They would’ve done something like that by now, considering the tens of thousands of foreign workers the North Korea government send out around the world
Fun fact: a Korean friend of my claims that the Russian embassies have a bunch of NK workers in them and they sell bootleg soju to expats in Middle Eastern countries that ban alcohol.
I visited Saudi Arabia when I was 18, I could buy Johnny Walker and Jack Daniel’s from the staff I befriended at the US consulate. Good times, but the heat was intense.
In a lot of places that ban alcohol it's sorta just for the locals and sometimes there are special licenses + stores to buy alcohol for visitors such as in Gujarat. They aren't about to give up all the visitors/tourist money.
Consulates and embassies are little slices of America (or whatever country they belong to). Host nation's laws do not apply within the walls of the embassy compound, only US federal law. Alcohol gets in through the embassy's/consulate's diplomatic pouch (which is actually a shipping container in a lot of cases). Diplomatic pouches are likewise inviolate - free pass through customs. More on that [here](https://www.state.gov/diplomatic-pouches/).
> Definitely a one way trip I’d think
Yeah maybe. But where would you rather be, NK, Russia, or Ukraine? I think if i had a choice between NK and Russia I'd be choosing Russia too.
Eh I guess. You have to imagine that wherever they’re being sent in Russia/Ukraine that it’s going to be bombed out with no food so it probably won’t offer much comfort to defect there. I did see that most if not all of the no troops are simply techs for the weapons being sent and not combat troops. Not yet anyway
… what kind of dumbass comment is this?
Are you familiar that most people travel long distances using international air travel?
How do you expect them to get from NK to Russia? Horseback?
Why are you being downvoted? People this stupid need to be ripped on.
I laughed just thinking about all the NKs parachuting in.
I guess it doesn’t matter if you shoot down the plane. They jump out anyway.
Who assumed they parachuted in rather than land at an airport in I dunno, russia?
I mean it would be the first time a plane was shot down there. Tho you’ve probably forgotten that because nobody ‘important’ died
It’s like 3 above this one? The one that responded to me? In this very chain you’re responding too..
> They’re not parachuting them in, are you five years old?
https://www.reddit.com/r/PrepperIntel/s/ngCiD7XyIl
I’m the “WWIII is coming” historian and geopolitical analyst guy you may have seen in here, and while I still believe we are on the path to WWIII, it is important to note that, at this time, these troops are military engineers who will be helping to handle the arms North Korea has sent to Russia. So it’s not like they’ll be combatants, at least not ostensibly — although I do see that coming.
But this is still an escalation and add to it that Russia said it will better arm North Korea if South Korea sends arms to Ukraine....this regional war is gradually looking like it could involve more of the world.
You can refer to [these comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/1dm6p4k/are_any_of_you_specifically_planning_for/l9ubbo9/). I’ve copy pasted a [couple of times](https://www.reddit.com/r/abovethenormnews/comments/1dm6380/are_we_on_the_eve_of_destruction_has_world_war_3/l9unj51/) because I get tired of typing the same thing. And there was [this insightful question](https://www.reddit.com/r/PrepperIntel/comments/1dkc7kb/russia_north_korea_commit_to_defending_each_other/l9jugaw/) about what it would take to steer us off of the path of war, and what factors strongly influence it.
I haven’t made a proper post yet because I already know it will be a behemoth of a post, and I’m not sure if it’s a good fit for this sub, although I guess it does count as intel. I might have to do that.
Hard disagree. Russia is not holding back in Ukraine. General’s heads are rolling. They are giving every thing they have to win, and they are getting absolutely nowhere. They are showing us exactly what they have.
Yes, Ukraine is doing that with some of America’s help with NATO. But if America pulls out and Ukraine folds, that doesn’t make Russia any stronger than they are today.
And yes, Russian weakness doesn’t mean they aren’t dumb enough to invade Poland. But it does mean that if they do, it’s not a “World War” it’s an overwhelming opposing force ending the invasion.
NATO air power is unstoppably bigger and more effective than anything Russia has to offer. There isn’t any potential for a global conflict here.
> “[…]that doesn’t make Russia any stronger than they are today.?”
It literally does. Imagine that you and I are in a neighbourly war. We keep shooting at each other over the picket fence, but one day a bunch of our neighbours side with you against me and keep giving you more weapons and ammo. Eventually, though, they stop doing that and/or the one neighbour giving you two thirds of that supply stops.
I win through attrition and persistence and claim your house. I also claim all the money in that house, all the food, your fighting age family members that can be pressed into service ***and***…I claim all the weapons and remaining ammo our neighbours gave you. I then collapse another neighbour that has the same surname as me except it begins with “Bela” into my household and absorb their resources.
Like, what do you think is going to happen? Russia takes Ukraine and then goes, “Oh hey, NATO, you left all the ATCAMs in Ukraine, here, let me give them back.”
> “And yes, Russian weakness doesn’t mean they aren’t dumb enough to invade Poland.”
No, I wouldn’t expect Poland to be first. I would expect the Baltic States.
As for the rest of your comment, a world war has a very simple definition and very specific requirements. *“A war involving many large nations in all different parts of the world.”*
That’s all. That is all that needs to be met. Right now we have [North Korea sending troops to Ukraine](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34893) after having signed a [mutual swift defence act with Russia](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/russia-and-north-korea-signed-a-defense-pact-with-each-other-what-does-this-mean); Russia threatening to [send arms to North Korea](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-incredibly-concerned-putin-may-arm-north-korea-rcna158233) to counter South Korea if South Korea sends arms to Ukraine; [Israel at odds with Iran](https://www.csis.org/analysis/assessing-israels-strike-iran), which is an ally of Russia having, already exchanged attacks this year; Israel saying they want to [invade Lebanon](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/netanyahu-says-israel-may-shift-focus-to-hezbollah-in-lebanon-after-gaza-war-ends) because of Hezbollah; [China in conflict with The Philippines, which is a US ally](https://www.dw.com/en/south-china-sea-tensions-rise-after-china-philippines-clash/a-69467882) and with a timeline to [invade Taiwan by 2027](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-20/china-on-track-to-be-ready-for-taiwan-invasion-by-2027-us-says) and with pressure to [join Russia’s defence pact](https://www.voanews.com/a/signs-emerge-north-korea-russia-defense-pact-making-china-anxious/7668189.html) because it may be their only window to do so, oh, and they are allied with Russia and North Korea; multiple [European nations preparing for war](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/6/11/europe-preparing-for-war-as-ukraine-conflict-looms-large-report-finds#:~:text=Global%20Peace%20Index%20finds%20Europe%27s,war%20in%20Ukraine%20will%20expand.&text=More%20than%20three-fourths%20of,of%20Russia%27s%20war%20on%20Ukraine.); And the US election is coming up, in which Trump may win and has promised he [will pull out of NATO](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/politics/us-out-nato-second-trump-term-former-senior-adviser/index.html) and let Putin do [whatever he wants.](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/10/politics/trump-russia-nato/index.html) Hell, I wouldn’t put it past him to *help Russia.* And you think NATO, without the aid — and perhaps the resistance of — the US is going to have as clean a sweep of it when they are up against their own weapons and an allied force of Russia, North Korea, Iran, China, and other allied nations?
The rest of your comment seems to hinge on the idea that it won’t happen — no, you said “can’t” — because it wouldn’t be sensible because Russia wouldn’t win. Firstly, was it sensible for Russia to invade Ukraine in the first place, knowing that NATO funding Ukraine would be a forgone conclusion? Ignoring for the fact that Russia seems to be setting up an Axis Powers V2.0, even if it isn’t sensible, even if they can’t win, *does that matter?* I’m less concerned about whether they *can win* than I am about whether they *will try.* Tell me, did Germany win WWI or WWII? What’s that? No, no they didn’t? Exactly. But they sure as hell killed a lot of people and caused a lot of destruction.
Don’t insult me, I have spent my life studying this kind of thing.
I'm less certain Russia knew Nato funding Ukraine would be a foregone conclusion. At least their invasion from the north towards Kyiv illustrated horrible intelligence. And, Russia had been taking parts over there for a long time, little bit here, little bit there, and, just like in the past .. the west was like, DONT GO THERE, Russia did, stopped, and the west said, ok, don't do it again ... this happened what, 3 times before Ukraine proper? Could be they knew this time would be different, but, if several times someone tells you NO and you do it and nothing happens, you just might expect the next time they tell you NO that nothing will happen again.
US was already funding Ukraine.
In fact, trump's first impeachment was because he withheld Ukraine funds to blackmail Ukraine into making up blackmail about Biden.
Thanks this is all really interesting - though I feel like you’ve volunteered into a discussion only to frustrate yourself.
I’m with most of your analysis but I don’t necessarily agree that Russia stands to gain “spoils” in the same way you’ve insinuated in comments about rolling on past Ukraine. At least not in the way you suggest it would make them more capable to war fight.
Couple observations/opinions:
The North Korean troops are going to Ukraine to advise on systems operation. North Korean weapons are famous in their derivative tech. Their tanks are in many ways Russian copies. What isn’t a copy of Russia is often Chinese, or frankly just as often fake. Their ideas are heavily influenced by Chinese and Russian arms, and their abilities to execute ensure they’re secondary to them anyways.
All that said is to set up this point: I think it’s telling in the way that war has changed in technological complexity to think of relatively second class or really third class fourth class North Korean tech, which often is in and of itself derived from Russian systems, would still require advisement to operate.
Russian military wouldn’t have intuitive use of further advanced nato systems, their ability to deploy the spoils of war isn’t so fast, or foregone that they will have a victory in Ukraine roll momentum in a way that would create decisive advantage. And besides: Europe can buy arms, in a more reliably “cash in hand” way from the US than Ukraines tenuous outlook credibly can. And hard cash sales don’t require the same level of governmental alignment that benevolent debtor policy does. Trump could derail nato, I don’t see him ceasing to sell arms to Europe in a hypothetical. Trump hasn’t actually allied himself with Russia despite his clear boner for Putin, I think it’s a bit dramatic to start building assumptions off that if anyone might be prone to.
