There's an insane amount of shipping going on right now and I seriously can't imagine terrorists can disrupt those supply chains. We'll just reroute around them - there is plenty of duplicate shipping channels in the world. If terrorists can get us to slide to the assumption of attacks instead of realizing shit happens and we're trying to fix it...well, they've already won.
A dirty bomb or gas attack would make it very difficult to get supplies to the right place.
If you are 'near' an attack zone, and stay inside your house, you may be able to safeguard yourself from most of the radiation or gas or whatever. But the area may be too unsafe for other people to regularly travel to, in which case water/food will be a problem.
It may take a few days for the gov. to get people geared up to travel in 'somewhat dangerous zones' around the attack with food/water etc..
> there is plenty of duplicate shipping channels in the world
But there are choke points, too. For example, the Strait of Malacca (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Malacca), the relatively narrow passage that connects the Indian Ocean to the Pacific. Something like 25% of the entire world's shipped goods pass through the Strait; and it's especially important for China, as nearly all of the imported oil that keeps her industrial machine running is shipped to them from the Middle East via that route.
None of which is to say that the sky is falling and people (in Germany or elsewhere) need to start stockpiling water and digging their Apocalypse Bunkers, of course. It's just worth noting that the space through which goods can be shipped is narrower than most people may realize.
"oblige" and "required" are pretty strong words for what can't be more than a recommendation. ("Die Bevölkerung wird angehalten, einen individuellen Vorrat [...]" is the German quote, which I'd maybe translate as "the public is asked to")
Also, as far as I can tell from the news reports, the report and it's recommendations are about general disaster preparedness, not terrorism or other attacks specifically. The stockpile recommendations also are nothing new, and I suspect they'll be ignored in the future just as much as they are now. People in areas with bad-ish infrastructure or regular emergencies (floodings, ...) will be prepared, others less so. I suspect civil defense authorities in most countries have similar recommendations.
Those are indeed strong words. Governments in Europe have considerably more power than in the new world. They can do these things - they view statehood as literally the community. Sometimes that has advantages, sometimes not.
Even scarier, is the fact that this is even being done.
Since there are no external threats and 0 chance of environmental disaster (Germany doesn't get floods and hurricanes etc.) - it speaks to a terrorist threat.
Over 1.5 million people flooded into Germany. 1 million official. Of those, only 1/4 were 'refugees' - i.e. displaced people from Syria and Iraq. The remainder were young men from Algeria, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia, Egypt seeking a better life.
Of course, I don't blame anyone for seeking a better life, but arbitrary infusion of 100's of thousands of people into farily ethnically homogenous state that already has problems with integration re: Turks, who stand out strongly among other immigrants in terms of their non-integration - is crazy.
'Bleeding hearts' need to be met with 'responsible, pragmatic minds'.
Yes - we need to help refugees. Of course. But we have to be responsible about it.
Angela Merkels unilateral and now unpopular policy of just opening the doors is absurd. She later said she was 'surprised' that so many 'non refugees' would decide to come - which illustrates how astonishingly politicos are out of touch with human nature.
The moment she opened the gates, I assumed the outcome - millions would try to come, by hook or by crook.
Canada and USA are shielded by oceans - but they and the UK have the right approach - they take a specific number from UN camps - such refugees are well vetted, they are credibly refugees and not terrorists, families instead of just young men, and it happens at a controlled pace.
+ Germany has 100K Syrian asylum requests in Sept 2015. This would be 10% of the official number of migrants, and less than that including many who are off the books:
+ Germany can have flooding, but it's in very specific areas. Germany does not face the kinds of catastrophic environmental issues that happen in the US - like right now in Louisiana. There is no chance that floods in Germany will affect mass populations. It's in isolated areas, usually by rivers. To get 'food and water' they can 'walk up the hill'. 'Flooding' has never been a concern on this scale, it's not why they are issuing the order.
