>За ними приедет армия и отвезет в комфортабельный бункер

Бункеров то они и не построили. У них очень хуево было с этим. Влом цитату искать точную.

"in July 1986, in a report to Congress, FEMA could state that “U.S. civil defense capabilities are low and declining.” “National survival would be in jeopardy” in the event of a nuclear attack, it declared, while asking for a mere $130 million to keep the network of emergency operation centers established 20 years before at a minimal functioning level—an amount that was further pared down."

Видимо собирались уебать раху первыми, если какие-то серьёзные терки начнутся.

>с десятками миллионов трупов.

А за США/НАТО будут, да? По волшебным причинам, угу.

Вот кстати документ:

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2022-07-14/long-classified-us-estimates-nuclear-war-casualties-during

Exemplifying the catastrophic scale of the casualties was a 1967 interagency report that reported on the comparative vulnerabilities of the United States and the Soviet Union. According to the estimate, in 1964, the Soviets could kill 48 million Americans in a preemptive attack; by 1968, with greater numbers of ICBMs in place, they would be able to kill 91 million. By contrast, the trend in Soviet fatalities was constant during the decade because U.S. already had large strategic forces in 1964. In a U.S. retaliatory attack on Soviet cities in 1964, some 77 million would be killed. Under the same circumstances, 81 million would be killed in 1967.

В СССР популяция в те годы была 240 миллионов.

>в субурбии

Большинство сабурбии не так далеко от промышленных зон, разнообразных предприятий, стратегических объектов, итп. И сабурбия не бетонная, а картонная, менее устойчивая к взрывным волнам и перегревам от излучения. Пожаров в ней точно будет больше.

>приканчиванием рашки.

Мы вообще-то про совок говорим.