The retired Generals on the talk-show circuit look grim. They say if the US attacks North Korea, it will retaliate and bomb Seoul, South Korea’s capitol. Hundreds of thousands could die. The Generals look even grimmer. There will be a ground invasion. Result? A possible 20,000 casualties per day.
No one mentions the X factor.
James Mattis, H.R. McMaster, Rex Tillerson, John Kelly, Nickki Haley – not a peep from them either.
In his State of the Union address the President lingers on the gruesome death of Otto Warmbier, promises “Resolve.” Trump also won’t touch it.
Twenty-four. South Korea has 24 operating nuclear power plants.
Fact: All of the recent US-coalition wars have involved countries where there were no – repeat no – large, operating nuclear power plants. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya. None of them had or has any large, commercial nuclear-reactors at the time of these wars. Thus, bombing missions, for all their hideous destructiveness, have not put at risk, the huge amounts of cesium-137, strontium-90 and other deadly radioactive contaminants in reactor cores.
So how do 24 nuclear power plants change the equation regarding a US war versus North Korea – a war which, by most predictions, quickly morphs into a war both on South and North Korea soil?
After the US launches a strike (pre-emptive or not) the Kim Jong Un regime unleashes artillery located immediately north of the DMZ. Hidden behind blast…