I wonder what would happen if North Korea did attack us. Would they devastate the largest cities in the US? Can they even reach the largest cities outside of possibly LA?
To be honest, I'm sort of excited at the prospect of this system collapsing, sort of Fahrenheit 451/Fight Club style. Everyone would get to start over, and I imagine no one would care if I paid back my student debt. People would start caring about the important things again. Imagine not having some report due on your boss' desk by Thursday, or finishing a reading assignment for some gen ed course. These are menial things that I don't feel should hold any importance in our lives. Obviously reading is important, but obligatory reading is senseless.
Now, I'm not saying I hope people perish. Ideally, our society would collapse without any death. I know that's unlikely, but I'm being optimistic. Imagine though, if you literally had no obligations, what would you do? Hike, climb, forage food, learn to hunt, whittle a bow and arrow?
Edit: I don't actually want anyone to get hurt. I'm envisioning an extremely unrealistic scenario where no one suffers, but our society is dismantled.
Probably not, and if so, probably only once or twice they could launch such a long range missile. ICBM technology is held by few nations, North Korea isn't one of them, yet. They have tested a long range rocket when they launched the satellite, but that is a far cry from having a guidance system capable of being accurate on the other side of the globe, and attaching a complex uranium triggered warhead to it that will detonate properly. Also, Russia and US and China have multiple warheads on their missiles, which helps defeat ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) systems. NK has never tested such a thing. We have Aegis ABM boats parked off of NK right now, and news that another one was brought in just yesterday. We have them parked off Japan, Quam, and other locations across the pacific. If the missile makes it this far we have complex ABM systems in Alaska, and if it makes it past those, we have even better systems on the mainland US from places like North Dakota, Washington, and California. So no, I don't think they pose a single threat to us at this distance. It's just a bluff and an empty threat. And even if true, we would most likely shoot their primitive rockets down. We're also working on ABM laser systems to destroy incoming missiles... Couple articles: One about the Aegis system, and one about more general ABM. You'll notice the third article talks about how our defense is mainly for shooting down primitive ICBMs and from countries who aren't armed to the teeth with them. Defeating a full on onslaught from say, Russia, would be difficult, as their missiles have baffles and decoys to break through any missile defense shield, and their missiles are so numerous at best we'd just reduce the number that land, not defeat them entirely. ABM defense is tough, because the more ABM batteries you install, the more nukes and better missiles everyone else will try to aquire. So a base system to take out a few nukes from rogues states with less than advanced capabilities, like NK, is the ideal goal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defense... https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/16/kore-m16.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_defense_systems_of_vari... No, that wouldn't happen. What Fight Club failed to tell you is those banks have multiple data centers. It's not centralized. Even if all of the bank buildings were destroyed, they still have a DR datacenter, and maybe a Hot DR site, and if those get destroyed they have third party stored tape backups to restore from, and trust me, they have a DR (Disaster Recovery) plan to have it all back online within 48 hours. i work in IT infrastructure in finance, trust me, we're prepared to keep and restore all of our data should the country get attacked in a massive way, but more likely, to hedge against mother nature. When I see that scene in Fight Club, I laugh and say, "Call all the infrastructure staff, time to enact the DR plan!" I enjoy the idealism of the sentiment of your post, but it won't happen. Life would go on as is even if a couple major cities were destroyed. It would be devestating, but there would be no "starting over" for us, our debts, or our work life.Can they even reach the largest cities outside of possibly LA?
To be honest, I'm sort of excited at the prospect of this system collapsing, sort of Fahrenheit 451/Fight Club style. Everyone would get to start over, and I imagine no one would care if I paid back my student debt.
I enjoy the idealism of the sentiment of your post, but it won't happen. Life would go on as is even if a couple major cities were destroyed. It would be devestating, but there would be no "starting over" for us, our debts, or our work life.
Am I the only one here that thinks if you borrow money you should pay it back? Also, if the banking and credit system immediately collapsed, you had better have some really amazing essential capital on hand like fresh water or livestock or a rare and useful trade or guess what? You're fucked. The idealism of a "restart button" is just that, idealism. Doesn't exist without lot's and lot's of blood and death. Think Mad Max times 100.
