(Anyone who wants to argue that the DPRK cannot be deterred has a high bar to clear. Why think deterrence won't work here, when it seems to have worked against Mao's China, Stalin's Russia, etc.? Why assume DPRK is more suicidal than other states?)
-
-
4. (Bonus point) Don't believe it when people say the North Koreans are stupid, are incapable of technical feats that are now decades old, etc. Their scientists and engineers seem competent enough to do this kind of work. They have been working at this for *decades*.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Right. Discourse in France and U.K. still that nukes are the cheapest way of being a great power. Surely the most cost-effective deterrent out there.
-
Look at upgrade budgets for trident and similar projects fella. Far from cost-effective
-
I'm not saying it is cheap - but arguably cheaper than acquiring conventional forces that would accomplish the same deterrent effect.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Neither is cost-effective
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
DPRK has learned THE history Lesson - always ask yourself "Can US be trusted? Can You believe promises of the US, or Treaties?"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Especially if the last country to voluntarily give up their nukes in exchange for security guarantees was invaded and partially annexed only a couple of years ago.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.