+ About 1/2 of those receiving direct asylum in 2015 were Syrians - they get an 'acceptance rate' of almost 100%. But only about 1/2 of those entering - by official figures - are making the applications. Which means 'officially' - only about 1/4 are Syrian. Syrians are not going to be represented in those that have not applied, because they are almost guaranteed to be accepted.
In 2015 DE had 441K applicants, but had over 900K 'migrants' - again - the 'official' numbers, with many estimates much larger.
'Open Borders' was a sever act of utter irresponsibility on the part of Angela Merkel - who caused the flood crises by inviting anyone with the ability to do this.
I was in Tunisia recently and it was common for people to talk openly about 'going to Germany'. Tunisians are definitely listed as 'safe country of origin' and are not going to have their refugee claims accepted.
The 'responsible' thing to do would be to fly in refugees directly from camps. It would be cheaper as well.
Angela Merkels actions resulted in 100's of thousands of people, flooding across tiny nations such as Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Hungary and creative massive calamity and disruption, and creating political chaos in those countries.
1) Stop spreading hate and general insecurity.
2) When talking about "W Europe" cite local sources to preserve correctness of information.
3) Question: Where are you from to have such a strong opinion?
> there are no external threats and 0 chance of environmental disaster (Germany doesn't get floods and hurricanes etc.) - it speaks to a terrorist threat.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Germany has floods, snow storms, etc. The government has to think about disaster protection and what it means in a modern society, which depends on concepts like 'always on'. Plans are twenty years old and need to be updated.
A few years ago there were some parts of Germany without electricity for a few days and some were not reachable, because of a winter storm, which damaged large power lines.
Yes, every country has such issues, but they are very minor in Germany in comparison to other places, which is what I meant to say. Furthermore - those 'threats' have existed for two thousand year, the motivation for the current mandate has nothing to do with environmental threats and 100% to do with terrorists threats.
There are terrorists attacks monthly in Europe (you don't get the headlines here in the US, and often, the 'attacks' are individuals with knives on trains, or who attack a single family so they don't get attention) - and European governments are really in a difficult situation - they don't know what to do. So this mandate kind of a 'knee jerk reaction' to some extent, possibly even 'political cover' so that they seem as though they are doing something, if you want a cynical take.
The North Sea coast, where I live here in Germany 100km away, has always seen floods and violent storms. Additionally there are floods from heavy rains in the Elbe region. I live in such a region, where such a flood is possible.
Germany has disaster protection plans. It has organizations to provide help, like the THW. Etc. etc. The plan mentioned here has been in preparation for several years now.
The plans have nothing to do with knife attacks in trains. You are clearly clueless about this government paper.
Indeed it's all about improving general preparedness again. Civil protection received very little attention in Germany since the Cold War ended and the big, evil enemy who could attack at any time was gone. The government now presented plans to improve it again. One bullet point among many others (general stockpiling, how to alarm people, emergency power, …) is to reiterate these rather old recommendations for individuals. So nothing special about this.
The German government has recommended this for decades already. What's new is that someone important with nothing else to do probably stumbled over this topic and decided it should be taken more seriously.
This is pretty much the equivalent to the random reading of TOS or the DoS Travel Security Advice [1]: It's always there in that pretty same wording, yet is only read or of general interest when it's changed.
I never thought about it before but now I wonder if I should have a small stock just in case. Nothing serious, maybe 2 weeks worth of stuff to live on. That I can have and forget, not maintain indefinately. Anyone have something like that? Any tips?
Well, food is easy enough - canned food doesn't take up much space and is easy to keep stocked, assuming you regularly rotate through it so that it doesn't expire.
The harder part is water, as just a few days worth of drinking water for one person can take up a huge amount of space.
The harder part is water, as just a few days worth of drinking water for one person can take up a huge amount of space.
Eh??? A generally "comfortable" minimal budget for water is 1 gallon per day (3.8 liters, call it 4), although you might need more on hot summer days. A 5 gallon container is, with all the plastic and features for stack-ability, going to take up less than a cubic foot (19,000 cc).
It's not compact like food, but it's pretty easy to store enough so that you can ride out a short disaster and pick your time to get more for a longer one.
