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.