.43.) From the Soviet point of view, the invasion was justified by the fact that this territory had been forcibly occupied by the Poles in the wake of the Russo-Polish war of 1919–20. The territory’s inhabitants were mainly Ukrainian and Belorussian, and its reincorporation into the USSR meant the reunification of Eastern and Western Ukraine and Belorussia.

But the Red Army’s invasion was clearly an act of aggression and the process of integrating Western Belorussia and Western Ukraine into the USSR was very violent, including the deportation of 400,000 ethnic Poles to the Soviet interior. Among their number were 20,000 Polish army officers and police officials, executed on Stalin’s orders in March–April 1940.

Britain went to war with Germany in defence of Poland, but the Soviet occupation of Eastern Poland was actually welcomed by Winston Churchill in a radio broadcast on 1 October 1939: ‘Russia has pursued a cold policy of self-interest. We could have wished that the Russian armies should be standing on their present line as the friends and allies of Poland instead of as invaders.

But that the Russian armies should stand on this line was clearly necessary for the safety of Russia against the Nazi menace. I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest. It cannot be in accordance with the interests or the safety of Russia that Germany should plant itself upon the shores of the Black Sea, or that it should overrun the Balkan states and subjugate the Slavonic peoples of south-eastern Europe.

That would be contrary to the historic life-interests of Russia.’ Operation Barbarossa, June–December 1941. Consistency was never Churchill’s strong point, and a few weeks later he was urging Anglo-French intervention in the Soviet war with Finland. This conflict had broken out at the end of November 1939 when the Finns resisted Stalin’s demands to join a Soviet-led bloc in the Baltic.

  1. Churchill was willing to risk war with Russia because the real purpose of the Anglo-French expedition to Finland was to cut off Germany’s supplies of iron ore from Norway and Sweden.
  2. Faced with the escalation of their local war into a major conflict in Scandinavia, Stalin and the Finns agreed a peace treaty in March 1940.

Finland was forced to make various territorial concessions to the Soviets but the country retained its independence. Eventually Churchill was proved right: Stalin’s resistance to German domination of Europe prompted Hitler to invade the Soviet Union in 1941.

But in 1939–40 Stalin was intent on cooperating as much as he could with Hitler, and the Nazi–Soviet pact was followed by a period of close political, economic and military cooperation between the two states. Stalin hoped that this collaboration would last a long time—long enough for him to prepare the country’s defences against a possible German attack.

Stalin saw war with Hitler as possible, even likely, but not inevitable. Stalin’s hopes for a durable deal with Hitler were not dented until the convening of a Soviet–German conference in Berlin in November 1940. Stalin was represented by his foreign minister, Vyacheslav Molotov, who was instructed to secure a new Nazi–Soviet pact that would guarantee the Soviet Union against German attack and extend Soviet–German spheres of influence arrangements to the Balkans.

Hitler’s counter-offer of a subordinate role in a German-led coalition of Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union was unacceptable to Stalin, who responded by reiterating the need for a new Nazi–Soviet pact. Hitler ignored this proposal and on 18 December 1940 issued the order for Operation Barbarossa.

From January 1941 it was clear that a German–Soviet war was coming. Diplomatic relations between the two countries continued to deteriorate; there was a massive build-up of German military might along Soviet borders, and multiple sources of intelligence information indicated that the Germans were preparing an invasion.

  • Stalin believed that to avoid a two-front war Hitler would not invade before he had defeated Britain.
  • He was also persuaded that the German military–political élite was split on the question of attacking the Soviet Union and that some adroit diplomacy could still avert war.
  • Above all, Stalin was confident that Soviet defences would hold when the Germans did attack and that there would be time to counter-mobilise his forces.

For this reason he resisted pressure from his generals for full-scale mobilisation prior to a German attack—an action that he thought might provoke an invasion by Hitler. Stalin was disastrously wrong. Hitler invaded Russia while still at war with Britain and the invasion came a lot sooner than the Soviet dictator expected. Stalin’s decision to remain in Moscow helped to steady a panic that was developing in the city, and he gave some stirring patriotic speeches to troops on their way to the front, such as here in Red Square, 7 November 1941. (David King Collection) The German invasion plan envisaged a quick and easy war in Russia that would see the Red Army destroyed within a few weeks and the country occupied along a line running from Archangel in the north to Astrakhan in the south.