I was born and raised in, and have retired to a town famous for its distance from any large body of water, let alone salt water (Joplin, MO), and most Germans aren't on their coast as well.
Here, if I run out of stored water, along those lines I need purifying capability, such as coffee filters for coarse filtering, then any one of a number of chemical methods, e.g. plain household bleach, or a serious small pore filter such as Katadyn specializes in.
I disagree, you can get by on 2 litres of water per day. You're obviously not going to be having showers and brushing your teeth with it, but that's not the end of the world.
Hell, I go through only about 6 litres of water a day while climbing mountains in the summer.
Remember that food also contains water when looking at minimum intakes.
That's why I qualified 1 gallon/3.8 liters as a "comfortable" minimum, if you're planning water storage for your dwelling, given the size of containers and your not needing to carry it anywhere, you might as well initially splurge. If the disaster lasts long enough, and you can't get more, you can cut down to ~2 liters/half a gallon some time before you run out.
Speaking as someone who cooks, a typical pantry should last you at least 2 weeks if you just wanted to survive. Flour, pasta, rice, eggs, various preserved meats and vegetables. Anything you have that is perishable could probably be immediately preserved and will easily last 2 weeks.
If there was really a problem, my main concerns would be water and power.
Everyone should have at least 3 days of food and water stockpiled. Especially if you live in an area where you might experience a natural or man-made disaster (doesn't Turkey get lots of earthquakes?).
You want food that can be eaten unheated, all the better if it's not in cans so you don't need a can opener. Get some biscuits or crackers, some canned meat (corned beef or tuna), and canned or dehydrated vegetables (soaking them works well enough). Dehydrated potatoes are also light and compact, and provide good energy. Chocolate is also a great compact source of energy, and lasts for a long time. Grab some muesli/granola bars as well for eating on the go.
A standard tin of corned beef will last a couple of days. A mixture of corned beef, dehydrated potatoes, and dehydrated peas will keep you going for a long time. I've eaten a pot of it all mixed together and gone until the evening eating hardly anything while climbing mountains.
As for water, you'll want at least 2 litres per day, and you'll want to rotate your stock every 6-12 months as water does go stale.
If you want to set yourself up for longer term, I'd suggest getting a gas cooker or something to cook on, and then you can also boil water to get clean water. The alternative for long term water is iodine or other purification tablets, but they taste nasty.
Apart from food, you'll also want to keep some medical supplies: bandages, sling, tape, gloves (these are important!). Toilet paper is also essential.
You'll want to keep all this stuff in a box or bag that you can easily grab and get the fuck out. I live in an earthquake prone area, so it pays to be prepared here.
Forgot about peanut butter. It's one of my essentials when going hunting or hiking. Goes surprisingly well with corned beef and bread, like a half-arsed satay.
Canned meat (especially tuna) is a good source of protein, which peanut butter doesn't really provide. There's also a moral effect of eating meat. You could just stockpile a few boxes of muesli bars, which are calorie dense, but you'd get pretty upset with eating them after a day or two.
Even the Army realises this, and attempts to give variation in their MREs and in their First Strike ration packs. You could feed a soldier on a fat/sugar/vitamin/fibre mix, but you'd kill their morale pretty damn quick.
I'd find spam a lot more demoralizing than peanut butter.
I looked in the cupboard. Tuna, which is almost just protein and water, has 17 grams of protein in a 74 gram serving. Chunky peanut butter has 7 grams of protein in a 32 gram serving (http://www.jif.com/products/extra-crunchy-peanut-butter).
The tuna is 70 calories. The peanut butter is 190 calories (it has quite a lot of fat in it).
Searching online, canned ham appears to be ~100 calories for 50-some grams, with 10 grams of protein. Spam compares to the peanut butter, with 180 calories per serving and 7 grams of protein (http://www.spam.com/varieties/spam-classic).
So by mass, the peanut butter does a pretty great job of supplying protein, and it comes with a bunch of calories too. Oil packed tuna would do better with the calories, but I find it off-putting.