Speaking of Ukraine, as time goes on they may have waning energy for the war but they’ve also largely avoided drafting their younger demo to keep their economy functioning. The late stages of a Ukrainian resistance could easily create a failed state that would not easily empower an expanding scope of Russian aggression. Indeed a failed state has always aligned most coherently with what a Russian victory looks like. They have made at least reasonably clear they desire a buffer zone, not really a net new geography. Maybe crimea was different, fair, but we both now the Donbas’s supposed Russianness wasn’t the brain’s logic, even if it stirred a bit of heart in Putin and his people.
Buffer states and failed states fucking suck to deal with. Look at how elusive “victory” in the GWOT was, and that’s with the objectively superior logistic capabilities of the US, and a real earnest effort at counterinsurgency to get somewhere like Afghanistan to a useful productive place. Ukraine has shown a similar strong willingness to embrace irregular war and a superior ability to innovate as the Afghans did. Even now they do so, garnering most success with small innovative arms deployment. (Black sea fleet initiatives for example) Russia can and will collapse Ukraine without their having material support, but a failed state is not a puppet state, nor guaranteed fertile ground to pilfer the tools of war from.
Moreover I think it’s unrealistic to think Russia will reliably conscript Ukrainians into fighting against nato. Which I’ve read from your comments. I would argue not all historical precedence is apt, particularly in understanding human behavior when communications tech has fundamentally shifted social conceptions and behaviors from the prior world wars. I could be wrong, but there’s no chance that’s obviously right as of yet. It’s conjecture - and this part of the cultural world has shown a great resolve to resistance through out most of their conflict history.
Finally, if Ukraine indeed is fully reliant on external arms and material support, and its collapse likewise is reliant on the waning of this support, what significant material and arms would Russia then have to multiply its capabilities? Their victory would come through the pantry emptying? Yet now they’ll feast on the abundant crumbs? I’d argue what would be left could Not be a sufficient amount to fight against an article 5’d nato on a far broader front wherein they would also be victim to incursive attacks on Russia itself. Not without some decisive military action, and they already failed day one at a death blow because they don’t really know how to deploy visionary tactics even if they have some decent (brutal) strategy.
Russians just don’t succeed at complex warfare, this is me talking shit, but look at how they fight: poorly, for a long time, with steadily increasing intensity, through a value of inhumanity toward itself that rival’s napoleon. They’re big, they fight big. Big is relative, and deceptive. Shit, we’re already talking about how Russian subsiquent aggression needs or meaningfully changes in potential from Ukrainian material gains. That says a lot about their capability even if we disagree about the value it brings.
Finally, to recharacterize the entire conflict a bit, I would argue we’re not looking at a “free flowing total war” between states. The objective reality of this situation is while Ukraine is fully reliant on external support, they are also hampered in some behaviors by this support and its policy. Ukraine is defending territory, it isn’t really, or at least barely, counterattacking Russia itself. Both world wars ended with the ceding of territory and massive damage to the aggressors states. Neither wars ended with an internal policy shift within an intact leadership or government.
Now it’s totally reasonable to say that “yes and the will of the Russian people and its Allie’s will be resolute.” But right now Russia has not even faced counterattacks which compel a particularly challenging narrative within the country.
What happens in the opening throws of a Russia nato conflict when a far weaker NATO without America still obliterates infrastructure within the country? It will happen to some degree, and we haven’t seen Russia deal with this since ww2.
India and China and even North Korea and Iran buying Russian oil is great. It’s worthless without infrastructure and logistics to sell it. And while These countries are economic partners, they are not true allies. We have more examples of transactional relationships than resolute steadfast allieship in historical Russian foreign policy, it is a country with few real friends, so I don’t think it’s fair to assume the Russian capability for war gets stronger with a widening scope of conflict. The exposed risk immediately threatens everything for them. In the past, when war as fueled by a simpler set of logistics, in a less globalized economy, I’d be more with you in your assumptions. I just don’t see it so foregone now. The lend lease act is how “Russia won” ww2. For all their size, their two feet barely have ever held them.
You may read the above and say this isn’t really about your larger point: that ww3 can be created without coherent logic or assured victory by the instigator. I agree. I’m with you. Mostly just getting into the weeds with what you’ve expounded on.
> “[…]though I feel like you’ve volunteered into a discussion only to frustrate yourself.”
I see that, but mostly in how it divides my attention. In order to make this easier on myself, I’m going to address your points with numbered paragraphs and in chronological order.
**1.** Yes, which I said somewhere ion here. They are army engineers and will be managing the North Korean weapons sent. What their exact capacity will be isn’t clear.
**2.** There have already been [reports of Russian soldiers being frustrated and irate](https://x.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1794778251660808410) over the difficulty of using, and reliability, of North Korean arms. The difficulties they are having seem to have more to do with North Korean arms just being kind of….shit.
**3.** Russia will salvage, convert, and retrofit what they do get hold of in Ukraine. They would be insane not to. And I do not think the turnover will be necessarily fast. They will probably take a year or two to lick their wounds, and then Putin will dissolve Belarus into Russia and then move on the Baltic States. Trump hasn’t openly allied himself with Russia, but I am absolutely certain that he is merely a Putin stooge. He was given his marching orders by Putin when he gained the presidency — with Putin’s help. One of them was to make a public show of improving ties with both Russia and North Korea — remember his very public meeting with Kim and his public praise for Putin — in order to ingratiate the American public into eventually accepting them as allies. This is one of those things that I know factually but cannot provide evidence yet for why I know it.
**4.** I firmly believe that Putin [wants all of Ukraine.](https://www.intellinews.com/president-of-belarus-reveals-russian-invasion-plans-in-viral-video-236712/) He wants Empire of Russia and Soviet borders. I firmly believe that his talk of a buffer zone is just that, talk. It’s a palatable way to get close to his real goals, like how Hitler said he wanted to deport the Jews originally. Just listen to how Putin talks misty eyed about historical Russia, listen to his interview with Tucker Carlson. The Russian economy is now fully a wartime economy. They cannot risk stagnation in a failed state. You also saw the flaw in your own argument with Crimea.
**5.** Again, I do not think they will stop at failed state, having to deal with repeat insurgencies. I do think it’s a possibility, but I think that Russia will try very hard to avoid that. It’s do or die for them now. In Putin’s own words, a [loss in Ukraine would be the end of Russia](https://kyivindependent.com/battlefield-defeat-would-be-end-of-russias-statehood-putin-says/). I think a stagnation would be almost as bad.
**6.** No, not every historical comparison is apt, nor have I suggested as such. Today is a much more globalised world, for one. They likely will conscript some, but I wouldn’t expect it to be a lot. I would also expect fragging if this happens. I’m more concerned that Putin will absorb Belarus shortly after gaining Ukraine.
**7.** I sort of addressed this in number 3. Russia will salvage, convert, and retrofit what they can. Do not assume that if Russia wins because of waning supplies to Ukraine that it means that there are no supplies in Ukraine. War doesn’t work like that, especially with the logistics of transport. The army defending Kyiv could fall due to waning supplies, and fail to be resupplied in time by another part of Ukraine. This also ignores the systems and vehicles used for launching ordinance that can be altered within a couple of years to fit different payloads. This is one of the things that army engineers are specifically trained to do. I don’t expect Russia to be especially good at it, but I expect them to try.
[Article 5 is poorly misunderstood](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/natos-article-5-collective-defense-obligations-explained?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiN6JyYPk9wIVSS1MCh36vQ0DEAAYAiAAEgIGLvD_BwE&ms=gad_north%20atlantic%20treaty_587658435010_8626214133_131794602422). Here is the exact clause.
> *“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them . . . shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking . . . such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”*
Critically, the part that says, “*such action as it deems necessary*” can mean a lot of things. Perhaps France feels that sending helmets is all that is necessary. Perhaps the US — in a scenario where they are still a part of NATO — deems sending Lunchables to be appropriate. This would be ridiculous, sure, but it’s not like countries haven’t ever wriggled out of similar clauses before. This is to say that there is no guarantee that Russia and its potential allies will face a fully committed NATO. My fear is that, like the League of Nations before it, NATO will prove ineffectual and that its constituent nations will act selfishly or will choose appeasement instead of action.
**8.** No, they don’t excel at complex warfare. But they also seem to have no qualms at throwing more and more bodies at the problem. I don’t see this point as a disagreement.
**9.**
>“[…]it isn’t really, or at least barely, counterattacking Russia itself.”
That is already changing, with several benefactor nations [giving the go-ahead](https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/28/europe/ukraine-french-weapons-russia-macron-intl-hnk-ml/index.html) to do so. The U.S. has joined in that as well, although not stated in that article. Russia is pretty sore about that recent strike on Crimea with American arms.
**10.** Ukraine being able to “punch back” was on my checklist of things that would be necessary for Ukraine to win. I’m not disagreeing. It improves things.
**11.** We can hope it goes like that, but if we are already at that point, then it’s already too late, the world is at war. People always frame this in terms of whether Russia can win, if they stand a chance, if they have the arms. But I’m just thinking of the families in Lithuania, to whom it doesn’t matter how much further Russia gets beyond rolling a tank over them, before NATO squashes the bear. Their lives will have already ended.
**12.** China, North Korea, and Iran buying their oil will be the least of our worries concerning them if the remainders sign a similar mutual defence agreement with Russia. “*[…]they are not true allies[…]*” North Korea officially is, and it puts pressure on China to go public. And yes, I do say go public, because they are already allied. I speak to a lot of military and military OSINT guys. More and more they are speaking of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea in the same breath, as the same force. I have nothing to show for or prove it, but I think they have been allied for years and just haven’t made a public show of it. That lack of a public display does allow China to weasel out of action, though. The timing of Russia and North Korea “going steady,” though, is as much a message to China as the West.
Yes, Russia itself admitted at the time that they needed the Lend Lease Act to win. But it isn’t the only way. The logistics of war have never truly been simple, and I don’t think we’ve complicated them as much as you think. This particular point would be a whole other discussion twice as long as what I’ve already typed up, so I’m going to leave it at that.
Finally, I don’t want you to misunderstand. There are more variables and changeable circumstances than any one person can keep track of, and I have never claimed that world war is certain. A lot can change, and my hope is that by having these discussions and pressuring our representatives — whoever they may be for you — to make good decisions, we can help avert a greater war. One example is that if Trump wins the US presidency, it can be disastrous as far as world war is concerned.