  • Thanks in part to Stalin’s miscalculations about the timing and immediate consequences of a German attack, Hitler almost achieved these goals.
  • See map, p.44.) Only when the Red Army repelled a German attack on Moscow in November–December 1941 did the tide of war begin to turn in the Soviets’ favour.

Even so, Hitler was strong enough to attempt victory again in 1942, this time in a southern campaign that took his armies to Stalingrad. After his death Stalin came under attack in the Soviet Union for allowing himself to be so surprised by Hitler. Leading the assault was Nikita Khrushchev, his successor as Soviet leader.

  1. In a secret speech to the twentieth congress of the Soviet Communist Party in 1956 Khrushchev denounced many aspects of Stalin’s leadership, including his warlordship.
  2. According to Khrushchev, it was clear that the Germans were going to invade and that the invasion would have disastrous consequences for the Soviet Union if the country was not adequately prepared and mobilised.

When war broke out, claimed Khrushchev, Stalin went into a state of shock and did not come to his senses until other party leaders went to him and insisted that he continue to lead the country. Stalin recovered his nerve but his amateurish military leadership proved to be disastrous, argued Khrushchev.

Only the sacrifices of the Soviet people saved the country from defeat, and it was Stalin’s generals and his comrades in the party leadership who deserved the credit for victory. Khrushchev’s somewhat self-serving critique of Stalin’s war leadership was part of a more general effort by him to puncture the mythology generated by the cult of personality that surrounded the dictator until his death in 1953.

According to the personality cult, Stalin was a military genius who could do no wrong. Soviet defeats in the early years of the war were explained as part of the great Stalin’s plan to draw the Germans deep into Russia in order to annihilate them, while Soviet victories were all designed and directed by the dictator himself. The German advance in the south, summer 1942. But when Khrushchev fell from power in 1964 a different view of Stalin as warlord began to emerge. Those Soviet generals who had worked closely with Stalin testified to the dictator’s military talents, particularly after he had learned the painful lessons of defeat.

  1. According to Zhukov, ‘Stalin made a big personal contribution to the victory over Nazi Germany and its allies.
  2. His prestige was exceedingly high, and his appointment as supreme commander was wholeheartedly acclaimed by the people and the troops.
  3. To err is human, and, of course, the supreme commander did make mistakes early in the war.

But he took them close to heart, gave them deep thought, and sought to draw due lessons from them so as never to repeat them again.’ This more positive view of Stalin’s role as supreme commander has been confirmed by the new evidence from the Russian archives that emerged after the collapse of Soviet communism in 1991.

  1. It is clear from Stalin’s appointments diary, for example, that he did not suffer a nervous collapse when the Germans invaded.
  2. Stalin was certainly shocked by the extent of the early German successes, but he remained in control and maintained the coherence of his military and political command structure in the face of devastating defeats.

Even when the Germans were approaching Moscow Stalin did not waver and took some key decisions that helped to save the city. Zhukov was given command of Soviet defences and Stalin resisted the temptation to throw all his reserves into the defensive battle, saving some for a planned counter-offensive.

His decision to remain in Moscow helped to steady a panic that was developing in the city, and he gave some stirring patriotic speeches to troops on their way to the front. Khrushchev’s criticism that Stalin always preferred offensive action and had little time for defence was more valid. When the Germans attacked in June 1941 he ordered a series of massive counter-offensives that made little headway but further disorganised Soviet defences.

Against the advice of his generals, he refused to withdraw his forces from Kiev, the Ukrainian capital. The result was that four Soviet armies—more than 40 divisions—were encircled by the Germans and 600,000 Soviet soldiers were killed, captured or went missing in action. Ruins of the factory district in besieged Stalingrad. One of the keys to success was maintaining a Red Army bridgehead in Stalingrad itself that would keep the Germans locked into a gruelling war of attrition for the city. (Interfoto) But it wasn’t just Stalin who was gung-ho for offensive action.

The offensivist orientation was integral to the Red Army’s military culture, and it was a doctrine to which all Stalin’s generals fully subscribed. Most of Stalin’s mistakes during the early years of the Eastern Front war were made on the advice of his generals. They, like him, were on a steep learning curve, and it took time and experience for them to develop better judgement—and the better they got at their job the more willing was Stalin to take their advice.

Victory at Stalingrad The great turning-point for Stalin and his generals came during the battle of Stalingrad. In summer 1942 the Germans re-launched their invasion of the USSR with a campaign in southern Russia designed to reach Baku and capture the oilfields that supplied 80% of the Soviet war economy’s fuel.

