...so why aren't You?
"The post-war epoch is gone. We are living in new times: in a pre-war epoch" ~ Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, on Twitter / X, 9th March 2024.
When we hear reports of deep bunkering for continuity of government, or a revival of vast civil defence programs designed to shelter entire civilian populations in
places like Switzerland (which has a longstanding nuclear bunkering policy going back to the 1950s)
or Sweden, or even the present feverish scrambling of high profile billionaires to make preparations for “the event”, we must take it as confirmation
of a clear and very near-term threat of full-blown nuclear war between Russia and the West.
German officials are now in panic mode as well, calling for
an immediate program of civil defence bunkering
(albeit optimistically) thinking they have ten years to accomplish it,
And it is not just the above actors that are busying themselves to get ready for WW3.
According to unsubstantiated rumours in the US, many ex-intel and military officers, government officials, etc.,
have been quietly acquiring retreats and presumably bunkers also.
On top of that, we know from our own discussions on the ground with relevant parties that more and more well-off people and even the less well-off are starting to worry,
if not panic, about getting ready on time for what is coming.
For example, Ron Hubbard of Atlas Survival Shelters in the US has expanded his operation to Europe and Australia,
even though he candidly admits he cannot hope to satisfy
current demand for what he describes as “hot ticket items” (referring to his own steel and precast bunkers) worldwide right now.
All of this, of course, bespeaks not just a credible threat, but a conscious, semi-quiet rush for the exits, so to speak.
Why is there Civil Defence Bunkering in Switzerland, Sweden and Finland?
In the more responsible countries (at least with regard to civil defence planning) of Switzerland, Sweden and Finland, there has been a longstanding policy of civil defence based
on the concept of practical fallout sheltering.
Notably, each of the three foregoing nations maintained a neutral status throughout the
Cold War, along with Austria (which to this day remains outside of NATO,
unlike Sweden and Finland, who recently joined the alliance).
Sweden and Finland in particular were traditionally keen not to appear as posing the least threat to Russia, leading to them being castigated by some in the NATO countries as cowardly appeasers,
and inspiring the derogatory term “Finlandisation” to describe a weak approach to relations with Russia.
It has to be stated, however, that each of the three “bunker countries” listed above, in addition to hoping that neutrality would minimise hostile intentions from Russia (despite the fact that
those in the know will tell you that Russia regards neutrality as nothing more than a risible tactic), also opted against
the acquisition of nuclear weapons and made a zero-sum-game choice between nuclear arms and proper civil defence measures, electing to spend the money on the latter rather than the former.
Britain and the US, on the other hand, took the opposite path by going all-in with the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and it is our understanding that the UK did so by deliberately
sacrificing civil defence expenditure for the sake of its nuclear deterrent, whereas the reasons why the US did not invest in both (given the great size of its economy) seems irrational
or otherwise inexcusable.
Switzerland's Bunker Phenomenon
Swiss nuclear war planning is renowned the world over for the emphasis it places on fallout shelters and deep bunkering, to the extent that
Swiss expertise on the subject is considered by many
to be the gold standard and therefore greatly sought after.
With close to 370,000 nuclear shelters
in the country (and rumours of even more than that), there is emergency accommodation for its entire population plus room to spare.
Sadly, due to the careless lapse in vigilance that fell upon the world in the aftermath of the ostensible collapse of the Soviet Union,
in 2011 the Swiss relaxed their longstanding rule that mandated
nuclear bunkers be constructed inside new build properties of 8 or more rooms, a move that now looks painfully short-sighted and naive.
It was, however, only a partial softening of their thinking, as they retained the rule for properties with 38+ rooms, but due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and
the still-escalating anti-western rhetoric emanating from the Kremlin,
the Swiss in 2023 adjusted their stance to some extent
(albeit not yet fully revoked the 2011 policy change).
Sweden's Approach to Bunkering
Sweden, of late, has been in a panic mode with regard to Russia's intentions in the Baltic Sea region, a state of alarm that began well before Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, compelling the Swedish government to issue a 2018 update of their classic emergency pamphlet, If Crisis or War Comes, to every resident of the country (you can also download this from our own Downloads Page).