I'm with ya, but it seems more and more people are screaming for student loan forgiveness. Not Blob_castle by any means, but elsewhere it seems to be a "thing" now days. Exactly. You won't be "happy your loans are gone and can enjoy life", you'll be fucked, in danger, and wondering where your next meal is coming from. The misanthropic idealism behind thinking a post-society collapse world would be "fun" is silly to me. It wouldn't be fun at all. But when I was younger I used to look at it the same way BC seems to, so I don't blame anyone. Now I look at it as "Uhhh, that would be scary". But I'm prepared enough, I'm not a "prepper" by any means, but I have a "bug-out-bag" with supplies, a little ammo, and a .22 rifle for shooting small game should I need to leave the city in a hurry ever. Not just for civil unrest, but I'm downwind from the Yellowstone Caldera, and who knows, anything could happen in the future. I don't look forward to it, but preparing for and reading about it can be somewhat interesting and possibly useful in the future. :) What BC misses, I think, is that it will be violent and people will take his stuff from him if they so choose. Many people are good, but most are going to be looking out for number 1. It won't be a quiet peaceful walk out of the city to his cave. It will be violence, chaos, looting, and mass pandemonium on a scale most of us have never seen. The country won't turn into some anarchist or libertarian paradise, no, more like pure chaos.Am I the only one here that thinks if you borrow money you should pay it back?
Also, if the banking and credit system immediately collapsed, you had better have some really amazing essential capital on hand like fresh water or livestock or a rare and useful trade or guess what? You're fucked.
I'm well past the phase of thinking anarchy would be great, and I still want to see the world go to shit. Why not? What have we got to lose? Lives? Nobody cares about lives. Not really. Just the closest ones they can find. Perhaps its the same part of me that likes to watch fire. Its chaos. It destroys quite a bit of what it touches, but for a very brief moment you get to see everything very, very clearly. Then you get murdered by a man in a clown mask with two strapons glued to his knees as he chops you in to tiny pieces with your woodcutting axe. All of which is fine, so long as every copy of "The Host" gets burnt for fuel, along with all of the Star Wars prequels. Every single copy.
The loans aren't the problems, its the amount you need to take out. A state school here in PA costs $16,000 a semester for basic food, the worst housing you can get, and general education. Books can be anywhere from a couple hundred to almost a thousand dollars, and during this entire time you really can't have that much of a serious job. The few people who can do work + college are exceptional, but realistically most people can't work 30-40 hours a week and do well in school. Sure your parents can theoretically help, but not everyone's parents have a lot of money, and worse still, college kids aren't really prepared for entering a life on their own. Nobody is really taught basic life skills like balancing a budget or doing laundry or shit these days. I dormed with kids who hadn't ever cleaned their own stuff. Also, the 16k a year is for 12 credits, the minimum you can get for full time enrollment. That means you'll spend 5 years at college to get the necessary requirements completed, for a total cost of 80,000 + books, additional food, and unforeseen expenses. While loans should be paid back, the cost of the loan was too high in the first place, and the payback on the loan is much less than was promised. There's a certain amount of betrayal present, and that's what got people up in arms, not the idea that loaned money should be returned.
I enjoy the idealism of the sentiment of your post
A guy can dream.
I would suggest that if you want a high chance of getting to live in a post apocalyptic country where there is no functioning government, infrastructure or adequate supply of food, smuggle yourself into North Korea. I can't remember where I read it, but someone described North Korea as being 'the retarded kid playing with matches in the paint shed'. While not very politically correct, it is not a bad assessment. If they end up detonating any nuclear device in the next five years, which I doubt they will, it will probably be while it is still in their country. That said, I think the USA is purposely inciting the situation so it has a 'legitimate reason' to strengthen it's military presence in that part of the world.
You have a point. I don't know how much longer we can milk this "war on terror" in the Middle East and as sad as it is, war is good business.
People would start caring about the important things again.
yes, like food and shelter except there would be no infrastructure left to help them or organize them. Think Lord of the Flies - there's a reason they made you read that in Grade 10. Think Somalia or any war zone where the infrastructure has disappeared. Do you think the USA is going to somehow not go tribal? Who will be in charge after the bomb? The people with the guns? Great, they'll be fair and decent. At least you won't have to pay your student loan. Of course, you might have to trade your sax for food.
I shouldn't go sarcastic on you B_C, but starting over in a bombed out war zone is not the same as starting over in the Garden of Eden. I welcome responses.
I actually have never read that novel, it wasn't required. I'll add it to my list. I'm saying that in the wake of destruction, it'd be easy to slip into the shadows. My ideal situation is to live in a cave and I imagine that could be done easily if such a situation transpired.
