3 ms·
Everyone being aware of the dangers of, say, heart disease doesn't miraculously make a cure appear. And within the game of MAD North Korea is playing against t
by matt4077 9y ago
Everyone being aware of the dangers of, say, heart disease doesn't miraculously make a cure appear.
And within the game of MAD North Korea is playing against the US and South Korea, I'm pretty sure it would be beneficial for the US to publicise the ability to neutralise the threat against Seoul. Because that threat is what gives NK the safety to continue the development of nuclear weapons and ICBMs.
The only reason not to publicise such capabilities would be the possibility to, in turn, neutralise this "instant-reaction type airforce" (or whatever it may be). And I'm having a hard time coming up with any realistic scenario.
- throwanem 9y agoAs you say, if we had it, we'd say so. But we don't, and neither does anyone else. Artillery interception isn't as hard a problem as ballistic missile defense, but it's hard enough to still be at the stage of defense contractor proof-of-concept, which is to say, it has yet to progress beyond a rigged demo that still isn't reliable.
- Clubber 9y agoThe only thing we could conceivably do is preemptively strike NK's line of artillery that spans across the entire country north of the DMZ. They would have to simultaneously detonate without detection though and I don't know of anything that can do that. Maybe a nuclear strike delivered from boomer subs, but that would still give warning. Of course that would get China involved and that wouldn't be pretty. Here's some info including maps of their artillery range and capability. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/how-north-korea-would-retaliate https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/how-north-korea-would...