@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic The US's nuclear triad is more dangerous and they know it. It is beyond ludicrous, it's delusional to think DPRK is planning to attack South Korea. They have a No First Use Policy and their nukes are only for defense if say the US attacked them. Besides
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 2/attacking ROK/US/allies/territories would be suicide and DPRK definitely want's to survive - and thrive in socialist economic prosperity.

Why DPRK Has Nukes (A Primer)

You KNOW why DPRK has nukes right? The US, by its policy, can do a nuclear first
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 3/strike on North Korea in the name of “self-defense”. Read John Bolton’s piece. DPRK has read it. So DPRK is deterring the US from attacking/regime change/nuclear first strike thru textbook deterrence theory. They just did self-defense exercises which every sovereign nation has
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 4/the right to do. (The USFK can do joint military exercises TARGETING DPRK, but the DPRK can't test-fire their tactical guided nuke in self-defense exercises??)
giphy.com/gifs/lukecosgr…
They ARE building up their second-strike capability to deter US from a nuclear first strike.
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 5/The real shady thing is that US doesn’t want the Armistice to end. I believe it wants to win the Korean War (which didn’t end in 1953, that’s a lie) by military victory. As soon as a peace treaty is inked, technically it’s illegal for US to attack DPRK.
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 6/To not go over w/ a fine-toothed comb everything Kim Yo Jong has said in her statements is dereliction of duty. Is it “because she’s a girl”? Give me a break. She embodies DPRK's official policy, perspectives/beliefs/concerns and when she critiques the
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 7/US's hostile policy and drops hints about going in a new direction, DC should pick it up. She has said:

"It would be easier and more favourable for the U.S. to rack its brains to make our nukes no threat to the U.S., rather than racking it to dispossess our nukes."

"We do
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 8/"not have the slightest intention to pose a threat to the U.S. and Comrade Chairman has already made it clear to President Trump.

Everything will go smoothly if they leave us alone and make no provocation on us."

Diplomacy is a two-way street. It isn't a one-way "Our way or
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 9/the highway". DPRK wants to end the Korean War in PEACE, but the US seems to be seeking to end it militarily or by regime collapse. So DPRK's very struggle for survival is the fight to end the Korean War (WHICH HASN'T ENDED, IT'S STILL WARTIME, WAKE UP) in ☮️. We should ALL
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 10/want it to end in ☮️. So, they sure as hell won't be the first to launch an attack on anyone or their nukes. It's only if the US or other nuclear power attacked them that they'd use their nukes. I'd say there's nothing to worry about from DPRK. The real threat to the world
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 11/will be Washington so paranoid over DPRK's national self-defense system/nukes that it resorts to military action. Which would be one of the dumbest acts in human history as it could lead to WW3. You can already see where the faultiness are. It's time to end the War in ☮️!
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 12/Choe Son Hui: "DPRK's nuclear weapons are non-negotiable, unless the U.S. is prepared to co-exist with the nuclear DPRK. Because this is the only way to ensure lasting peace on the Korean peninsula and stability and security in the North East Asia."
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 13/I agree with the remarks of Choe Son Hui and Kim Yo Jong. We live w/ other nuclear nations, we can live with a nuclear limited DPRK. That's the "sweet spot": They will agree to permanently limit their nuclear/ICBM programs AND to USFK staying in ROK for normalized relations
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 14/w/ the US and being recognized as a nuclear state. FYI they are FOR Non-Proliferation. The only reason they're developing their nukes is to deter the US from attacking them. THAT ALL ENDS WHEN PEACE ENDS THE 71-YEARS-LONG KOREAN WAR. They'll trade the future of their nuclear
@duyeonkim @BulletinAtomic 15/program for a peace treaty today. Why would they need to fine-tune nuclear delivery systems if☮️ends the War? They won't need them and Kim has said this. Just ask them. All Biden or Blinken has to do is ask them.
🇺🇸☮️🇰🇵☮️🇰🇷
@SecBlinken
@JoeBiden
@POTUS
@TheBlueHouseENG

