There are members here who assert that the United States is resilient.  Lest we forget, the more complex a system is, the more susceptible it is to failure.  We have a just in time delivery system.  We have an aging power grid system it is vulnerable in so many ways.  We have a banking system that can be hacked.  Our financial markets are also subject to hacking.  Now, throw in all those whirl-stahr videos of people going ape shit at Waffle House, McDs, Chuck e Cheese and malls over stupid non-essential things and reconsider, are we really all that resilient?  People here shoot each other because of clothing color.  People shot each other for cutting them off on "their" road.  People riot because one side is intolerant of any opposing view point.  As others said, we are just three meals away from social unrest (riots).  

Nope, we are certainly less resilient than other nations.  Russians and Chinese are used to hardship.  Americans by contrast are soft.  We've a nation where 50 million (or about 1 in seven) are free sh*t army dependent on government handouts to live.  In other nation's they would have starved to death.

The simplier the society, the more resilient a society is.  You can't bomb a stone age people back into the stone age.  They woudln't know the difference but if you shut off the power/cell phone to a valley girl, well, that's different.

BULLSHIT



We are best in class in nearly every category. All our weaknesses are our enemies weaknesses too. Lack of resources is only a plus in the mind of GD. In reality, we have so much stuff we could absorb a full nuclear attack and still be better off than the attacking country started out.

How much rural of America would give a shit if the major cities were nuc'd?

Ed

Assless chaps is redundant. Ever seen chaps with an ass? They're called pants.  

Sorry, pet peeve. carry on.

Thread derailed by assless chaps.

Despite the recent ruckus, which gets amplified by lazy, incompetent, and dim witted "news outlets" the USA is as politically stable as it has ever been.

Then, we have those two oceans protecting us from any land threats along with more productive agricultural land than anywhere else.

China or Russia, crippled by a nuclear attack, will have their "friendly neighbors" gleefully try to carve up and take over the remaining productive and resource rich areas of those countries.

Besides us, I'd say Canada or Oz would be the next best places.

Afghanistan.
Being bombed is SOP for them.

Kinda hard to nuke back to the stone age when a society never escaped a stone age.  

I'm goin sub-Sahara Africa

Now with poll.

Cable goes out, internet is lost, cell phones don't work, power goes down, EBT cards don't work- 61% of the people in the US would be screwed before the Welfare and Unemployment checks don't come in the mail

The jagged rocks would be jagged glass, and the goats would have 3, 5, or 6 legs, otherwise no difference.

That's just what I was thinking. Smartphones stop working and the US is done. Really soft compared to most of the world.

US. Take out some major cities and we might end up better.

Not in Nebraska your not, and if you do I'm moving.

China.

Lots of Geographic Area, Lots of Population, could return to a Authoritarian System of Governance at the drop of a hat.

Russia would be next, Lots of Geographic Area, few targets, more comfortable with a Military Governance.

North Korea and the US would bring up the rear for different reasons:

North Korea doesn't have many targets, and not much geographic area, politically it could continue on as long as a Kim was alive though.

We'd fold after just a few, or enter into a state of murderous rage and burn it all, 50/50 which way it went. So we could either be the toughest (murder rage) or easiest (please don't hurt me)...

In Nuclear terms Russia is like the "monster" in any B movie.. the hero initially hits the monster with something that he thinks will completely disable it, and the monster just shakes it off and advances..

Russia Its Huge and those people in Siberia don't GAF

China can afford to lose far more population. They have also invested heavily in continuity programs to provide survivability for their ruling elite.

One nuke probably wouldn't disable the US, china, or Russia. A tactical strike against the greatest population centers would devastate all 3 but the US would still have some manufacturing and population left with enough knowledge to rebuild. China and Russia's rural areas aren't going to rebuild the leftovers with engineers. It's gonna be a self subsistence situation. In the US every small city has contractors and engineers and at least some small manufacturing plant and machinists.
Democracy wins.