If North Korea attacked and was successful, I think that a lot of things might happen. For one, I imagine that there would be a spike, particularly in centers with large Asian populations, of racially motivated assaults. I don't know what it was like where you're from or where you were living around the 9/11 attacks, but in my home town people were suddenly seeing "suspicious looking A-rabs" everywhere. To compound things, one of Osama bin Laden's many nephews was attending the local university and had to be evacuated for his own safety. I also think that as AlderaanDuran points out, there are a lot of systems in place to prevent a total loss of information. Don't forget that the road system in the U.S. is very good, so there would be little danger of physical isolation occurring.
I think with out overpopulated cities have become, the interstate system no longer is as effective as it may have once been. Just look at the roads in the South when a hurricane is coming. Evacuation is anything but swift.
Very true. What I'm saying is that they're essentially just as good as those less maintained roads because there are so many people trying to utilize them at once.
| For one, I imagine that there would be a spike, particularly in centers with large Asian populations, of racially motivated assaults. | It's interesting you bring that up. You're probably right, but part of me wonders if it would be different in this situation for Asians. For one, Asia already kinda hates NK. Almost all the Koreans in the US are actually South Koreans, which would probably be the most anti-NK group of all. Sure, there'd be some brickheads that think they're all the same, but I wonder if that would even be a significant group. Asians are perhaps one of the most integrated immigrant groups in the US at this point. It's been said rather unironically that Asians are the "racial bourgeoisie". We may have curbed our xenophobic distrust of Asia since we have denounced Japanese internment, so would racist backlash be minor in this day and age? If anything, I'd expect it to be more aimed at Chinese. It's generally perceived that no one wants to be North Korean, but not so for China, who remains the only real "ally" of NK.
We may have curbed our xenophobic distrust of Asia
Here's the thing about Asian Americans. They're not a cohesive group with a common culture as Black Americans are. I say Black, not African American because there are African Americans who can trace their roots back to specific African countries and do not have ancestors who were enslaved. Asia is an old continent, with very old cultures and opinions about other Asian cultures and to some extent that is present here in the States. In the face of whites, yes Asian Americans may group together but there is often still a stronger link to country of origin than to other Asian Americans. Furthermore, when people say Asian Americans or even Asians, people of South Asian ancestry are usually left out of the group, at least in the US. I argue that Asian Americans are not one of the most integrated groups in America, though I guess it would depend on personal experience and definition. From my own experience, we're reminded of how different we are far more often than would be true if what you say is true. How often are Latinos or Blacks asked, "where are you from? No, where are you really from?" To put it another way, Asians are often labeled as "the perpetual foreigners". Not only that, but if schools accepted students on merit alone, then Asians would make up a larger percentage of Ivy League student bodies than they presently do. However, this is not so. I heard a joke once that made me laugh so hard and yet made me incredibly sad as well. I can't remember the name of the comedian, but it went like this. "It was hard growing up Japanese, because I'm Korean." My experience is somewhat different. Yes, friends growing up would jokingly say to me, "all Asians look the same" usually followed by, "You don't look like other Asians," as if their friendship with me and getting to know me as an individual somehow absolved them of racism. Nope. I get the impression that to many people, all Asians and Asian Americans are Chinese.
Yes, definitely, but from the perspective of racial discourse, they tend to get hit with the same perception regardless of whether that's deserved or not. Historically in the US, and perhaps still, race(ism) is viewed on a scale from white to black. There's a lot about the issue scattered here, if you can get access to those pdf's. Asians became the "model minority", the ones that integrated into society and became successful in the wake of the various stages of Asian immigration. The perceptions carry over still today. How many ethnic stereotypes describe successfulness? Here's where the idea of the "racial bourgeoisie" steps in. Yes, it's all good and fucked up indeed. None of that would make you immune from perpetual foreigner syndrome, though. It's funny that you bring up Ivy Leagues though. Here in California at the UC system there is no affirmative action and Asians make up close to half the student body. I suppose Ivy League schools don't have a Tapioca Express in their food courts, but here, where things are mingled enough, it's kinda hard to imagine people suddenly getting angry at every other person they see.Here's the thing about Asian Americans. They're not a cohesive group with a common culture as Black Americans are.
Yeah, you've got a point. Sometimes I think that part of the difficulty of a national identity is that California isn't Massachusetts isn't Texas isn't Hawai'i and this lends itself to painting with broader strokes. Joe Six-pack can't be expected to know a Hmong from a Singaporean but even so, it's a shame that racism is often ignored or let slide under the misguided perception that it will somehow die on its own.