  • As in summer 1941, the Germans advanced very rapidly and Hitler was encouraged to think that his armies could simultaneously reach Baku and occupy Stalingrad.
  • Stalin’s city’ was a psychological as well as an industrial and strategic target for Hitler, and its capture would have been a devastating blow to Soviet morale.

(See map, p.46.) Stalin was slow to respond to the German threat in the south because he thought that Hitler’s main target was Moscow. Another problem was that some ill-conceived and badly prepared offensive operations in April–May 1942 had resulted in such severe losses that Soviet defences were in a badly weakened state when the Germans launched their southern campaign.

But when Hitler’s intentions became clear, Soviet defences in the Stalingrad area were strengthened and plans laid for a concentrated counter-offensive that would turn back the German advance. One of the keys to success was maintaining a Red Army bridgehead in Stalingrad itself that would keep the Germans locked into a gruelling war of attrition for the city.

This was the importance of the prolonged defensive battle of Stalingrad that the Soviets waged from August to November 1942. Victorious Soviet soldiers marching through the ruins of Stalingrad. Stalin and his generals had orchestrated a heroic defence of the city that was admired throughout the allied world. (Interfoto) The turning-point at Stalingrad came in November 1942, when the Soviets launched a multi-pronged offensive that surrounded Hitler’s armies in the city and threatened to cut off German forces advancing toward Baku.

In the event the Germans were able to execute a retreat that saved some of their southern armies, but their troops in Stalingrad remained trapped in the city and by early 1943 had either been wiped out or captured by the Red Army. When the dust had settled, the Germans and their allies had lost nearly 50 divisions and suffered casualties of one and a half million, including 150,000 dead in Stalingrad alone.

Hitler’s southern campaign was a complete failure, and the last real chance for the Germans to win the war on the Eastern Front had been lost. (See map, p.47.) Stalingrad was a triumph for Stalin and his generals. They had orchestrated a heroic defence of the city that was admired throughout the allied world, and demonstrated consummate operational art in the skilful execution of a complex strategic encirclement operation.

  • During the course of these operations the Soviet high command developed a coherence and dynamism that it maintained until the end of the war.
  • Central to this cohesion and creativity was Stalin’s leadership.
  • It was his authority and his handling of relations with and between his generals that united and energised the group.

Stalin continued to make mistakes—as did his generals—but these became fewer and less costly as the war progressed. After Stalingrad, German defeat on the Eastern Front was inevitable—as long as the Soviet people continued to make colossal sacrifices and providing that Stalin and his generals kept on winning the big battles.

The verdict on Stalin In an interview published in 1981 Averell Harriman, US ambassador in Moscow during the war, who had more direct dealings with Stalin than almost any other foreigner, summed up the dictator’s qualities as a warlord: ‘Stalin the war leader was popular, and there can be no doubt that he was the one who held the Soviet Union together.

I do not think anyone else could have done it. I’d like to emphasise my great admiration for Stalin the national leader in an emergency—one of those historic occasions when one man made such a difference. He had an enormous ability to absorb detail and to act on detail.

He was very much alert to the needs of the whole war machine. These were not the characteristics of a bureaucrat, but rather those of an extremely able and vigorous war leader.’ Richard Overy’s verdict in his classic book Why the Allies won (1975) was that ‘Stalin brought a powerful will to bear on the Soviet war effort that motivated those around him and directed their energies.

In the process he expected and got exceptional sacrifices from his besieged people, revelations of the brutality of the wartime regime should not blind us to the fact that Stalin’s grip on the Soviet Union may have helped more than it hindered the pursuit of victory.’ In my book Stalin’s wars I take this argument a step further and argue that Stalin’s war leadership was indispensable to the Soviet victory and that without his personal contribution the war against Hitler may well have been lost. Geoffrey Roberts is Professor of History and International Relations at University College Cork. Further reading: C. Bellamy, Absolute war: Soviet Russia in the Second World War (Basingstoke, 2007).D. Glantz and J. House, When titans clashed: how the Red Army stopped Hitler (Kansas, 1995).E.

Who won the most war?