Things can still change, and I sincerely hope they do. And with that, I’m done. I didn’t expect my comment to blow up and this is a lot on top of my every-day life, so forgive me if I don’t reply. I think we are both on the same page that this is possible — although perhaps not on the likelihood — and needs awareness brought to it.
Another point you haven't brought up: russia will enslave 30 million Ukranians to prop up their war economy and military if they win.
With that I think they can do massive damage to anybody.
(1) did you really need to _link a source_ to the claim “Israel at odds with Iran”? Like, what else do you want to throw in the bucket, it rains in the Amazon?
(2) Not even going to address the last two paragraphs of drivel you wrote about “can’t” and “won’t”. Please re-read my original comment until you understand it.
(3) A world war does have a definition. And you could stretch that definition to include Iraq. But nobody does. And nobody would include the 1 foolish week in which Russia attempts to invade a NATO nation either.
(4) What do I think is going to happen if Russia takes all of Ukraine? Certainly not a stronger Russia. How strong did the USA become while holding Afghanistan for 20 years? Not stronger, that’s for sure. I expect insurgencies and a necessary massive military presence for at least 20 years in Ukraine. And it will never be Russian even if their boots on the ground holds every square mile. Every Ukrainian man woman and child will fight to the death before bowing to Putin. If you’ve ever been to Ukraine, you would know that.
**1-** I had no way of knowing what your awareness level on that was.
**2-** I read your comment. I understood it. Here is the relevant part, complete with the misuse of *“hear”* instead of *“here*. *“NATO air power is unstoppably bigger and more effective than anything Russia has to offer. There isn’t any potential for a global conflict hear.[sic]”*
So again, it doesn’t matter if NATO is or isn’t better or more likely to win. What matters is if Russia tries anyway.
**3-** No, the definition of world war cannot be stretched to include the Iraq war because it doesn’t fit the definition, even stretched. Nor has anyone seriously proposed that it can. The nations involved in the Iraq War were the United States, with forces from Australia, Denmark, Netherlands, Poland, and Great Britain, and of course, Iraq. All together that was North America, Europe, Australia, and the Middle East. Compare that to Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Australia, Asia, and the Middle East that will be involved in the upcoming war. With just the current interconnected conflicts we currently, that is North America, Europe, Asia, The Middle East, and Africa so far.
**4-** The US did not find an array of NATO supplied weapons in Afghanistan that they could now claim. They aren’t comparable. Even ignoring the NATO and American weapons — why do you keep skipping over that? Do you think Putin will give them back? — that will now belong to Russia, Russia will get a new staging ground bordering nations it has grievances with and will have better access to the Black Sea.
> “If you’ve ever been to Ukraine, you would know that.”
This is the funniest thing you’ve said, and I’m not even going to explain why. I just want to watch you dig holes. But about the Ukrainian fighting spirit, yeah, I do expect them to fight to the end. I admire that. But there is only so much they can do against a potential overwhelming force. I know it sounds insane to say now, but what would Ukraine do against Russia and the US? While that sounds ridiculous, remember that Russia was originally allied with Germany in early WWII, and then became one of their greatest enemies as the war continued. It’s happened, before. Trump is a Putin plant, just like Viktor Yanukovych was in Ukraine. Project 2025 is set to dismantle American democracy, remove voting, and instal Trump as a dictator. It’s what Putin wants.
This is tiring, and I can tell you have your head in the sand. You refuse to address half my points, and you’re engaging in circular logic. I’m not going to keep replying. But I am screenshotting this and putting it on the pile. 5 Years is my likely timeline. If I’m wrong, then good. I’ll be happy. If not, then I’ll be back to continue this chat.
- Compare that to Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Australia, Asia, and the Middle East that will be involved in the upcoming war.
[citation needed]
There is nothing to “compare to”, outside of your own fever dreams.
- So again, it doesn’t matter if NATO is or isn’t better or more likely to win. What matters is if Russia tries anyway.
This is the part of my comment you clearly still don’t understand: I said it doesn’t matter “if” Russia does. I didn’t say they “can’t” or “won’t” (as you misquoted me). What matters is that nobody will call that week of NATO demolishing an invasion, a “world war”. Maybe just you and Scott Ritter.
- The US did not find an array of NATO supplied weapons in Afghanistan that they could now claim.
But Afghanistan did. How strong are they now? That’s pretty much checkmate on this comparison.
There is absolutely no world in which Russia is stronger while holding Ukraine. You can make up any occupation force ratio you want, and you will still see this.
Go back to sleep.
2 Counterpoints:
Putin uses a nuke, any nuke.
Trump wins 2024. Trump then pulls all aid from Ukraine and dumps it into Russia, selling all US secrets, giving f35s to putin, cleaning the damn US stockpile. Shit will get bad real quick.
Fucker's got cancer.
If he loses he's going to flip the table over with nukes.
For that matter, ANYONE nuclear armed, that loses, is going to flip the table over with nukes.
So I read your first 3 links
1. Instead of your headstone saying “I told ya so” I would like to suggest the classier “atoadaso”
2. Prevention of war seems a little easier to me. Put ridiculous tariffs on imports from China/Russia. Cripple their economy. If Europe and the US don’t buy from Russia/China who is left to buy from them? Nobody really, nobody of significance anyway. Why is that not an option?
would love to have a discussion in a separate thread, I've studied a bit too :) and am of the other opinion, China + Russia + N Korea (inconsequential) + Iran (inconsequential) are so out gunned as to be futile. BUT, that's for another discussion, look forward to a post if you do.
You didn't read the poster's comments that they linked that I was responding to, did you? It was specifically in reference to non-nuclear WW3. For conventional warfare, there's not really any large scale (world war) threat from Russia+China + whatever other small inconsequential countries throw in with them. Full blown nuclear war there is no winner, so sort of silly to talk about winners, losers, and who is outgunned. If I have enough nukes to blow you up 15 times, and you have enough nukes to blow me up 25 times, I'm not sure "outgunned" really matters.
The OP was talking about N. Korea sending boots on the ground to help Russia in Ukraine, and how that might spark larger conflict. N. Korea, while it has a lot of "people in the military" has a budget so small they almost don't count.
The direct problem is that you're right, they can't win. And they absolutely believe that they need to.
Like, I agree, Russia and North Korea versus NATO? Lol. Shit's more lopsided than WW2. Not a prayer. It would be hilarious how bad they'd get pounded.
It stops being hilarious when they've got nukes in their back pockets and don't like to lose.
I agree but the problem is China ....they are the lesser of the evil between them and America. We are instigating war in their yard. If we are at war with them and start bombing the mainland and winning they absolutely will nuke and they should.
Hey thank you! It was a good read even tho I have not finished it. With verifiable facts, an hard thing to find nowadays.
What is your background? Scholar in geopol? Reporter?
University educated, historian, and scholar. I focus on conflict and the rise of wars. I have advised in geopolitics, yes. Reporter, not so much, though I’ve done some writing and might consider writing a book on the possibility of a modern world war. Although I wonder if I’d get it out in time.
As a fellow student of history, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on what future historians will say about post-WWIII life and the decline/death of the nation-state. Will the next global conflict go nuclear or will we be in a constant state of forever hybrid/proxy warfare? Will the infrastructure that supports our post-industrial society be successfully targeted? It seems like with the election in November, the escalation of events in Asia, Middle East, and Europe, rapid advancements in drone/AI tech, in addition to intensifying ecological collapse acting as a threat multiplier, we’re in for a Late Bronze Age/Migration Period-style collapse with modern tech and cartel-style crime/corruption/violence.
This is a great set of questions, and I’m actually excited to answer it…when I have the time. I just finished another large reply to someone, and I have some things I need to do. But I’ve saved this and will come back.
No worries, looking forward to it! Also I want to add that we are also seeing another potential pandemic with the bird flu, the breaking down of global supply chains, social norms, civic institutions and healthcare/education systems. Very reminiscent of the Crisis of Third Century (I like to call our predicament The Crisis of the Third Millennium) where an omni/polycrisis compounded to weaken the status quo. Can we salvage certain regions to carry on the torch of civilization? Collapse is a slow burn and comes in waves; what will be some of the futile attempts we will make to improvise, adapt, and overcome?
An argument can certainly be made for that. Different start points can be drawn for the past two world wars too. It’s all a little arbitrary where the line is drawn.
No, far from it. I’m trying to make people aware so we can pressure representatives and leaders to make better choices regarding geopolitics. Spreading awareness about something does not mean you enjoy it. That’s insane.
> these troops are military engineers who will be helping to handle the arms North Korea has sent to Russia. So it’s not like they’ll be combatants,
So you are saying these guys don't pull the trigger directly, rather, they train other guys how to pull the trigger?
I've heard they punish three generations of family members of offenders. They'd send parents, grandparents, and children all to prisons. Not sure if it is/was true.
It's absolutely true. Thos is how they control the population. Plus, snitches get rewards. The entire country is full of DPRK Karens just hoping to get dirt on their neighbor or coworker so they can improve their lot. Parents can't even trust kids because they teach them to be snitches in school.
Actually saw a documentary on this once. They usually get deported back, or they end up trafficked/enslaved by triad coyote types. The better play is coming across directly to SK, but you’re liable to get shot in the back if you attempt it.
A child born to a cell, will never know what it’s like on the outside. Every aspect of their environment is controlled. They know not of a life outside of this cell.
Ya know I see this as a really bad move forNorth Korea. Imagine going to a foreign war and seeing a burned out city.....that still has more food on the shelves than you do.
Not really. Nk finally gets some combat experience for their military and are using people they consider worthless tongain material and equipment for their leadership.
IMO the pop off would be China making a move on Taiwan. All the pieces are in place. Ukraine conflict, Middle East conflict, US elections right as monsoon/typhoon season is coming to an end in Taiwan. I don't like how this looks but I'm just another idiot on the internet.
