Originally Posted by
sdsearch
While it would take a while (Google estimates 6 hours 45 minutes), it's actually close enough to walk. You don't need miles or cash to walk.
But your point seems silly to me. Unless your goal is only to land in the country and take back off (or only stay in an airport hotel), getting to anywhere else in the country besides airport hotels is not going to be doable with miles either.
So by your definition, if Vatican City is unreachable by miles, then Rome city center is also unreachable by miles (it's actually a bit further to walk, btw). So are many famous cities (whose airports are outside the city jurisdicition).
By your definition:
- Oslo is unreachable by miles
- Brussels is unreachable by miles
- Baltimore is unreachable by miles
- Seattle is not reachable by miles
- Detroit is not reachable by miles
since none of those cities can be reached using miles alone.
If those all sound like silly statements, just because I used cities, then why is it not equally silly to say that Vatican City (which is both a city and country) is unreachable by miles if Rome is considered reachable by miles???
Because the thread asks about countries unreachable by miles... If you want to talk about cities unreachable by miles, you're asking a different question. And if you want to use an absurd interpretation by saying you don't need miles to walk, then you can walk almost anywhere, even if it "might take a while". So your interpretation is silly because "by your argument" everywhere is reachable on foot or by swimming (without miles), rendering the whole discussion pointless.