Which countries have won the most battles? –

Rank Country Won battles
1 France 1115
2 The United Kingdom / England 1105
3 United States 833
4 Russia 491
5 Germany 425
6 Spain 387
7 Poland 344
8 Rome 259
9 China 244
10 Turkey 210

Want to learn more? Then you might like to read:

Battles that Changed History The Art Of War

Asked By: Luke Bryant Date: created: Apr 25 2024

Which country killed the most in ww2

Answered By: Isaac Bailey Date: created: Apr 28 2024

Estimates for the total death count of the Second World War generally range somewhere between 70 and 85 million people. The Soviet Union suffered the highest number of fatalities of any single nation, with estimates mostly falling between 22 and 27 million deaths.

Where to hide during ww3?

Guam. An easily defensible island with a strong military presence, Guam is a wise place to hole up if you want to survive a worldwide conflict.

Asked By: Ashton Collins Date: created: May 05 2024

Where is the safest place in Europe during ww3

Answered By: Connor Smith Date: created: May 07 2024

3. Switzerland – Switzerland has ranked highly on the list of the most secure place in the world, for years. The country itself is considered to be one with the highest standard of living and the most stable economy. Historically, Switzerland has maintained a neutral position in times of war.

Where is the safest place in Europe in a nuclear war?

Safest countries –

  1. A study in August last year found that the countries with the best hope of at least seeing their civilisation survive during the ten years after a nuclear war would be Argentina and Australia.
  2. The reason they, and several countries across central Africa, would be able to maintain life was because “they already grew more resistant crops, such as wheat, in large quantities and also had low populations”, said,
  3. However, “it wouldn’t be necessarily peaches and cream” for Australia, said Professor Alan Robock, from Rutgers University in New Jersey, because “you can imagine there will be flotillas of hungry refugees from Asia on their way there”.

So perhaps you could consider Iceland? The named the Nordic country as the safest place in the event of a nuclear war. “Because Iceland is isolated from the rest of the world by the North Atlantic Ocean, it would be very difficult for a nuclear missile to reach Iceland without being detected first,” it said.

  • Also, it added, Iceland generates all of its electricity from geothermal sources, so even if the entire electrical grid went down, Iceland “would still have power thanks to its natural hot springs”.
  • The site also noted that Canada has a “large landmass and population spread out over a wide area”, making it “less likely that a single nuclear strike could wipe out the entire country”.
  • Modelling by in 2016 found that “should atomic annihilation be on the cards”, one of the safest places to live would be Antarctica, because the “sub-zero continent” is “miles from anywhere”, or Easter Island in the South Pacific, which is more than 2,000 miles from South America.

Continue reading for free We hope you’re enjoying The Week’s refreshingly open-minded journalism. Subscribed to The Week? Register your account with the same email as your subscription. : The safest places to be in a nuclear attack

Asked By: Miles Bell Date: created: Dec 16 2023

Who has saved the most lives

Answered By: Wyatt Patterson Date: created: Dec 18 2023
Norman Borlaug
Borlaug in 2004
Born March 25, 1914 Cresco, Iowa, U.S.
Died September 12, 2009 (aged 95) Dallas, Texas, U.S.
Alma mater University of Minnesota ( BS, MS, PhD )
Known for
  • Green Revolution
  • World Food Prize
  • Nobel Peace Prize (1970)
  • Presidential Medal of Freedom (1977)
  • ForMemRS (1987)
  • Vannevar Bush Award (2000)
  • Public Welfare Medal (2002)
  • National Medal of Science (2004)
  • Congressional Gold Medal (2006)
  • Padma Vibhushan (2006)
Scientific career
  • Agronomy
  • Plant pathology
  • Genetics
  • DuPont
  • Cooperative Wheat Research and Production Program (Mexico)
  • International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
  • Texas A&M University
Thesis Variation and Variability in Fusarium lini, (1942)
Doctoral advisor Jonas Jergon Christensen
Other academic advisors Elvin C. Stakman

Norman Ernest Borlaug (; March 25, 1914 – September 12, 2009) was an American agronomist who led initiatives worldwide that contributed to the extensive increases in agricultural production termed the Green Revolution, Borlaug was awarded multiple honors for his work, including the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal,

  1. Borlaug received his B.S.
  2. In forestry in 1937 and PhD in plant pathology and genetics from the University of Minnesota in 1942.
  3. He took up an agricultural research position with CIMMYT in Mexico, where he developed semi-dwarf, high- yield, disease -resistant wheat varieties,
  4. During the mid-20th century, Borlaug led the introduction of these high-yielding varieties combined with modern agricultural production techniques to Mexico, Pakistan, and India.