I'd imagine that most people would have enough food to last for 10 days in their pantry, fridge, and freezer.
Obviously, the water part is a bit different, most people won't have 15-odd litres of water just sitting around.
I'm fairly sure that most countries advise residents to keep 3 days supply of food and water stockpiled, or maybe it's just the countries that are disaster-prone.
More interesting than the food stockpile though:
> and pressed for plans for the military to train more closely with police in preparing for potential large-scale militant attacks.
Isn't the military constitutionally barred from operating domestically in Germany?
>I'm fairly sure that most countries advise residents to keep 3 days supply of food and water stockpiled, or maybe it's just the countries that are disaster-prone.
> Isn't the military constitutionally barred from operating domestically in Germany?
It is, except for disaster relief (e.g. major floods). During the Munich nazi amok run, the Feldjäger (military police) were alerted, though, and politicians are widely talking about increased cooperation and joint exercises between police and military.
German speaking here. It's important to know that there are regional (Landtag) elections coming up, and the right-wing AfD tries to paint current politicians as a bunch of incompetent people incapable of providing security for the German people - and the established politicians react with populist stuff like this and the idea of forbidding double citizenship and Niqabs.
Everything that sounds like populist bullsh*t coming from Germany should be regarded with the elections in mind.
By 'populism' you mean 'people speaking their minds'? And that they should be ignored?
By 'populism' do you mean the vast majority of Europeans and clear majority of Germans who are not supportive of the 'open doors' immigration policy?
Especially those made by diktat - without popular consultation, without legal consideration, without a vote in parliament - which affects the entirety of Europe?
Maybe Germans can have their 'leaders' stop forcing policy on the rest of Europe?
And by the way - your argument does not work in your favour: it is not the AfD telling people to prepare - it's the actual government wherein there is no AfD people to make such claims.
The very fact that the government - weary of people acting out against Muslims - is willing to make this statement says a lot about the actual threat environment.
> By 'populism' you mean 'people speaking their minds'? And that they should be ignored?
AfD is openly cooperating with organized neo-nazis (e.g. PEGIDA).
> By 'populism' do you mean the vast majority of Europeans and clear majority of Germans who are not supportive of the 'open doors' immigration policy?
"clear majority of Germans"? Oh no. AfD and friends are a tiny, but vocal and hateful group. Just like Trump.
> And by the way - your argument does not work in your favour: it is not the AfD telling people to prepare - it's the actual government wherein there is no AfD people to make such claims.
The ones responsible for the fear-mongering are the conservative parties in the government (CDU, CSU). They desperately want to prevent more success for the AfD by copying the fear-mongering strategy of the AfD. Needless to say that the "appeasement" policy both fuels the AfD and moves the direction of the government more and more to the right end.
> The very fact that the government - weary of people acting out against Muslims - is willing to make this statement says a lot about the actual threat environment.
The threat is not Islamist terrorism. The threat is a massive explosion of right-extremist violence - in 2015 alone, over a thousand attacks on refugee camps/homes occurred, 92 of those arsons, the rest open violence, Hakenkreuz graffitis etc; just recently neo-Nazis stabbed a young member of Die LINKE party, a pro-Refugee mayor (Henriette Reker of Cologne) got stabbed, neo-Nazis rioted in Heidenau exactly one year ago.
I really despise this new news cycle, where random conspiracy blogs stumble upon a rudimentary and minor policy change, take it out of context, put their alarmist, sensationalist spin on it, spread it through their blog networks and facebook groups and make it appear like legitimate news. Always under the pretense that they want to educate citizens when all they really care about is advertising money. And 24 hours later the whole ruckus is forgotten and a new piece of information is taken out of context. Most people develop good filters with regard to such news while others don't and then feel like the world might come to an end any second.
There are elections in two states and federal elections coming up in 2017. Security and refugees are the main topics. The governing parties are trying to sound hard to stop the rise of the populist AFD by adjusting to the right. Especially the CSU, which since the beginning of time governs Bavaria (where the attacks happended) and traditionally was the rightmost not yet extremist party, tries to compete with populism. Claims to forbid burkas and stuff like that have been made.