One can sense the palpable stress amidst the switched-on Swedes in the fascinating 2020 video report below, which aired two years before Russia made its move into Ukraine:
Since that time, however, Sweden has ever further cranked up the worry levels through (a) its application to join NATO,
(b) its recent panic-inducing statements about the need for
its population to prepare for war with Russia and (c)
its successful accession to NATO.
Personally, having lived in a frontline NATO country for 5 years, I totally understand the Swedish sense of terror because I experienced it myself in the run-up to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
But for Sweden, being prepared has an extra nuance beyond its government encouraging its populace to become preppers and psychologically preparing them for a world war;
it extends to affording a proper level of diligence to the matter of limited-scope sheltering for most of the country's population (with a heavy focus on urban coverage), courtesy of some
67,000 bunkers / shelters.
To the best of our knowledge Sweden does not, however, provide food in those shelters; rather, Swedes must bring their own (in keeping with government policy of encouraging everyone
to become a prepper).
Worse, many if not most of these shelters appear to have limited utility, not being fully designed for nuclear war, but appear as rather more of a stop-gap against conventional strikes.
Naturally, we would assess Swedish bunkering to be far inferior to the Swiss arrangements, and believe that this underlines the fact that is always better by far to take preparedness
plans into your own hands rather than to rely on government help.
Bunkering in Finland
Whereas the Swedes seem to have traditionally infused minimalism into their bunkering preparations, the Finns (who have a policy of
"total defence" that draws all citizens into the defensive effort)
have taken a more Swiss-style approach to it by factoring protection against nuclear blasts into their considerations.
Helsinki, the capital and largest city in Finland, has bunkers burrowed into the city's bedrock, with the expectation that the mass overhead would both absorb the shockwaves and scorch effects
of a nuclear barrage, as well as soaking up the concomitant radiation.
The bunkers have been designed with nuclear blast doors and curvature worked into the access tunnels to further attenuate the effects of a nuclear shockwave.
With some 5,500 bunkers in Helsinki alone, the Finns claim to have enough World War Three emergency accommodation for the entire population of the city (plus plenty to spare),
and in the country as a whole, there
is an estimated 50,500 bunkers in total (some estimates place the figure higher)
so that the entire civilian population has coverage in the event of a nuclear war with Russia.
Many if not most of the public (and private) bunkers in Finland also double as sports halls, gyms, cafes, swimming pools, car parks, etc., in an impressive demonstration of dual-use planning to offset THE
development and maintenance costs.
Billionaires Going Berserk for Bunkers
If you have been paying attention of late (which should be the case if you are the conservative reader we hope you are!), you will have almost certainly encountered the raft of
mainstream news stories about billionaires scrambling
to build “doomsday shelters”. (See also this CBC article).
Amidst all the proffered rationales is plenty of talk about surviving economic collapse, societal unrest, climate change (yes, seriously), cyberattacks, and so on.
But realistically, nobody needs a fallout shelter underground with thick concrete encasing, blast doors and sophisticated life support systems to survive any of those things.
What Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, et al, are plainly preparing for is nuclear war.
Closing Thoughts
"World War Three's begun, people better waken up to this" ~ Gerald Celente in an interview with Neil McCoy-Ward on 18th March 2024.
Hopefully by now you are no longer counting on any of the weak arguments against the possibility if nuclear war that so many are wishfully clinging to (see our article,
5 Popular Nuclear War Myths, and see the need to be proactive.
And although the UK government (in contrast to, say, the Swedish government) is still not being fully straight with its citizenry concerning the present path to war with Russia (and China),
a slow-boil priming-cum-desensitisation is underway in the mainstream media so that the narrative can and will, we predict, turn on a sixpence when they decide "it's time".
By that stage, however, getting on the bunker ladder will be too late for all but the very wealthiest members of the public outside the fold of the elites, assuming it will not be too late
even for them.
You could, no doubt, be cynical about this and say that of course we would make that point, but if you look at it objectively, we are sure you will agree with us that the sooner you get this
peace-of-mind matter resolved the better because, given the looming CBDC-based controlled financial system, the window to act will probably close long before the war with Russia begins in earnest.
And if you would like help in finding a retreat locale or building a shelter, perhaps we can be of assistance.