Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814
Loathe as I am to quote Steve Bannon, “Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.”
Pay them to shut up and move on.
|
Not to downplay the lives of those living in Seoul who are in range, and I'm by no means nothing else other than a CP armchair General. But is 10M really that feasible of a number to die if NK goes nuts and turns on their artillery? Again, not downplaying the destruction it would cause, but that number seems way too high. Are we to assume there is no warning system in place should NK decide to attack? From what I have read, there are only a couple hundred artillery pieces that can actually reach Seoul itself. Those pieces are being tracked in real-time by satellite imagery. Surely the US/SK intelligence would notice the second they are activated and be able to give out warnings. As well, citizens in Seoul practice drills in case of attack. I can't imagine, unless it's in the middle of the night, people learning of an attack that is en route and simply staying put. And finally, if Seoul is to be levelled in 30 minutes, that is assuming that the US and SK do sweet FA to actually stop it. I'd imagine the second they begin firing, US and SK contingences are immediately activated and rather than 30 minutes of hellfire it's 5-10 at the most before most of those artillery pieces are toast.
If cities like Mariupol and Bahkmut took months to raze down, I simply can't envision 10M dying in Seoul in 30 minutes with the US right on the door step a few KMs away, ready to retaliate. Yes, a large number would die unfortunately. But the entire city destroyed along with 10M people sounds...made up
.