When the Munich shooting happened the whole city was locked down, the minister of defence unilaterally set military troops on call who for obvious historic reasons are only allowed to act inside Germany if the alternative would literally be "no Germany left", so she got bashed for that, police forces from neighbouring German states were called to Munich, the federal special unit GSG9 came, and even Austrian Cobra forces came to help.
As bad as this sounds: This was only a mass shooting from a crazy person and while there was misinformation and panic spreading, after the initial catastrophe the situation was immediately under control. The shooter is dead, the guy who sold him the weapon got caught.
There is really no reason to panic here, to bully muslims or let alone allow the military to act inside the borders. Not having soldiers on the streets (or police who act like soldiers for that matter) is a privilege we should not give up so easily.
And I don't think it is reasonable to expect any terrorist group to be able to keep me locked inside my home for 5 days, when authorities here are already calling foreign forces and keep the military on call, as soon as a teenager with a Glock goes crazy.
Just to underscore that, the leader of the Alternative for Germany party (Frauke Petry) only yesterday spoke out in favor of people arming themselves with guns and self-defense devices after all the violent attacks last month:
I think with a population of 80 million, you cannot entirely avoid shootings. 9 people died in Munich and this is horrible. And while each one on there is terrible, the Wikipedia category for German shootings [0] is small. The obvious comparison with the US shows that arming the population would be very counterproductive. So when I read stuff like that, I am asking myself whether she actually is that stupid or whether she knows exactly what she says and just tries to manipulate the people and what would be worse.
The only positive thing to note about the latest rise of the far-right parties in Europe is that it nicely debunked the morale high ground of women in politics. They can be just as evil/corrupt/populist/human, the liberal ones were just the first who showed up.
How is this in any way noteworthy? Lots of governments recommend a small personal stockpile. The Swiss government recommends that every resident stockpiles at least six weeks'[0] worth of food.
Making an issue of such a policy in light of recent attacks is nothing but fear-mongering.
[0] It may have been six months' worth. I forget, and don't have the source on me right now.
49 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 81.6 ms ] threadIf you are 'near' an attack zone, and stay inside your house, you may be able to safeguard yourself from most of the radiation or gas or whatever. But the area may be too unsafe for other people to regularly travel to, in which case water/food will be a problem.
It may take a few days for the gov. to get people geared up to travel in 'somewhat dangerous zones' around the attack with food/water etc..
But there are choke points, too. For example, the Strait of Malacca (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Malacca), the relatively narrow passage that connects the Indian Ocean to the Pacific. Something like 25% of the entire world's shipped goods pass through the Strait; and it's especially important for China, as nearly all of the imported oil that keeps her industrial machine running is shipped to them from the Middle East via that route.
A terrorist attack on the Strait isn't inconceivable, either. Al Qaeda experimented with attacks on ships in the years before 9/11, culminating in the attacks on the USS Cole in 2000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing) and the oil tanker MV Limburg in 2002 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_Jewel#Bombing). This line of effort petered out following the capture of the "terrorist entrepreneur" who had driven it, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd_al-Rahim_al-Nashiri), but that doesn't mean some other ambitious fellow won't pick it up again in the future.
None of which is to say that the sky is falling and people (in Germany or elsewhere) need to start stockpiling water and digging their Apocalypse Bunkers, of course. It's just worth noting that the space through which goods can be shipped is narrower than most people may realize.
"oblige" and "required" are pretty strong words for what can't be more than a recommendation. ("Die Bevölkerung wird angehalten, einen individuellen Vorrat [...]" is the German quote, which I'd maybe translate as "the public is asked to")
Also, as far as I can tell from the news reports, the report and it's recommendations are about general disaster preparedness, not terrorism or other attacks specifically. The stockpile recommendations also are nothing new, and I suspect they'll be ignored in the future just as much as they are now. People in areas with bad-ish infrastructure or regular emergencies (floodings, ...) will be prepared, others less so. I suspect civil defense authorities in most countries have similar recommendations.