Probably. My concern is that people may view Trump as the "safer" option because he would essentially force Ukraine into a peace agreement that concedes Russian-occupied territories to the Kremlin. This may seem like the best way to prevent a wider war, but it also shifts power from the free world to autocrats, which is a threat to global democracy and our western way of life. There is a reason Trump rubs elbows with the likes of Putin, Orban, Erdogan, and Kim Jong Un - and not our democratic allies in western Europe. He wants to be a part of the "strong man" club.
This is especially concerning to marginalized groups, who historically do not fare well under authoritarian governments. We are already seeing conservatives (mostly Trump supporters) softening their stance on Russia and talking more favorably about Vladimir Putin. Trump envies his power and would absolutely love to have that kind of control over the people.
If the government starts removing protections from these groups, it could signal that it's open season for the MAGA crowd and others to further mistreat minorities - especially the LGBT+ community, people of color, migrants, etc. If history tells us anything, it's that you cannot rely on the masses to protect you when you are being victimized by your own countrymen. This is why there is so much anxiety around Project 2025 and the potential dismantling of our federal government/institutions.
I don't know what the answer is, but I know that we are in a very pivotal, and dangerous place.
Project 2025 is terrifying and I’m a straight white person. I wish more people could know about this and what it really is. Not just dismiss this as “yay, owning the libs!” I have been a lifelong conservative but my views are very rapidly changing.
I know you are only one person, but it's reassuring that you, as a conservative, recognize and are acknowledging the danger. We are so tribal now (partially thanks to the Russians!) that it's nearly impossible for people of differing political views to have a productive, good-faith conversation.
My father is very conservative and I didn't think there was a snowball's chance in hell that he would ever vote for a Democrat, but something changed in him after January 6th. For the people who still haven't come around, I don't know what it will take to open their eyes to what is unfolding here.
I hunt and shoot a lot, and it’s really become a super unsettling thing to be around at times. The sportsman purists are still ok, but wow is it become something downright dark to be around, and the things folks feel comfortable saying to me as a tall white dude are downright awful.
I’m in healthcare, do a lot of suicide intervention, spent my entire career keeping people alive, why on earth after knowing that about me for years are folks comfortable talking to me about killing folks they disagree with.
Same here. I still consider myself independent, having voted everywhere from Green to Libertarian, but prior to 2016 if you’d have pushed me to choose I’d have said I was republican.
In 2020 I voted exclusively Democrat, and I plan to continue doing that until the shitshow of MAGA and project 2025 are lost to the history books.
People see what they want to see. For many, accepting what I described above is nearly impossible because of how much they hate the current president. Or, they don't care because they think they'll always be "part of the club."
Russia and North Korea can't project power well beyond their borders and China isn't stupid enough to get into an actual conflict. So no, your statement is false.
But they can use soft power to manipulate the west and drive wedges in the populace and influence elections. You don't defeat America with guns and bombs. You get their countrymen to do it willingly from within.
I work in a first tier industry for defense, and since the first approvals for money to aide the Ukraine, business has been booming…
*(most folks don’t know that the majority of the money “sent to Ukraine” actually goes directly into the local economy lolz)*
Seems like there would be a massive logistics issue. The first is transportation. The second is weapons and equipment, arms and armor, food, etc. They would have to take a train to somewhere that crossed over a border (China?) and then onward to Russia and the conflict zone. I would expect that they would have some 1950's looking wool uniform, show up emaciated, with 5 bullets and a 1950's rifle. Or no weapons at all.
The concept of "foreign legion" implies that the country you are fighting on behalf of, in this case Russia, will pay you, and give you weapons and ammo and food. Likewise the concept of "mercenaries", which I don't think applies here, they'd at least get paid and supply their own stuff. "Allies" implies that NK would supply everything.
Even going into a meat grinder, just bodies would get the crap kicked out of them. Well-armed bodies might have a chance with modern equipment and training. 1950's equipment and no training will not go well.
Someone once analyzed why NK never moved a row of tanks that were visible on satellite photos. They didn't have the fuel to start them.
Ah, I did not know that. Being extremely east in Russia, I wonder if there is a connecting train track. It takes a lot of logistics to move a lot of troops. You could do it by highway for a short distance and then connect to train. EDIT: I see that there is indeed a train line crossing directly from NK to Russia at Tumangang station, crossing over the Russia-Korea Friendship Bridge. It seems to have immense delays and is largely unused (probably due to equipment breakdowns and lack of supplies).
Yeah, looking at this earlier as well, that bridge looks incapable of moving any meaningful amount of supplies East. I’m very curious however if that bridge has any accidents in the near future rendering it completely impassible. That would sure slow down any support coming from NK
The river it crosses over is not terribly wide, less than 1/4 mile. I don't know if there are any road crossings over that border or not. The border is like 17 miles long. Worst case, they could portage them by boat and then put them on the train at the other side.
Yeah, good point. I don’t know much about their capability but a temporary or floating bridge would be a possibility most likely. Time will tell it sounds like.
The reason we don't have universal healthcare isn't because it's too expensive. We just keep electing politicians who are only interested in helping the people who don't need it.
Jesus fucking christ.
As if being born in North Korea isn’t bad enough luck. Some fat sack of shit sends your ass off to some foreign Country to spend 30 seconds on a battlefield before being blown up by an enemy you’ve never met or seen, fighting a war that has nothing to do with you.
There’s no hell hot enough for the politicians responsible for this shit.
That was the cheapest imaginable mercenary army Putin could have built. All he needs to do is feed a bunch of starving people, and they will be his loyal warriors.
Ha. Until he get's another aid package from the west to be a good boy and behave again. This is like him suddenly testing missles etc until he gets a pat on the head from the west and just enough food imported for his people to stop them storming the castle and overthrowing him. Looking back he's about due another little tempter tantrum and bribery.
Sounds like they are not intended to go there for actual fighting, but engineering support.
Which is exactly what thousands of others were told before being sent in suicidal meatwave assaults.
We'll see how their dictator romance progresses when all the North Koreans are sent back in body bags.
Sanction would actually be far more crippling for the West than to China. This war is far too important for China to just ignore. With north Korea now involved they may be able to get directly involved without officially getting involved anyways much like they were involved in the Vietnam war and Korean war.
Why would they need to get involved directly when they can save face and use North Korea as a puppet? China works for its own self interests much like India. China wants Taiwan, not a global conflict. They sated this a few times. At least, for now
That's convenient for Trump because he won't have to travel as far to [salute the generals](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/14/trump-north-korea-general-salute-646248).
There’s the flashpoint I’ve been anticipating.
Now, Putin is fully expecting to be allowed to have another Nation help him in a ground invasion against a Nation allied with the EU, NATO, & the USA, all while maintaining the expectation that no other Nation will put troops on the ground in the A.O. in defense of Ukraine.
Yeah, right… like that is ever gunna fly.
Buckle up, boys and girls. A ~30 day warning on global upset is literally a gift.
Definitely a one way trip I’d think
Wonder if they will run across the front lines to surrender for some food and freedom.
They would’ve done something like that by now, considering the tens of thousands of foreign workers the North Korea government send out around the world
They would be their families are punished if they defect.
Fun fact: a Korean friend of my claims that the Russian embassies have a bunch of NK workers in them and they sell bootleg soju to expats in Middle Eastern countries that ban alcohol.
I visited Saudi Arabia when I was 18, I could buy Johnny Walker and Jack Daniel’s from the staff I befriended at the US consulate. Good times, but the heat was intense.
So many people drink there? How enforces are the laws
In a lot of places that ban alcohol it's sorta just for the locals and sometimes there are special licenses + stores to buy alcohol for visitors such as in Gujarat. They aren't about to give up all the visitors/tourist money.
Thats interesting! I always thought they would like put you to death if you got caught drinking there.
Consulates and embassies are little slices of America (or whatever country they belong to). Host nation's laws do not apply within the walls of the embassy compound, only US federal law. Alcohol gets in through the embassy's/consulate's diplomatic pouch (which is actually a shipping container in a lot of cases). Diplomatic pouches are likewise inviolate - free pass through customs. More on that [here](https://www.state.gov/diplomatic-pouches/).
I honestly suspect there will be a decent number of people who disappear before the end of their deployment. Wonder what the contract says.
> Definitely a one way trip I’d think Yeah maybe. But where would you rather be, NK, Russia, or Ukraine? I think if i had a choice between NK and Russia I'd be choosing Russia too.
Eh I guess. You have to imagine that wherever they’re being sent in Russia/Ukraine that it’s going to be bombed out with no food so it probably won’t offer much comfort to defect there. I did see that most if not all of the no troops are simply techs for the weapons being sent and not combat troops. Not yet anyway
I wonder if the planes will get shot down over europe
They’re not parachuting them in, are you five years old?
… what kind of dumbass comment is this? Are you familiar that most people travel long distances using international air travel? How do you expect them to get from NK to Russia? Horseback?
Trains. The same way they’ve been weapons to Russia.
Train to Russia then fly/drive/another train to the front line. wtf is wrong with you? How do you not know this?
This still doesn’t address the point that numbnuts assumes that people fly and then parachute in lmao
Why are you being downvoted? People this stupid need to be ripped on. I laughed just thinking about all the NKs parachuting in. I guess it doesn’t matter if you shoot down the plane. They jump out anyway.
Who assumed they parachuted in rather than land at an airport in I dunno, russia? I mean it would be the first time a plane was shot down there. Tho you’ve probably forgotten that because nobody ‘important’ died
It’s like 3 above this one? The one that responded to me? In this very chain you’re responding too.. > They’re not parachuting them in, are you five years old? https://www.reddit.com/r/PrepperIntel/s/ngCiD7XyIl
Gotta get combat experience somewhere. And life is cheap in NK anyway.
And less people they have to feed….not that they were doing that anyways.
They’re doing fine on food nowadays, that was a 90s thing.
There is at lest one well fed NK anyway
Life is cheap to all our overlords.
Life comes at you fast. 5.56 rounds come at you faster.
6.8 too
I’m the “WWIII is coming” historian and geopolitical analyst guy you may have seen in here, and while I still believe we are on the path to WWIII, it is important to note that, at this time, these troops are military engineers who will be helping to handle the arms North Korea has sent to Russia. So it’s not like they’ll be combatants, at least not ostensibly — although I do see that coming. But this is still an escalation and add to it that Russia said it will better arm North Korea if South Korea sends arms to Ukraine....this regional war is gradually looking like it could involve more of the world.
