Well, that is a head of a pin question...
I think that SK has to be resigned to losing Seoul temporarily in the event of an invasion, but there is no question that if NK cannot get the job done in a day, it will lose all supply lines, communications, C and C, in short, everything, ... and no way NK is going to be able to move that many men further into the peninsula that fast.
It all comes down to NK being able to inflict a lot of damage, but it cannot offer anything else. Who is to say that NK soldiers would not openly defect and revolt once they get even a whiff of SK air?
It is no exaggeration to say that any kind of invasion by NK into SK would be suicidal for the NK regime, nuclear bombs or not. What outcome for NK would be better than the status quo? And the status quo sucks.
› Login to comment
2 Comments
30061015 at 05:12 AM JST - 6th July
How many missiles could NK fire into SK before NK is incinerated?
Klein2 at 07:23 AM JST - 6th July
Well, that is a head of a pin question... I think that SK has to be resigned to losing Seoul temporarily in the event of an invasion, but there is no question that if NK cannot get the job done in a day, it will lose all supply lines, communications, C and C, in short, everything, ... and no way NK is going to be able to move that many men further into the peninsula that fast.
It all comes down to NK being able to inflict a lot of damage, but it cannot offer anything else. Who is to say that NK soldiers would not openly defect and revolt once they get even a whiff of SK air? It is no exaggeration to say that any kind of invasion by NK into SK would be suicidal for the NK regime, nuclear bombs or not. What outcome for NK would be better than the status quo? And the status quo sucks.