The headline as it stands is highly misleading.
Even scarier, is the fact that this is even being done.
Since there are no external threats and 0 chance of environmental disaster (Germany doesn't get floods and hurricanes etc.) - it speaks to a terrorist threat.
Over 1.5 million people flooded into Germany. 1 million official. Of those, only 1/4 were 'refugees' - i.e. displaced people from Syria and Iraq. The remainder were young men from Algeria, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia, Egypt seeking a better life.
Of course, I don't blame anyone for seeking a better life, but arbitrary infusion of 100's of thousands of people into farily ethnically homogenous state that already has problems with integration re: Turks, who stand out strongly among other immigrants in terms of their non-integration - is crazy.
'Bleeding hearts' need to be met with 'responsible, pragmatic minds'.
Yes - we need to help refugees. Of course. But we have to be responsible about it.
Angela Merkels unilateral and now unpopular policy of just opening the doors is absurd. She later said she was 'surprised' that so many 'non refugees' would decide to come - which illustrates how astonishingly politicos are out of touch with human nature.
The moment she opened the gates, I assumed the outcome - millions would try to come, by hook or by crook.
Canada and USA are shielded by oceans - but they and the UK have the right approach - they take a specific number from UN camps - such refugees are well vetted, they are credibly refugees and not terrorists, families instead of just young men, and it happens at a controlled pace.
ie. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36429381
And do you have a source for your claim that only 1/4 of recent asylum seekers were refugees?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3240010/Number-refug...
+ Germany has 100K Syrian asylum requests in Sept 2015. This would be 10% of the official number of migrants, and less than that including many who are off the books:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/world/welcome-syrian-refugees-...
+ Germany can have flooding, but it's in very specific areas. Germany does not face the kinds of catastrophic environmental issues that happen in the US - like right now in Louisiana. There is no chance that floods in Germany will affect mass populations. It's in isolated areas, usually by rivers. To get 'food and water' they can 'walk up the hill'. 'Flooding' has never been a concern on this scale, it's not why they are issuing the order.
+ About 1/2 of those receiving direct asylum in 2015 were Syrians - they get an 'acceptance rate' of almost 100%. But only about 1/2 of those entering - by official figures - are making the applications. Which means 'officially' - only about 1/4 are Syrian. Syrians are not going to be represented in those that have not applied, because they are almost guaranteed to be accepted.
In 2015 DE had 441K applicants, but had over 900K 'migrants' - again - the 'official' numbers, with many estimates much larger.
Wikipedia has some decent numbers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_migrant_crisis
'Open Borders' was a sever act of utter irresponsibility on the part of Angela Merkel - who caused the flood crises by inviting anyone with the ability to do this.
I was in Tunisia recently and it was common for people to talk openly about 'going to Germany'. Tunisians are definitely listed as 'safe country of origin' and are not going to have their refugee claims accepted.
The 'responsible' thing to do would be to fly in refugees directly from camps. It would be cheaper as well.
Angela Merkels actions resulted in 100's of thousands of people, flooding across tiny nations such as Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Hungary and creative massive calamity and disruption, and creating political chaos in those countries.
You do realise that populations are concentrated around rivers right? Therefore rivers tend not to be isolated areas.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Germany has floods, snow storms, etc. The government has to think about disaster protection and what it means in a modern society, which depends on concepts like 'always on'. Plans are twenty years old and need to be updated.
A few years ago there were some parts of Germany without electricity for a few days and some were not reachable, because of a winter storm, which damaged large power lines.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrill_(storm)
Example for a flood: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_European_floods
There are terrorists attacks monthly in Europe (you don't get the headlines here in the US, and often, the 'attacks' are individuals with knives on trains, or who attack a single family so they don't get attention) - and European governments are really in a difficult situation - they don't know what to do. So this mandate kind of a 'knee jerk reaction' to some extent, possibly even 'political cover' so that they seem as though they are doing something, if you want a cynical take.
The North Sea coast, where I live here in Germany 100km away, has always seen floods and violent storms. Additionally there are floods from heavy rains in the Elbe region. I live in such a region, where such a flood is possible.