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Michael L Bonic

Michael L Bonic Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BonicMichael

3 Apr
As long as the US keeps playing this game of holding ☮️ (the end of the Korean War) hostage to DPRK’s “full denuclearization”, DPRK’s nuclear deterrence & 2nd strike capability will keep growing. I’d immediately negotiate accepting a limited nuclear DPRK, normalization & ☮️. 🤩
2/Nuclear DPRK, Ltd
There’s direct proportionality b/t US’s hostility (unilateral demands, conditions, sanctions) towards DPRK and the pace of DPRK’s nuclear & ICBM development. When the former increases, so does the latter. Were the former to stop, so would the latter. The
3/geniuses (not) in the Beltway don’t seem to grasp this elementary relation tho. Instead of worrying Kim will break his self-imposed double moratorium, they should entice DPRK to agreeing to Maximum Limits on their nuclear & ICBM programs (maximum allowable nukes & ICBSs).
Read 13 tweets
3 Apr
Let’s Share The Korean Peninsula
(What a brilliant idea, why didn’t I think of it? Oh wait, I did.)
[A Theatrical Parody]

A diplomat stands up to address the other diplomats seated at a table: Image
2/DPRK Diplomat: “OK we fought a bloody war to decide who gets control the Korean Peninsula. It was too brutal so we signed an Armistice. And now you you want us to decide who rules over a reunited Korea in this room?!”

ROK Diplomat: “Pretty much. It’s better than fighting.”
3/DPRK Diplomat: “We’ll never give up our Socialism. How can we resolve in this room what couldn’t be settled on the battlefield?”

US Diplomat: “Just give us all of your nukes DPRK, and all of the splendors of Western capitalism will be yours to enjoy.”

DPRK Diplomat: “Ha! You
Read 13 tweets
3 Apr
Historical backdrop to the “Korea Question” still unanswered today
[From MAY 26, 2009]
Are We at War With North Korea?
Um, sort of, in a way …
slate.com/news-and-polit…
“Sort of. The 1953 Korean War Armistice Agreement, signed by the United Nations Command, North Korea, and China,
2/“ended the conflict in a practical sense. It set up a system for exchanging prisoners of war, created a north-south boundary within a demilitarized zone, and marked the suspension of all open hostilities. It was not, however, intended as the final say on the matter. In fact,
3/“Article IV of the Armistice recommends that “the governments concerned on both sides” convene a conference within three months of signing to organize the withdrawal of foreign forces from the peninsula and settle the “Korea question”—roughly, who would rule over a reunited
Read 10 tweets
1 Apr
“In China, the people can’t change the government, but the system keeps changing. In countries like the US, the people can change the government, but the system can’t be changed.” quora.com/How-safe-is-Ch…
2/“Finally, came Deng Xiao Ping who famously said:“It doesn’t matter black cat (Capitalism) or white cat (Communism), as long as it catches mice, it’s a good cat”. His preference in pragmatism than ideologies has transformed China. This thinking allowed China to make plans which
3/“suit the actual needs in the country, instead of rigidly bounded to ideologies. By embracing market economy, it signified China had stopped pursuing the goal of a communism state...

In just 40 years, the CPC have lifted 800 million people out from poverty. The rate of growth
Read 8 tweets
1 Apr
Biden’s NK Policy Review, likely a step-by-step/phased approach of denuclearization rewarding DPRK at each step w/ sanctions relief, clashes w/: "[W]e shall never barter our system, the safety & future of our people for the likes of lifting of sanctions”.
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1377308…
2/Additional threads:

Kim Yo Jong calls out the hypocrisy of the double standard in self-defense exercises in Moon Jae In’s rhetoric in a statement of scathing critique.
Read 8 tweets
31 Mar
The Biden Admin’s North Korea Policy Review will likely take a step-by-step/phased approach towards North Korea’s “complete denuclearization”, rewarding DPRK at each step w/ incremental sanctions relief.
2/However Kim Yo Jong has previously said (her 10 July 2020 remarks appear later in thread) that DPRK will reject any future “denuclearization for sanctions” schemes offered by the US. Biden’s NK Policy Review following Friday’s US-Japan-ROK Trilat NSA Dialogue then could be DOA.
3/Cue to 4:42:

Anchor: “The trilateral meeting this time this Friday may mean that we will soon see the conclusion of the Biden Administration’s North Korea Policy. What are you expecting.”

Dr Go: “So...From the reports coming out of Washington, it looks like the Biden
Read 22 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!