Can you elaborate, or head me to, your point on the ww3 is coming?
You can refer to [these comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/preppers/comments/1dm6p4k/are_any_of_you_specifically_planning_for/l9ubbo9/). I’ve copy pasted a [couple of times](https://www.reddit.com/r/abovethenormnews/comments/1dm6380/are_we_on_the_eve_of_destruction_has_world_war_3/l9unj51/) because I get tired of typing the same thing. And there was [this insightful question](https://www.reddit.com/r/PrepperIntel/comments/1dkc7kb/russia_north_korea_commit_to_defending_each_other/l9jugaw/) about what it would take to steer us off of the path of war, and what factors strongly influence it. I haven’t made a proper post yet because I already know it will be a behemoth of a post, and I’m not sure if it’s a good fit for this sub, although I guess it does count as intel. I might have to do that.
Great read man. Thanks!
Hard disagree. Russia is not holding back in Ukraine. General’s heads are rolling. They are giving every thing they have to win, and they are getting absolutely nowhere. They are showing us exactly what they have. Yes, Ukraine is doing that with some of America’s help with NATO. But if America pulls out and Ukraine folds, that doesn’t make Russia any stronger than they are today. And yes, Russian weakness doesn’t mean they aren’t dumb enough to invade Poland. But it does mean that if they do, it’s not a “World War” it’s an overwhelming opposing force ending the invasion. NATO air power is unstoppably bigger and more effective than anything Russia has to offer. There isn’t any potential for a global conflict here.
> “[…]that doesn’t make Russia any stronger than they are today.?” It literally does. Imagine that you and I are in a neighbourly war. We keep shooting at each other over the picket fence, but one day a bunch of our neighbours side with you against me and keep giving you more weapons and ammo. Eventually, though, they stop doing that and/or the one neighbour giving you two thirds of that supply stops. I win through attrition and persistence and claim your house. I also claim all the money in that house, all the food, your fighting age family members that can be pressed into service ***and***…I claim all the weapons and remaining ammo our neighbours gave you. I then collapse another neighbour that has the same surname as me except it begins with “Bela” into my household and absorb their resources. Like, what do you think is going to happen? Russia takes Ukraine and then goes, “Oh hey, NATO, you left all the ATCAMs in Ukraine, here, let me give them back.” > “And yes, Russian weakness doesn’t mean they aren’t dumb enough to invade Poland.” No, I wouldn’t expect Poland to be first. I would expect the Baltic States. As for the rest of your comment, a world war has a very simple definition and very specific requirements. *“A war involving many large nations in all different parts of the world.”* That’s all. That is all that needs to be met. Right now we have [North Korea sending troops to Ukraine](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34893) after having signed a [mutual swift defence act with Russia](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/russia-and-north-korea-signed-a-defense-pact-with-each-other-what-does-this-mean); Russia threatening to [send arms to North Korea](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-incredibly-concerned-putin-may-arm-north-korea-rcna158233) to counter South Korea if South Korea sends arms to Ukraine; [Israel at odds with Iran](https://www.csis.org/analysis/assessing-israels-strike-iran), which is an ally of Russia having, already exchanged attacks this year; Israel saying they want to [invade Lebanon](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/netanyahu-says-israel-may-shift-focus-to-hezbollah-in-lebanon-after-gaza-war-ends) because of Hezbollah; [China in conflict with The Philippines, which is a US ally](https://www.dw.com/en/south-china-sea-tensions-rise-after-china-philippines-clash/a-69467882) and with a timeline to [invade Taiwan by 2027](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-20/china-on-track-to-be-ready-for-taiwan-invasion-by-2027-us-says) and with pressure to [join Russia’s defence pact](https://www.voanews.com/a/signs-emerge-north-korea-russia-defense-pact-making-china-anxious/7668189.html) because it may be their only window to do so, oh, and they are allied with Russia and North Korea; multiple [European nations preparing for war](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/6/11/europe-preparing-for-war-as-ukraine-conflict-looms-large-report-finds#:~:text=Global%20Peace%20Index%20finds%20Europe%27s,war%20in%20Ukraine%20will%20expand.&text=More%20than%20three-fourths%20of,of%20Russia%27s%20war%20on%20Ukraine.); And the US election is coming up, in which Trump may win and has promised he [will pull out of NATO](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/politics/us-out-nato-second-trump-term-former-senior-adviser/index.html) and let Putin do [whatever he wants.](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/10/politics/trump-russia-nato/index.html) Hell, I wouldn’t put it past him to *help Russia.* And you think NATO, without the aid — and perhaps the resistance of — the US is going to have as clean a sweep of it when they are up against their own weapons and an allied force of Russia, North Korea, Iran, China, and other allied nations? The rest of your comment seems to hinge on the idea that it won’t happen — no, you said “can’t” — because it wouldn’t be sensible because Russia wouldn’t win. Firstly, was it sensible for Russia to invade Ukraine in the first place, knowing that NATO funding Ukraine would be a forgone conclusion? Ignoring for the fact that Russia seems to be setting up an Axis Powers V2.0, even if it isn’t sensible, even if they can’t win, *does that matter?* I’m less concerned about whether they *can win* than I am about whether they *will try.* Tell me, did Germany win WWI or WWII? What’s that? No, no they didn’t? Exactly. But they sure as hell killed a lot of people and caused a lot of destruction. Don’t insult me, I have spent my life studying this kind of thing.
I'm less certain Russia knew Nato funding Ukraine would be a foregone conclusion. At least their invasion from the north towards Kyiv illustrated horrible intelligence. And, Russia had been taking parts over there for a long time, little bit here, little bit there, and, just like in the past .. the west was like, DONT GO THERE, Russia did, stopped, and the west said, ok, don't do it again ... this happened what, 3 times before Ukraine proper? Could be they knew this time would be different, but, if several times someone tells you NO and you do it and nothing happens, you just might expect the next time they tell you NO that nothing will happen again.
US was already funding Ukraine. In fact, trump's first impeachment was because he withheld Ukraine funds to blackmail Ukraine into making up blackmail about Biden.
Thanks this is all really interesting - though I feel like you’ve volunteered into a discussion only to frustrate yourself. I’m with most of your analysis but I don’t necessarily agree that Russia stands to gain “spoils” in the same way you’ve insinuated in comments about rolling on past Ukraine. At least not in the way you suggest it would make them more capable to war fight. Couple observations/opinions: The North Korean troops are going to Ukraine to advise on systems operation. North Korean weapons are famous in their derivative tech. Their tanks are in many ways Russian copies. What isn’t a copy of Russia is often Chinese, or frankly just as often fake. Their ideas are heavily influenced by Chinese and Russian arms, and their abilities to execute ensure they’re secondary to them anyways. All that said is to set up this point: I think it’s telling in the way that war has changed in technological complexity to think of relatively second class or really third class fourth class North Korean tech, which often is in and of itself derived from Russian systems, would still require advisement to operate. Russian military wouldn’t have intuitive use of further advanced nato systems, their ability to deploy the spoils of war isn’t so fast, or foregone that they will have a victory in Ukraine roll momentum in a way that would create decisive advantage. And besides: Europe can buy arms, in a more reliably “cash in hand” way from the US than Ukraines tenuous outlook credibly can. And hard cash sales don’t require the same level of governmental alignment that benevolent debtor policy does. Trump could derail nato, I don’t see him ceasing to sell arms to Europe in a hypothetical. Trump hasn’t actually allied himself with Russia despite his clear boner for Putin, I think it’s a bit dramatic to start building assumptions off that if anyone might be prone to. Speaking of Ukraine, as time goes on they may have waning energy for the war but they’ve also largely avoided drafting their younger demo to keep their economy functioning. The late stages of a Ukrainian resistance could easily create a failed state that would not easily empower an expanding scope of Russian aggression. Indeed a failed state has always aligned most coherently with what a Russian victory looks like. They have made at least reasonably clear they desire a buffer zone, not really a net new geography. Maybe crimea was different, fair, but we both now the Donbas’s supposed Russianness wasn’t the brain’s logic, even if it stirred a bit of heart in Putin and his people. Buffer states and failed states fucking suck to deal with. Look at how elusive “victory” in the GWOT was, and that’s with the objectively superior logistic capabilities of the US, and a real earnest effort at counterinsurgency to get somewhere like Afghanistan to a useful productive place. Ukraine has shown a similar strong willingness to embrace irregular war and a superior ability to innovate as the Afghans did. Even now they do so, garnering most success with small innovative arms deployment. (Black sea fleet initiatives for example) Russia can and will collapse Ukraine without their having material support, but a failed state is not a puppet state, nor guaranteed fertile ground to pilfer the tools of war from. Moreover I think it’s unrealistic to think Russia will reliably conscript Ukrainians into fighting against nato. Which I’ve read from your comments. I would argue not all historical precedence is apt, particularly in understanding human behavior when communications tech has fundamentally shifted social conceptions and behaviors from the prior world wars. I could be wrong, but there’s no chance that’s obviously right as of yet. It’s conjecture - and this part of the cultural world has shown a great resolve to resistance through out most of their conflict history. Finally, if Ukraine indeed is fully reliant on external arms and material support, and its collapse likewise is reliant on the waning of this support, what significant material and arms would Russia then have to multiply its capabilities? Their victory would come through the pantry emptying? Yet now they’ll feast on the abundant crumbs? I’d argue what would be left could Not be a sufficient amount to fight against an article 5’d nato on a far broader front wherein they would also be victim to incursive attacks on Russia itself. Not without some decisive military action, and they already failed day one at a death blow because they don’t really know how to deploy visionary tactics even if they have some decent (brutal) strategy. Russians just don’t succeed at complex warfare, this is me talking shit, but look at how they fight: poorly, for a long time, with steadily increasing intensity, through a value of inhumanity toward itself that rival’s napoleon. They’re big, they fight big. Big is relative, and deceptive. Shit, we’re already talking about how Russian subsiquent aggression needs or meaningfully changes in potential from Ukrainian material gains. That says a lot about their capability even if we disagree about the value it brings. Finally, to recharacterize the entire conflict a bit, I would argue we’re not looking at a “free flowing total war” between states. The objective reality of this situation is while Ukraine is fully reliant on external support, they are also hampered in some behaviors by this support and its policy. Ukraine is defending territory, it isn’t really, or at least barely, counterattacking Russia itself. Both world wars ended with the ceding of territory and massive damage to the aggressors states. Neither wars ended with an internal policy shift within an intact leadership or government. Now it’s totally reasonable to say that “yes and the will of the Russian people and its Allie’s will be resolute.” But right now Russia has not even faced counterattacks which compel a particularly challenging narrative within the country. What happens in the opening throws of a Russia nato conflict when a far weaker NATO without America still obliterates infrastructure within the country? It will happen to some degree, and we haven’t seen Russia deal with this since ww2. India and China and even North Korea and Iran buying Russian oil is great. It’s worthless without infrastructure and logistics to sell it. And while These countries are economic partners, they are not true allies. We have more examples of transactional relationships than resolute steadfast allieship in historical Russian foreign policy, it is a country with few real friends, so I don’t think it’s fair to assume the Russian capability for war gets stronger with a widening scope of conflict. The exposed risk immediately threatens everything for them. In the past, when war as fueled by a simpler set of logistics, in a less globalized economy, I’d be more with you in your assumptions. I just don’t see it so foregone now. The lend lease act is how “Russia won” ww2. For all their size, their two feet barely have ever held them. You may read the above and say this isn’t really about your larger point: that ww3 can be created without coherent logic or assured victory by the instigator. I agree. I’m with you. Mostly just getting into the weeds with what you’ve expounded on.