Germany has disaster protection plans. It has organizations to provide help, like the THW. Etc. etc. The plan mentioned here has been in preparation for several years now.
The plans have nothing to do with knife attacks in trains. You are clearly clueless about this government paper.
[1] https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country/german...
Yep https://www.reddit.com/r/prepping/
The harder part is water, as just a few days worth of drinking water for one person can take up a huge amount of space.
Eh??? A generally "comfortable" minimal budget for water is 1 gallon per day (3.8 liters, call it 4), although you might need more on hot summer days. A 5 gallon container is, with all the plastic and features for stack-ability, going to take up less than a cubic foot (19,000 cc).
It's not compact like food, but it's pretty easy to store enough so that you can ride out a short disaster and pick your time to get more for a longer one.
Here, if I run out of stored water, along those lines I need purifying capability, such as coffee filters for coarse filtering, then any one of a number of chemical methods, e.g. plain household bleach, or a serious small pore filter such as Katadyn specializes in.
Hell, I go through only about 6 litres of water a day while climbing mountains in the summer.
Remember that food also contains water when looking at minimum intakes.
And I like to brush my teeth....
If there was really a problem, my main concerns would be water and power.
You want food that can be eaten unheated, all the better if it's not in cans so you don't need a can opener. Get some biscuits or crackers, some canned meat (corned beef or tuna), and canned or dehydrated vegetables (soaking them works well enough). Dehydrated potatoes are also light and compact, and provide good energy. Chocolate is also a great compact source of energy, and lasts for a long time. Grab some muesli/granola bars as well for eating on the go.
A standard tin of corned beef will last a couple of days. A mixture of corned beef, dehydrated potatoes, and dehydrated peas will keep you going for a long time. I've eaten a pot of it all mixed together and gone until the evening eating hardly anything while climbing mountains.
As for water, you'll want at least 2 litres per day, and you'll want to rotate your stock every 6-12 months as water does go stale.
If you want to set yourself up for longer term, I'd suggest getting a gas cooker or something to cook on, and then you can also boil water to get clean water. The alternative for long term water is iodine or other purification tablets, but they taste nasty.
Apart from food, you'll also want to keep some medical supplies: bandages, sling, tape, gloves (these are important!). Toilet paper is also essential.
You'll want to keep all this stuff in a box or bag that you can easily grab and get the fuck out. I live in an earthquake prone area, so it pays to be prepared here.
Peanut butter is about 2x as calorie dense as canned meat (and it tastes good and is going to be more nutritious than cheap canned meat).
Canned meat (especially tuna) is a good source of protein, which peanut butter doesn't really provide. There's also a moral effect of eating meat. You could just stockpile a few boxes of muesli bars, which are calorie dense, but you'd get pretty upset with eating them after a day or two.
Even the Army realises this, and attempts to give variation in their MREs and in their First Strike ration packs. You could feed a soldier on a fat/sugar/vitamin/fibre mix, but you'd kill their morale pretty damn quick.
I looked in the cupboard. Tuna, which is almost just protein and water, has 17 grams of protein in a 74 gram serving. Chunky peanut butter has 7 grams of protein in a 32 gram serving (http://www.jif.com/products/extra-crunchy-peanut-butter).
The tuna is 70 calories. The peanut butter is 190 calories (it has quite a lot of fat in it).
Searching online, canned ham appears to be ~100 calories for 50-some grams, with 10 grams of protein. Spam compares to the peanut butter, with 180 calories per serving and 7 grams of protein (http://www.spam.com/varieties/spam-classic).
So by mass, the peanut butter does a pretty great job of supplying protein, and it comes with a bunch of calories too. Oil packed tuna would do better with the calories, but I find it off-putting.
edit: Here's a link for tuna:
http://starkist.com/products/chunk-light-tuna-in-water-can
It's a different product than I looked at, but close enough.
Obviously, the water part is a bit different, most people won't have 15-odd litres of water just sitting around.