As a result, Mexico became a net exporter of wheat by 1963. Between 1965 and 1970, wheat yields nearly doubled in Pakistan and India, greatly improving the food security in those nations. Borlaug was often called “the father of the Green Revolution”, and is credited with saving over a billion people worldwide from starvation,

According to Jan Douglas, executive assistant to the president of the World Food Prize Foundation, the source of this number is Gregg Easterbrook ‘s 1997 article “Forgotten Benefactor of Humanity.” The article states that the “form of agriculture that Borlaug preaches may have prevented a billion deaths.” He was awarded the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his contributions to world peace through increasing food supply.

Later in his life, he helped apply these methods of increasing food production in Asia and Africa.

Has there ever been a nuclear war?

For over 50 years, but especially since the end of the cold war, the United States and the Russian Federation (formerly the Soviet Union) have engaged in a series of bilateral arms control measures that have drastically reduced their strategic nuclear arsenals from a peak of around 60,000.

  1. The most recent of those measures, the New START Treaty, limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons to 1,550 per State.
  2. New START is scheduled to expire on 5 February 2021; should it expire without a successor or not be extended, it will be the first time that the strategic arsenals of the United States and the Russian Federation have not been constrained since the 1970s.* * The New START Treaty entered into effect on 5 February 2011 for a period of 10 years.

It can be extended for up to five years, unless it is replaced earlier by another agreement. Source: Federation of American Scientists Acronyms: SALT I=Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty; INF=Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty; START=Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty; SORT=Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty; New START=Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms.

Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. One can destroy a whole city, potentially killing millions, and jeopardizing the natural environment and lives of future generations through its long-term catastrophic effects. The dangers from such weapons arise from their very existence. Although nuclear weapons have only been used twice in warfare—in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945—about 13,400 reportedly remain in our world today and there have been over 2,000 nuclear tests conducted to date.

Disarmament is the best protection against such dangers, but achieving this goal has been a tremendously difficult challenge. Regional Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones (NWFZ) have been established to strengthen global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament norms and consolidate international efforts towards peace and security.

The United Nations has sought to eliminate such weapons ever since its establishment. The first resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1946 established a Commission to deal with problems related to the discovery of atomic energy among others. The Commission was to make proposals for, inter alia, the control of atomic energy to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes.

The resolution also decided that the Commission should make proposals for “the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons and of all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction.” A number of multilateral treaties have since been established with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation and testing, while promoting progress in nuclear disarmament.

These include the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests In The Atmosphere, In Outer Space And Under Water, also known as the Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT), the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which was signed in 1996 but has yet to enter into force, and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which will enter into force on 22 January 2021.

A number of bilateral and plurilateral treaties and arrangements seek to reduce or eliminate certain categories of nuclear weapons, to prevent the proliferation of such weapons and their delivery vehicles. These range from several treaties between the United States of America and Russian Federation as well as various other initiatives, to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation, and the Wassenaar Arrangement,

  • The United Nations Secretariat supports efforts aimed at the non-proliferation and total elimination of nuclear weapons.
  • Securing Our Common Future: An Agenda for Disarmament ” considers nuclear weapons in the framework of “disarmament to save humanity.” In the agenda, the Secretary-General calls for resuming dialogue and negotiations for nuclear arms control and disarmament.

He also supports extending the norms against nuclear weapons, and in that regard appeals to States that possess nuclear weapons to affirm that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Finally, the agenda proposes preparing for a world free of nuclear weapons through a number of risk -reduction measures, including transparency in nuclear-weapon programmes, further reductions in all types of nuclear weapons, commitments not to introduce new and destabilizing types of nuclear weapons, including cruise missiles, reciprocal commitments for the non-use of nuclear weapons and reduction of the role of nuclear weapons in security doctrines.

Asked By: Walter Wright Date: created: Jul 13 2023

Who saved this world

Answered By: Jake Taylor Date: created: Jul 15 2023

#1: Stanislav Petrov In September 1983, lieutenant colonel Stanislav Petrov was the duty officer working at the Serpukhov-15 command center in the Soviet Union. Suddenly, the nuclear early-warning system began blaring. It had detected five missiles had been fired at them from the US.

Asked By: Rodrigo Morris Date: created: Apr 11 2024

What are the chances of surviving a war

Answered By: Gerld Adams Date: created: Apr 11 2024

Movies and popular culture often portray there being few survivors but other than in a small number of particularly fierce battles within a larger war, the majority survive, generally a large majority 80-90%.