Consume Product

If you're stuck in place, they'll get you eventually. Either starve you out or bring in literal artillery.

I'd prefer an escape tunnel to get my family out of there. Get them to a church or neighbours house or anywhere that's more public. They're able to carry out these massacres in the wood because there are no witnesses and they can spin the story however they want; if they try it around people they have to worry about optics.

Most would prefer a more aesthetically pleasing design but otherwise I'd say that's about everyone's dream here.

Seems a bit too much. You're just trapping yourself in there, it doesn't have the proper defense strategy needed in event of a raid. Feds will just let you in there until you're forced to capitulate.

Money may not be an issue, but time and energy are going to be. How are you going to move all of that concrete and equipment?
Besides the practical complaints, you would be bored and miserable inside a personal jail cell all the time instead of being out in nature.

"Fortresses" do not do anything in a raid besides providing an intimidation factor, which feds don't care about. You have a limited supply and food and water and they have literally have unlimited supplies.

My advice would be to choose a piece of land with some based friends and family and study the geography, train and perform drills. Learn and apply self sufficiency skills. Study improvised weaponry.

The greatest defense is the strongest coffin if you have nowhere to go. Either this is a pointless oddity and nobody is going to knock on your door, or youre a one man army without any of the logistics to support such a fortress. This is why libertarianism and “rugged individualism” only gets people so far.

>Would this help in a Ruby Ridge/ Waco scenario?

Absolutely not. MAYBE if you had an acre of indoor farming and an indoor well to subsidize a decade worth of food. MAYBE if they couldn't breach the thing without taking casualties they would eventually fuck off after 5 years.

Realistically they'd get armored construction equipment and explosives from the army. Besides this they'd find your air filtration inlet and tear gas you day and night.

Useless in a the scenario you are talking about. Governments were able to penetrate much stronger buildings then this, with stone walls several meters thick, a thousand years ago.

Security by obfuscation is a better option. A repurposed cave way off in the forest or something.

There was a survival type who got a very well paying meeting with a group of wealthy people who were building bug out hideaways. He said that he didn't have that much to offer new but he did make the point to begin being very nice to your security team. They were literally so full of themselves that they needed to be told that. And wherever you are the locals will know you are there. And you got all that nice stuff.

https://prephole.com/surviving-a-year-of-shtf-in-90s-bosnia-war-selco-forum-thread-6265/

No. I'd continue living in the city.

Hitler didn't go to the woods. He went to Vienna.

Reinforced concrete will hold for 20 years or so, but without a lot of maintenance of will start spalding, and the house will end up in decay. If you're okay with that, ie you're building a bunker to hole up in in the short run, then there's no problem. But if you're building for your children, I would advise a different material

Die free

No, it would only delay a siege, not counter it. Anonymity is your best defense... other than being in God's will.

How would the Siege of Ruby Ridge been different if you had a bulletproof house?

When Samuel and Vicki Weaver were shot they were outside.