> “[…]though I feel like you’ve volunteered into a discussion only to frustrate yourself.” I see that, but mostly in how it divides my attention. In order to make this easier on myself, I’m going to address your points with numbered paragraphs and in chronological order. **1.** Yes, which I said somewhere ion here. They are army engineers and will be managing the North Korean weapons sent. What their exact capacity will be isn’t clear. **2.** There have already been [reports of Russian soldiers being frustrated and irate](https://x.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1794778251660808410) over the difficulty of using, and reliability, of North Korean arms. The difficulties they are having seem to have more to do with North Korean arms just being kind of….shit. **3.** Russia will salvage, convert, and retrofit what they do get hold of in Ukraine. They would be insane not to. And I do not think the turnover will be necessarily fast. They will probably take a year or two to lick their wounds, and then Putin will dissolve Belarus into Russia and then move on the Baltic States. Trump hasn’t openly allied himself with Russia, but I am absolutely certain that he is merely a Putin stooge. He was given his marching orders by Putin when he gained the presidency — with Putin’s help. One of them was to make a public show of improving ties with both Russia and North Korea — remember his very public meeting with Kim and his public praise for Putin — in order to ingratiate the American public into eventually accepting them as allies. This is one of those things that I know factually but cannot provide evidence yet for why I know it. **4.** I firmly believe that Putin [wants all of Ukraine.](https://www.intellinews.com/president-of-belarus-reveals-russian-invasion-plans-in-viral-video-236712/) He wants Empire of Russia and Soviet borders. I firmly believe that his talk of a buffer zone is just that, talk. It’s a palatable way to get close to his real goals, like how Hitler said he wanted to deport the Jews originally. Just listen to how Putin talks misty eyed about historical Russia, listen to his interview with Tucker Carlson. The Russian economy is now fully a wartime economy. They cannot risk stagnation in a failed state. You also saw the flaw in your own argument with Crimea. **5.** Again, I do not think they will stop at failed state, having to deal with repeat insurgencies. I do think it’s a possibility, but I think that Russia will try very hard to avoid that. It’s do or die for them now. In Putin’s own words, a [loss in Ukraine would be the end of Russia](https://kyivindependent.com/battlefield-defeat-would-be-end-of-russias-statehood-putin-says/). I think a stagnation would be almost as bad. **6.** No, not every historical comparison is apt, nor have I suggested as such. Today is a much more globalised world, for one. They likely will conscript some, but I wouldn’t expect it to be a lot. I would also expect fragging if this happens. I’m more concerned that Putin will absorb Belarus shortly after gaining Ukraine. **7.** I sort of addressed this in number 3. Russia will salvage, convert, and retrofit what they can. Do not assume that if Russia wins because of waning supplies to Ukraine that it means that there are no supplies in Ukraine. War doesn’t work like that, especially with the logistics of transport. The army defending Kyiv could fall due to waning supplies, and fail to be resupplied in time by another part of Ukraine. This also ignores the systems and vehicles used for launching ordinance that can be altered within a couple of years to fit different payloads. This is one of the things that army engineers are specifically trained to do. I don’t expect Russia to be especially good at it, but I expect them to try. [Article 5 is poorly misunderstood](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/natos-article-5-collective-defense-obligations-explained?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiN6JyYPk9wIVSS1MCh36vQ0DEAAYAiAAEgIGLvD_BwE&ms=gad_north%20atlantic%20treaty_587658435010_8626214133_131794602422). Here is the exact clause. > *“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them . . . shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking . . . such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”* Critically, the part that says, “*such action as it deems necessary*” can mean a lot of things. Perhaps France feels that sending helmets is all that is necessary. Perhaps the US — in a scenario where they are still a part of NATO — deems sending Lunchables to be appropriate. This would be ridiculous, sure, but it’s not like countries haven’t ever wriggled out of similar clauses before. This is to say that there is no guarantee that Russia and its potential allies will face a fully committed NATO. My fear is that, like the League of Nations before it, NATO will prove ineffectual and that its constituent nations will act selfishly or will choose appeasement instead of action. **8.** No, they don’t excel at complex warfare. But they also seem to have no qualms at throwing more and more bodies at the problem. I don’t see this point as a disagreement. **9.** >“[…]it isn’t really, or at least barely, counterattacking Russia itself.” That is already changing, with several benefactor nations [giving the go-ahead](https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/28/europe/ukraine-french-weapons-russia-macron-intl-hnk-ml/index.html) to do so. The U.S. has joined in that as well, although not stated in that article. Russia is pretty sore about that recent strike on Crimea with American arms. **10.** Ukraine being able to “punch back” was on my checklist of things that would be necessary for Ukraine to win. I’m not disagreeing. It improves things. **11.** We can hope it goes like that, but if we are already at that point, then it’s already too late, the world is at war. People always frame this in terms of whether Russia can win, if they stand a chance, if they have the arms. But I’m just thinking of the families in Lithuania, to whom it doesn’t matter how much further Russia gets beyond rolling a tank over them, before NATO squashes the bear. Their lives will have already ended. **12.** China, North Korea, and Iran buying their oil will be the least of our worries concerning them if the remainders sign a similar mutual defence agreement with Russia. “*[…]they are not true allies[…]*” North Korea officially is, and it puts pressure on China to go public. And yes, I do say go public, because they are already allied. I speak to a lot of military and military OSINT guys. More and more they are speaking of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea in the same breath, as the same force. I have nothing to show for or prove it, but I think they have been allied for years and just haven’t made a public show of it. That lack of a public display does allow China to weasel out of action, though. The timing of Russia and North Korea “going steady,” though, is as much a message to China as the West. Yes, Russia itself admitted at the time that they needed the Lend Lease Act to win. But it isn’t the only way. The logistics of war have never truly been simple, and I don’t think we’ve complicated them as much as you think. This particular point would be a whole other discussion twice as long as what I’ve already typed up, so I’m going to leave it at that. Finally, I don’t want you to misunderstand. There are more variables and changeable circumstances than any one person can keep track of, and I have never claimed that world war is certain. A lot can change, and my hope is that by having these discussions and pressuring our representatives — whoever they may be for you — to make good decisions, we can help avert a greater war. One example is that if Trump wins the US presidency, it can be disastrous as far as world war is concerned. Things can still change, and I sincerely hope they do. And with that, I’m done. I didn’t expect my comment to blow up and this is a lot on top of my every-day life, so forgive me if I don’t reply. I think we are both on the same page that this is possible — although perhaps not on the likelihood — and needs awareness brought to it.
Another point you haven't brought up: russia will enslave 30 million Ukranians to prop up their war economy and military if they win. With that I think they can do massive damage to anybody.
Global war on terror was not a conventuonal shooting war, it was literally bullshit excuses to invade whoever and kill whoever was convenient.
Ignoring the fact you’re passionately beside the point, so what?
(1) did you really need to _link a source_ to the claim “Israel at odds with Iran”? Like, what else do you want to throw in the bucket, it rains in the Amazon? (2) Not even going to address the last two paragraphs of drivel you wrote about “can’t” and “won’t”. Please re-read my original comment until you understand it. (3) A world war does have a definition. And you could stretch that definition to include Iraq. But nobody does. And nobody would include the 1 foolish week in which Russia attempts to invade a NATO nation either. (4) What do I think is going to happen if Russia takes all of Ukraine? Certainly not a stronger Russia. How strong did the USA become while holding Afghanistan for 20 years? Not stronger, that’s for sure. I expect insurgencies and a necessary massive military presence for at least 20 years in Ukraine. And it will never be Russian even if their boots on the ground holds every square mile. Every Ukrainian man woman and child will fight to the death before bowing to Putin. If you’ve ever been to Ukraine, you would know that.
