World3 min(s) read
Here are the worst places to be if World War 3 erupts - some locations might shock you
The worst places you can be if World War III breaks out today have been revealed. Amid current global tensions and the continued war in Europe after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, concerns about a large‑scale international conflict are louder than ever.
According to the AI chatbot ChatGPT, some countries and cities are far more vulnerable than others. The chatbot states: “As a leading global military power and a member of NATO, the U.S. would be a primary target.”
Cities such as Washington D.C., Los Angeles, and New York City are flagged as especially at risk, with emergency‑preparedness firm Mira Safety noting that if Russia were to target the US, initial strikes might focus on remote military assets, before moving on to major urban centers.
The site predicts: “Suppose Russia attempts an alpha strike against America, or a counterforce measure to target our nuclear weapons. In that case, their initial targets will be relatively remote. As counterforce evolves into counter‑value, Russian missiles would begin targeting larger cities, including New York, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.”
The top high‑risk countries and cities
Beyond the U.S., the list of worst places if large‑scale war erupts includes several major powers and hotspots. Russia itself is identified as “a nuclear superpower and a likely belligerent in WW3”, placing major Russian cities such as Moscow and Saint Petersburg in danger.
China is another country where one would not want to be, given its status as “a major global power with potential involvement in conflicts, especially concerning Taiwan.”
Also vulnerable are Ukraine (ranked fourth), then Germany, the UK, France, and Poland, which share a joint fifth place. Other areas mentioned include the Middle East, Taiwan, and North Korea.
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk acknowledged his country’s risk when he said per Reuters: “I have no reason to claim we’re on the brink of war, but a line has been crossed, and it’s incomparably more dangerous than before.”
Meanwhile, China declared it was “ready to fight ‘any type’ of war” in a warning to the U.S. and former President Donald Trump.
Trump himself commented during a speech to the United States Department of Justice: “I think we have it, I think we have it, but this could lead to World War III, very easily, could very easily lead to World War III.
"But I think we’re in pretty good shape, a lot better than where we were before we got involved. That was heading into World War III territory, that would’ve been a war like no other because of nuclear weapons, and other types of weapons that you don’t even wanna know about.”
What about safer places to be?
On the flip side, some locations are considered relatively safer if a global war erupts. Countries such as Switzerland, Iceland, and Argentina came up among the safest choices. These places benefit from factors like geographic isolation, lower strategic value, and less direct involvement in major power conflicts.
While no location is guaranteed safe in a full‑scale war, this list provides a snapshot of where risk might be highest and where it may be lowest. Let me know if you’d like a full list of the “top 10 worst places” and “top safest places” as identified.