What are the important things? I think the important things are a family that doesn't have to worry about nuclear annihilation, or invading forces. I would be WAY beyond shocked if North Korea were able to attack the US in any meaningful way, but I certainly wouldn't be so sophomoric to welcome it so that people can "care again". I see below that to AlderaanDuran's post you replied "A guy can dream." Well, I would be careful what you wish for my friend. Our country is by no means without it's problems but we are also extremely fortunate as a society. If you want to suffer, nothing is stopping you. Go suffer. I enjoy not having to.I imagine no one would care if I paid back my student debt. People would start caring about the important things again. Imagine not having some report due on your boss' desk by Thursday, or finishing a reading assignment for some gen ed course.
I like you B_C, but are you suggesting that a post apocalyptic scenario with radiation poisoning, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions dead and the destruction of a vast ecosystem would somehow justify not having to turn in your homework or pay for your loans?
I know it's very far-fetched, but ideally it'd only cause a collapse of our society without detriment to anyone's health. I like thinking idealistically, even though it's far from reality.
Then frame your question as such. How can there be no detriment to anyones health proceeding an attack? Is this a North Korean pillow fight?
Essentially yes, I'm painting a picture of a pillow fight.
Was that Mary Chestnut clocking Shelby Foote with a pillow?
It was a rough war, no one can verify that with any certainty.
This is possibly the most selfish thing I have ever seen. So you're saying that because people deem things important differently than you, mass devastation and collapse of society that would force them to change their ways would be beneficial? Do you aspire to be a dictator? Have you considered the fact that people don't want the same things out of life as you? Just because someone thinks differently doesn't mean they are wrong or that they need to change.I'm sort of excited at the prospect of this system collapsing...no one would care if I paid back my student debt.
I'm simply sharing my thoughts, I'm not proposing that one way is better than another. Simply that it's interesting to think of a different societal structure.
You're clearly proposing that one set of activities is better than the other through use of words like menial. You may want to run away from all responsibility, but why drag everyone else down with you? I'm just a little offended that you are excited by the prospect of one country attacking another in a potentially devastating way.People would start caring about the important things again. Imagine not having some report due on your boss' desk by Thursday, or finishing a reading assignment for some gen ed course. These are menial things that I don't feel should hold any importance in our lives.
Imagine though, if you literally had no obligations, what would you do? Hike, climb, forage food, learn to hunt, whittle a bow and arrow?
I'm excited at the prospect of starting over, not devastation.
I'm confused as to why you're taking this so personally. Regardless, I'll continue to discuss. I feel as if there are many facets of my life that could have been done differently. You're speaking as if I'm actively trying Yo make this happen, when all I'm doing is daydreaming. I imagine that I have it easy compared to many and that many others wouldn't mind starring over as well. This post was meant to appeal to those people, not ones like who are content with their current lives.
It's not necessarily that I'm taking it personally as much as I'm surprised that someone can think with such little regard for other people. When challenged, you give non-answers and avoid all of the questions. But you're right, I don't know you and it's hardly worth my time to try to convince you, but I'll continue to discuss. You're completely missing the point. Daydreaming about a situation like this is inherently very selfish because you're not considering any impact it may have on others. And if it does impact others you are implying that is also a good thing because maybe they want the same things as you, and/or the current society is one that does not sit well with you. I would venture a guess to say that wanting to live in a cave puts you in a near negligible minority, and this situation would affect many, many more people in a negative way than any who would feel they benefited from it now, or any time in the future. But I can't find any data describing how many people want to break from society and live off the land, so if I'm incorrect in this assumption, definitely let me know.
I very much dislike how rude you're being, so if you could politely stop, it'd be much appreciated. I do hold my own personal beliefs that I believe would yield the most happiness. Not just for myself, but for everyone. I would disagree that it's a selfish thing to think. I'm not saying that my way of thinking is right and everyone else is wrong. What I'm getting at is that I believe living with a focus on the necessities would promote a happier life than how we live now. This same thought process could come from imagining a sudden collapse of the society without any sort of catastrophic event. Am I forcing my views upon anyone? No. Am I simply sharing my opinion of the situation? Yes. So, but only stating my thoughts, I'm trying to get others to think about the situation. Your reaction is to become extremely offended, which is fine. You and I don't hold similar views. But at least it has you thinking.
Continuing to challenge the validity of your post is rude? Then why would you post it for discussion? I dont have any intention of being rude. Maybe your picture of the situation is just so idealistic that its hard for me to imagine so I can't see what your describing, and that's fine.
It's not the challenging that's rude, it's the tone. I have been known to think very idealistically, irrationally so at times.
I subscribe to the notion that humans are peaceful at heart and it's greet and a lack of compassion and respect that leads us to become violent.
Next time, say that. ;) It is because men lack mindfulness that men treat other so cruelly. But then, it is because men lack mindfulness that all of the bad things happen.