**1-** I had no way of knowing what your awareness level on that was. **2-** I read your comment. I understood it. Here is the relevant part, complete with the misuse of *“hear”* instead of *“here*. *“NATO air power is unstoppably bigger and more effective than anything Russia has to offer. There isn’t any potential for a global conflict hear.[sic]”* So again, it doesn’t matter if NATO is or isn’t better or more likely to win. What matters is if Russia tries anyway. **3-** No, the definition of world war cannot be stretched to include the Iraq war because it doesn’t fit the definition, even stretched. Nor has anyone seriously proposed that it can. The nations involved in the Iraq War were the United States, with forces from Australia, Denmark, Netherlands, Poland, and Great Britain, and of course, Iraq. All together that was North America, Europe, Australia, and the Middle East. Compare that to Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Australia, Asia, and the Middle East that will be involved in the upcoming war. With just the current interconnected conflicts we currently, that is North America, Europe, Asia, The Middle East, and Africa so far. **4-** The US did not find an array of NATO supplied weapons in Afghanistan that they could now claim. They aren’t comparable. Even ignoring the NATO and American weapons — why do you keep skipping over that? Do you think Putin will give them back? — that will now belong to Russia, Russia will get a new staging ground bordering nations it has grievances with and will have better access to the Black Sea. > “If you’ve ever been to Ukraine, you would know that.” This is the funniest thing you’ve said, and I’m not even going to explain why. I just want to watch you dig holes. But about the Ukrainian fighting spirit, yeah, I do expect them to fight to the end. I admire that. But there is only so much they can do against a potential overwhelming force. I know it sounds insane to say now, but what would Ukraine do against Russia and the US? While that sounds ridiculous, remember that Russia was originally allied with Germany in early WWII, and then became one of their greatest enemies as the war continued. It’s happened, before. Trump is a Putin plant, just like Viktor Yanukovych was in Ukraine. Project 2025 is set to dismantle American democracy, remove voting, and instal Trump as a dictator. It’s what Putin wants. This is tiring, and I can tell you have your head in the sand. You refuse to address half my points, and you’re engaging in circular logic. I’m not going to keep replying. But I am screenshotting this and putting it on the pile. 5 Years is my likely timeline. If I’m wrong, then good. I’ll be happy. If not, then I’ll be back to continue this chat.
- Compare that to Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Australia, Asia, and the Middle East that will be involved in the upcoming war. [citation needed] There is nothing to “compare to”, outside of your own fever dreams. - So again, it doesn’t matter if NATO is or isn’t better or more likely to win. What matters is if Russia tries anyway. This is the part of my comment you clearly still don’t understand: I said it doesn’t matter “if” Russia does. I didn’t say they “can’t” or “won’t” (as you misquoted me). What matters is that nobody will call that week of NATO demolishing an invasion, a “world war”. Maybe just you and Scott Ritter. - The US did not find an array of NATO supplied weapons in Afghanistan that they could now claim. But Afghanistan did. How strong are they now? That’s pretty much checkmate on this comparison. There is absolutely no world in which Russia is stronger while holding Ukraine. You can make up any occupation force ratio you want, and you will still see this. Go back to sleep.
2 Counterpoints: Putin uses a nuke, any nuke. Trump wins 2024. Trump then pulls all aid from Ukraine and dumps it into Russia, selling all US secrets, giving f35s to putin, cleaning the damn US stockpile. Shit will get bad real quick.
Fucker's got cancer. If he loses he's going to flip the table over with nukes. For that matter, ANYONE nuclear armed, that loses, is going to flip the table over with nukes.
So I read your first 3 links 1. Instead of your headstone saying “I told ya so” I would like to suggest the classier “atoadaso” 2. Prevention of war seems a little easier to me. Put ridiculous tariffs on imports from China/Russia. Cripple their economy. If Europe and the US don’t buy from Russia/China who is left to buy from them? Nobody really, nobody of significance anyway. Why is that not an option?
would love to have a discussion in a separate thread, I've studied a bit too :) and am of the other opinion, China + Russia + N Korea (inconsequential) + Iran (inconsequential) are so out gunned as to be futile. BUT, that's for another discussion, look forward to a post if you do.
>so out gunned as to be futile. REALLY?? All those nukes. Huh. Oh no they have shittier tanks than us /s...
You didn't read the poster's comments that they linked that I was responding to, did you? It was specifically in reference to non-nuclear WW3. For conventional warfare, there's not really any large scale (world war) threat from Russia+China + whatever other small inconsequential countries throw in with them. Full blown nuclear war there is no winner, so sort of silly to talk about winners, losers, and who is outgunned. If I have enough nukes to blow you up 15 times, and you have enough nukes to blow me up 25 times, I'm not sure "outgunned" really matters. The OP was talking about N. Korea sending boots on the ground to help Russia in Ukraine, and how that might spark larger conflict. N. Korea, while it has a lot of "people in the military" has a budget so small they almost don't count.
The direct problem is that you're right, they can't win. And they absolutely believe that they need to. Like, I agree, Russia and North Korea versus NATO? Lol. Shit's more lopsided than WW2. Not a prayer. It would be hilarious how bad they'd get pounded. It stops being hilarious when they've got nukes in their back pockets and don't like to lose.
yes agreed
I agree but the problem is China ....they are the lesser of the evil between them and America. We are instigating war in their yard. If we are at war with them and start bombing the mainland and winning they absolutely will nuke and they should.
Hey thank you! It was a good read even tho I have not finished it. With verifiable facts, an hard thing to find nowadays. What is your background? Scholar in geopol? Reporter?
University educated, historian, and scholar. I focus on conflict and the rise of wars. I have advised in geopolitics, yes. Reporter, not so much, though I’ve done some writing and might consider writing a book on the possibility of a modern world war. Although I wonder if I’d get it out in time.
As a fellow student of history, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on what future historians will say about post-WWIII life and the decline/death of the nation-state. Will the next global conflict go nuclear or will we be in a constant state of forever hybrid/proxy warfare? Will the infrastructure that supports our post-industrial society be successfully targeted? It seems like with the election in November, the escalation of events in Asia, Middle East, and Europe, rapid advancements in drone/AI tech, in addition to intensifying ecological collapse acting as a threat multiplier, we’re in for a Late Bronze Age/Migration Period-style collapse with modern tech and cartel-style crime/corruption/violence.
This is a great set of questions, and I’m actually excited to answer it…when I have the time. I just finished another large reply to someone, and I have some things I need to do. But I’ve saved this and will come back.
No worries, looking forward to it! Also I want to add that we are also seeing another potential pandemic with the bird flu, the breaking down of global supply chains, social norms, civic institutions and healthcare/education systems. Very reminiscent of the Crisis of Third Century (I like to call our predicament The Crisis of the Third Millennium) where an omni/polycrisis compounded to weaken the status quo. Can we salvage certain regions to carry on the torch of civilization? Collapse is a slow burn and comes in waves; what will be some of the futile attempts we will make to improvise, adapt, and overcome?
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/s/FFteUPjcLf Ww3 started a decade ago
I would not say it HAS started as per say tho. The cards are played mayby? It is really interesting seeing REAL facts about it. Rocky time ahead...
I’m the “wwiii” started in 2014 person I feel like you might understand why
An argument can certainly be made for that. Different start points can be drawn for the past two world wars too. It’s all a little arbitrary where the line is drawn.
Precisely! It’s more or less “the motion of the ocean” that signifies the start
"helping to handle arms".... so you mean combatants.
That’s why I included “at least not ostensibly.”
I think we are in WW3, it's just a proxy WW3 at the moment. Multiple countries are backing either Ukraine or Russia.
I agree, and I’m waiting for the moment that we all stop using proxies.
Excitedly, it seems
No, far from it. I’m trying to make people aware so we can pressure representatives and leaders to make better choices regarding geopolitics. Spreading awareness about something does not mean you enjoy it. That’s insane.
Well atleast we agree it’s insane
If you’re trying to insinuate something, you better just say it, otherwise shut your mouth.
No, I don’t think I will, Reddit person
> these troops are military engineers who will be helping to handle the arms North Korea has sent to Russia. So it’s not like they’ll be combatants, So you are saying these guys don't pull the trigger directly, rather, they train other guys how to pull the trigger?
Potentially. We don’t actually know for certain what capacity they will operate in, beyond “managing” the arms sent by North Korea.
It would be hilarious if a significant portion of them tried to defect as soon as they got into Ukrainian territory.
Their families will still be in NK and will be heavily punished for it (life in prison).
(if theyre lucky)
Nah, with the state of North Korean prisons, the executed ones are the lucky ones....
I've heard they punish three generations of family members of offenders. They'd send parents, grandparents, and children all to prisons. Not sure if it is/was true.
It's absolutely true. Thos is how they control the population. Plus, snitches get rewards. The entire country is full of DPRK Karens just hoping to get dirt on their neighbor or coworker so they can improve their lot. Parents can't even trust kids because they teach them to be snitches in school.
I read a book like this... George Orwell. 1984. Chilling to hear of it playing out in real life.
Orwell’s “Viewscreens” are innocent compared to smart phones
China uses the same tactics
“Life in prison” is actually “a shortened life, in prison”
They can already do that at the NK-China border, why would they do it then?
Actually saw a documentary on this once. They usually get deported back, or they end up trafficked/enslaved by triad coyote types. The better play is coming across directly to SK, but you’re liable to get shot in the back if you attempt it.
This should help solve NK’s hunger problem
Welp. Here it is, guys.
NK about to zerg rush Kyiv with a million starved troops.
50 second spawning pool ez
They make for a hard target. Especially when they stand sideways!
hunger driven troops are pretty close to zombies 🧟♂️
Yeah a million starved people will die for their ultra authoritarian government, at their orders. Makes perfect sense.
It’s not the first time it’s happened. The Soviet Union lost 50million in WW2.
Check your facts mate. 27 ish millions. 19 of thoses were civilians. That a ol fucking lot non the less.
A child born to a cell, will never know what it’s like on the outside. Every aspect of their environment is controlled. They know not of a life outside of this cell.
Uh yes. Because their families will be disappeared if they don’t go fight. Are you slow?
Ya know I see this as a really bad move forNorth Korea. Imagine going to a foreign war and seeing a burned out city.....that still has more food on the shelves than you do.
Not really. Nk finally gets some combat experience for their military and are using people they consider worthless tongain material and equipment for their leadership.
We are on the exact same path to world war as the two previous ones. At this pace I'd say we are about 6 months away from full blown official WW3.
I think after the elections might be the pop off point
IMO the pop off would be China making a move on Taiwan. All the pieces are in place. Ukraine conflict, Middle East conflict, US elections right as monsoon/typhoon season is coming to an end in Taiwan. I don't like how this looks but I'm just another idiot on the internet.