I'm fairly sure that most countries advise residents to keep 3 days supply of food and water stockpiled, or maybe it's just the countries that are disaster-prone.
More interesting than the food stockpile though:
> and pressed for plans for the military to train more closely with police in preparing for potential large-scale militant attacks.
Isn't the military constitutionally barred from operating domestically in Germany?
The developed ones of course.
It is, except for disaster relief (e.g. major floods). During the Munich nazi amok run, the Feldjäger (military police) were alerted, though, and politicians are widely talking about increased cooperation and joint exercises between police and military.
Everything that sounds like populist bullsh*t coming from Germany should be regarded with the elections in mind.
By 'populism' do you mean the vast majority of Europeans and clear majority of Germans who are not supportive of the 'open doors' immigration policy?
Especially those made by diktat - without popular consultation, without legal consideration, without a vote in parliament - which affects the entirety of Europe?
Maybe Germans can have their 'leaders' stop forcing policy on the rest of Europe?
And by the way - your argument does not work in your favour: it is not the AfD telling people to prepare - it's the actual government wherein there is no AfD people to make such claims.
The very fact that the government - weary of people acting out against Muslims - is willing to make this statement says a lot about the actual threat environment.
AfD is openly cooperating with organized neo-nazis (e.g. PEGIDA).
> By 'populism' do you mean the vast majority of Europeans and clear majority of Germans who are not supportive of the 'open doors' immigration policy?
"clear majority of Germans"? Oh no. AfD and friends are a tiny, but vocal and hateful group. Just like Trump.
> And by the way - your argument does not work in your favour: it is not the AfD telling people to prepare - it's the actual government wherein there is no AfD people to make such claims.
The ones responsible for the fear-mongering are the conservative parties in the government (CDU, CSU). They desperately want to prevent more success for the AfD by copying the fear-mongering strategy of the AfD. Needless to say that the "appeasement" policy both fuels the AfD and moves the direction of the government more and more to the right end.
> The very fact that the government - weary of people acting out against Muslims - is willing to make this statement says a lot about the actual threat environment.
The threat is not Islamist terrorism. The threat is a massive explosion of right-extremist violence - in 2015 alone, over a thousand attacks on refugee camps/homes occurred, 92 of those arsons, the rest open violence, Hakenkreuz graffitis etc; just recently neo-Nazis stabbed a young member of Die LINKE party, a pro-Refugee mayor (Henriette Reker of Cologne) got stabbed, neo-Nazis rioted in Heidenau exactly one year ago.
So many bad things in history we couldn't prevent, we couldn't foresee. We already know how this will end. And nobody will stop it, it seems.
When the Munich shooting happened the whole city was locked down, the minister of defence unilaterally set military troops on call who for obvious historic reasons are only allowed to act inside Germany if the alternative would literally be "no Germany left", so she got bashed for that, police forces from neighbouring German states were called to Munich, the federal special unit GSG9 came, and even Austrian Cobra forces came to help.
As bad as this sounds: This was only a mass shooting from a crazy person and while there was misinformation and panic spreading, after the initial catastrophe the situation was immediately under control. The shooter is dead, the guy who sold him the weapon got caught.
There is really no reason to panic here, to bully muslims or let alone allow the military to act inside the borders. Not having soldiers on the streets (or police who act like soldiers for that matter) is a privilege we should not give up so easily.
And I don't think it is reasonable to expect any terrorist group to be able to keep me locked inside my home for 5 days, when authorities here are already calling foreign forces and keep the military on call, as soon as a teenager with a Glock goes crazy.
"German right-wing leader backs citizens' right to arm themselves" - http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCAKCN10V0A5
The only positive thing to note about the latest rise of the far-right parties in Europe is that it nicely debunked the morale high ground of women in politics. They can be just as evil/corrupt/populist/human, the liberal ones were just the first who showed up.
[0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategorie:Amoklauf_in_Deutschl...
Making an issue of such a policy in light of recent attacks is nothing but fear-mongering.
[0] It may have been six months' worth. I forget, and don't have the source on me right now.