3 ms·
The problem with this analysis is that it's irrelevant. Modern 1st world military capabilities are devastating beyond all reckoning from history. This is easy t
by InclinedPlane 12y ago
The problem with this analysis is that it's irrelevant. Modern 1st world military capabilities are devastating beyond all reckoning from history. This is easy to forget because in every conflict involving such capabilities they've significantly pulled their punches for one reason or another. But in an all out total war things would be much different.
Of course there is the issue of nuclear annihilation, which should not be easily dismissed, and still poses an existential risk for human civilization.
Beyond that though, conventional military capabilities are quite potent, and if they were ever leveled intentionally and with ferocity toward, say, civilian populations we would likely be shocked at the outcome. Modern militaries are capable of killing millions per day using only conventional weapons.
- ctdonath 12y agoExample: North Korea maintains its integrity by a viable threat that it could, using conventional (even old) weapons, level Seoul (pop.: 25M) in about a half an hour with a moment's notice.
- hga 12y agoThere's no way they could "level" Seoul with conventional weapons, it's way too big and per what I've read but ought to check more closely, beyond all but the heaviest of artillery (i.e. beyond 152 mm range, even with rocket assist (which reduces the payload)). Cause serious damage and kill a lot of people, yes, especially during the several days it would require to disable the howitzers in their Hardened Artillery Sites (HARTS).