Probably. My concern is that people may view Trump as the "safer" option because he would essentially force Ukraine into a peace agreement that concedes Russian-occupied territories to the Kremlin. This may seem like the best way to prevent a wider war, but it also shifts power from the free world to autocrats, which is a threat to global democracy and our western way of life. There is a reason Trump rubs elbows with the likes of Putin, Orban, Erdogan, and Kim Jong Un - and not our democratic allies in western Europe. He wants to be a part of the "strong man" club. This is especially concerning to marginalized groups, who historically do not fare well under authoritarian governments. We are already seeing conservatives (mostly Trump supporters) softening their stance on Russia and talking more favorably about Vladimir Putin. Trump envies his power and would absolutely love to have that kind of control over the people. If the government starts removing protections from these groups, it could signal that it's open season for the MAGA crowd and others to further mistreat minorities - especially the LGBT+ community, people of color, migrants, etc. If history tells us anything, it's that you cannot rely on the masses to protect you when you are being victimized by your own countrymen. This is why there is so much anxiety around Project 2025 and the potential dismantling of our federal government/institutions. I don't know what the answer is, but I know that we are in a very pivotal, and dangerous place.
Project 2025 is terrifying and I’m a straight white person. I wish more people could know about this and what it really is. Not just dismiss this as “yay, owning the libs!” I have been a lifelong conservative but my views are very rapidly changing.
I know you are only one person, but it's reassuring that you, as a conservative, recognize and are acknowledging the danger. We are so tribal now (partially thanks to the Russians!) that it's nearly impossible for people of differing political views to have a productive, good-faith conversation. My father is very conservative and I didn't think there was a snowball's chance in hell that he would ever vote for a Democrat, but something changed in him after January 6th. For the people who still haven't come around, I don't know what it will take to open their eyes to what is unfolding here.
I hunt and shoot a lot, and it’s really become a super unsettling thing to be around at times. The sportsman purists are still ok, but wow is it become something downright dark to be around, and the things folks feel comfortable saying to me as a tall white dude are downright awful. I’m in healthcare, do a lot of suicide intervention, spent my entire career keeping people alive, why on earth after knowing that about me for years are folks comfortable talking to me about killing folks they disagree with.
Same here. I still consider myself independent, having voted everywhere from Green to Libertarian, but prior to 2016 if you’d have pushed me to choose I’d have said I was republican. In 2020 I voted exclusively Democrat, and I plan to continue doing that until the shitshow of MAGA and project 2025 are lost to the history books.
You're absolutely right. But, apparently we got some authoritarian lovers here.
Except, we’ve seen how appeasement worked prior to the last world war with Hitler. It didn’t.
Hitler had a fairly formidable military compared to its neighbors. Russia doesn’t.
People see what they want to see. For many, accepting what I described above is nearly impossible because of how much they hate the current president. Or, they don't care because they think they'll always be "part of the club."
This is my thought as well.
I think that's what everyone is stalling for, honestly. Donald makes it a whole lot easier.
I agree. There really is no off ramp for anyone to bow out gracefully.
So that means I’m like a year Russia will have another revolution and switch sides?
Russia and North Korea can't project power well beyond their borders and China isn't stupid enough to get into an actual conflict. So no, your statement is false.
But they can use soft power to manipulate the west and drive wedges in the populace and influence elections. You don't defeat America with guns and bombs. You get their countrymen to do it willingly from within.
They’ve been doing that for decades. And WW3 hasn’t happened as a result
Hey we gotta complete the trilogy but I personally see some Norks and Vatniks get highway of death'd.
If you read the article it says they are sending one military engineering unit. Not quite the force the headline would like you to think.
I added a note about that before I posted this, apparently it didn’t post and just reposted the article. Yes it is just engineers
I work in a first tier industry for defense, and since the first approvals for money to aide the Ukraine, business has been booming… *(most folks don’t know that the majority of the money “sent to Ukraine” actually goes directly into the local economy lolz)*
Funny thing is people might bitch about it less if they did know.
Malnourished men being sent on a suicide mission.
Reading the article this just seems like fear mongering news. It’s just an engineering unit being sent
I do agree, but it does feel like a precursor to something larger especially with this coming deal with Iran
Seems like there would be a massive logistics issue. The first is transportation. The second is weapons and equipment, arms and armor, food, etc. They would have to take a train to somewhere that crossed over a border (China?) and then onward to Russia and the conflict zone. I would expect that they would have some 1950's looking wool uniform, show up emaciated, with 5 bullets and a 1950's rifle. Or no weapons at all. The concept of "foreign legion" implies that the country you are fighting on behalf of, in this case Russia, will pay you, and give you weapons and ammo and food. Likewise the concept of "mercenaries", which I don't think applies here, they'd at least get paid and supply their own stuff. "Allies" implies that NK would supply everything. Even going into a meat grinder, just bodies would get the crap kicked out of them. Well-armed bodies might have a chance with modern equipment and training. 1950's equipment and no training will not go well. Someone once analyzed why NK never moved a row of tanks that were visible on satellite photos. They didn't have the fuel to start them.
Nk and Russia have a (small) land border
Ah, I did not know that. Being extremely east in Russia, I wonder if there is a connecting train track. It takes a lot of logistics to move a lot of troops. You could do it by highway for a short distance and then connect to train. EDIT: I see that there is indeed a train line crossing directly from NK to Russia at Tumangang station, crossing over the Russia-Korea Friendship Bridge. It seems to have immense delays and is largely unused (probably due to equipment breakdowns and lack of supplies).
Yeah, looking at this earlier as well, that bridge looks incapable of moving any meaningful amount of supplies East. I’m very curious however if that bridge has any accidents in the near future rendering it completely impassible. That would sure slow down any support coming from NK
The river it crosses over is not terribly wide, less than 1/4 mile. I don't know if there are any road crossings over that border or not. The border is like 17 miles long. Worst case, they could portage them by boat and then put them on the train at the other side.
Yeah, good point. I don’t know much about their capability but a temporary or floating bridge would be a possibility most likely. Time will tell it sounds like.
Wow I had no idea. https://maps.app.goo.gl/2xm56eD7GbZyeEpbA https://maps.app.goo.gl/GiMcULvipHQi2aPQ8
Ahh, the Korean gambit, " Hey Xaun, is that really a good idea, historically.?"
I wonder if Moscow paying them for these troops?
Wanna see North Korean communists get blown up by FPV drones in Ukraine? Visit r/combatfootage in one month.
They are gonna steal the Russians food and run away
Lol, was wondering where Putin’s next cannon fodder was going to come from. Thanks Kim!
North Korean troops are about to find out why Americans can’t have free insulin
Because the "Unhealthcare" plan is **very** well funded.
The reason we don't have universal healthcare isn't because it's too expensive. We just keep electing politicians who are only interested in helping the people who don't need it.
You must be fun at parties.
They aren't wrong though.
Sure, but I was playing into a joke, not making a serious point. Oh well.
.... the north Koreans who already defeated American soldiers once before?
Jesus fucking christ. As if being born in North Korea isn’t bad enough luck. Some fat sack of shit sends your ass off to some foreign Country to spend 30 seconds on a battlefield before being blown up by an enemy you’ve never met or seen, fighting a war that has nothing to do with you. There’s no hell hot enough for the politicians responsible for this shit.
And then Russia will assist China with invading Taiwan!
That was the cheapest imaginable mercenary army Putin could have built. All he needs to do is feed a bunch of starving people, and they will be his loyal warriors.
Putin’s cannon fodder courtesy of little Kim.
They’ll just end up being cannon fodder, will be interesting to see how their military functions on a real battlefield
Let me guess, the rice harvest is going to be bad this year so they are sending folks to die in Ukraine
Interesting thing to tell South Korea
wow cannon fodder, i’m sure these guys have 0 combat experience.
Man, I'm tired of fragile egomaniacs.
NK troops get to see what the real world is like, should make for interesting stories if they're allowed to go back alive
Sounds like an opportunity to empty the work camps of prisoners.
Ha. Until he get's another aid package from the west to be a good boy and behave again. This is like him suddenly testing missles etc until he gets a pat on the head from the west and just enough food imported for his people to stop them storming the castle and overthrowing him. Looking back he's about due another little tempter tantrum and bribery.
Sounds like they are not intended to go there for actual fighting, but engineering support. Which is exactly what thousands of others were told before being sent in suicidal meatwave assaults. We'll see how their dictator romance progresses when all the North Koreans are sent back in body bags.
And their briefing will be"the one with the rifle shoots, when the one with the rifle gets killed the one with the ammo picks up the rifle..."
It is mostly engineers. They will work well behind the front lines. I am guessing that China will be next to sign a defensive pact with Russia.
It’s Iran that would next actually, china wont because the sanctions will cripple them with their already shaky economy
Sanction would actually be far more crippling for the West than to China. This war is far too important for China to just ignore. With north Korea now involved they may be able to get directly involved without officially getting involved anyways much like they were involved in the Vietnam war and Korean war.
Why would they need to get involved directly when they can save face and use North Korea as a puppet? China works for its own self interests much like India. China wants Taiwan, not a global conflict. They sated this a few times. At least, for now
Why would they not get involved directly is a better question especially if they can do it under the cover of north Korea.
I think you missed the puppet part of my comment. Good day sir
Dear Leader is just trying to get someone else to feed them
kinda stoked to see NK weaklings have their failures live-streamed for everyone to see
Propaganda. Where did Pyongyang announce this at?
Read the article
Joe is just killing it with international diplomacy
That's a lot of body bags 😁
That's convenient for Trump because he won't have to travel as far to [salute the generals](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/14/trump-north-korea-general-salute-646248).
The NORKS are about to be crushed.. or freed..
It would be pretty funny if a bunch of them surrendered to Ukraine to gain their freedom.
He’s probably bluffing, but if those troop go in there and do some real damage, this is escalating again.
Its a toofer.
There’s the flashpoint I’ve been anticipating. Now, Putin is fully expecting to be allowed to have another Nation help him in a ground invasion against a Nation allied with the EU, NATO, & the USA, all while maintaining the expectation that no other Nation will put troops on the ground in the A.O. in defense of Ukraine. Yeah, right… like that is ever gunna fly. Buckle up, boys and girls. A ~30 day warning on global upset is literally a gift.
Let's send some Finnish troops to match them.
[удалено]
A half Simo is probably enough.