About 8,000 North Korean soldiers are stationed in Russia on the border with Ukraine, the US secretary of state has said, warning that Moscow is preparing to deploy those troops into combat “in the coming days”.
Antony Blinken said the US believed that North Korea had sent 10,000 troops to Russia in total, deploying them first to training bases in the far east before sending the vast majority to the Kursk region on the border with Ukraine.
Blinken told a press conference that the North Korean troops had received Russian training in “artillery, UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles], basic infantry operations, including trench clearing, indicating that they fully intend to use these forces in frontline operations”.
Well the south might as well retake the north now.
Korean Soldier: So what do I have to do?
Russian General: You just run towards them until they run out of ammunition. Then we will take over.
Korean soldier: How do I known where they are?
Russian general: Once they shoot you we will know.
Right, people scoff at North Korean presence, but I doubt the North Korean soldiera would be used in human wave tactic as the Russians do. North Korea is still an independent sovereign entity, and the last thing they want is to let their troops be used by Russians in a shitty way. It obvious that North Korea will want to gain combat experience, the same way that South Korea sent troops to Vietnam fifty years before.
North Korea is still an independent sovereign entity, and the last thing they want is to let their troops be used by Russians in a shitty way.
… without proper compensation. I’m just guessing here, when I suspect that Russia has more USD in stock than the DPRK. But what I’m pretty certain of is, that the Kims would let you do anything to their people for the right amount of cash.
IDK what agreement Putin and Kim has, but if it in any way considers DPRK soldiers as something resembling living creatures, for other than pumping up compensation, then I’d be very surprised.
OK, sure, the ones that survive will have combat experience. But that’s not why they’re there.
Of course there is more tit for tat deal, but North Korea will not send troops to combat if they think they will not gain anything from it militarily.
That’s 6 days worth of pointless extra casualties. Not cool, Kim.
But he got $20M so he’s willing to do that sacrifice.
Maybe this is Kim’s Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B and the troops are made up of things like telephone sanitizers.
Plus, fewer mouths to starve this way.
Ukraine should offer the North Koreans political asylum if they defect.
North Koreans are granted immediate citizenship in South Korea because, according to the South Korean constitution, all North Koreans are South Korean citizens.
They receive a lump sum payout, which has been equivalent to $20,000 USD in the past, though this payout has decreased throughout the years.
Source: https://www.crossingbordersnk.org/blog/refugees-in-south-korea/2020/10/22
They are already not allowed back (except like the generals, who know that the west is actually not a wasteland).
Except the soldiers probably don’t realize that. On the other hand, if they don’t fight fiercely, or defect even, then their families are held responsible.
Wait what?! So are they just killed or something?
You just can’t have people from NK coming back knowing that like food rations and any kind of freedom exists. I don’t know what’s going to happen to those who survive.
Huh, another country is putting boots on the ground at the frontline in support of Russia? Sounds like other countries at least approving their weapons for use by Ukraine against targets inside Russia is more than warranted - if not sending their own boots on the ground.
Pretty sure Poland would be up for it.
It was warranted the moment the Kremlin attacked their peaceful neighbor.
Sure would be interesting if Ukraine were given weapons to attack NK with. Never heard anything about NK declaring war or Ukraine declaring war due to this, but I imagine something has to happen.
Yeah, that’s definitely another outstanding question: Does this make DPRK on the Korean peninsula a legitimate military target? Do they think so, and does this make them more likely to pre-emptively break the cease-fire with South Korea? Seems like that risk is higher, considering they destroyed transportation paths to the DMZ.
Thursday, October 31st: About 8,000 North Korean soldiers at Ukraine border, says US
Friday, November 1st: About 7,000 North Korean soldiers at Ukraine border, says US
Saturday November 2nd: About 6,000 North Korean soldiers at Ukraine border, says US
Etc.
Due to a high death rate, or defection rate?
Iirc the Russian casualty rate was supposedly on the order of 1000 a day recently, so probably implying the former.
The numbers put out by Ukraine have been 1000+ consistently for quite a while now.
Average over the past few months is probably 1,400/day
Yes.
Either/Or
So about a week to a week-and-a-half’s worth of troops?
He’s probably waiting for election day to deploy the cannon fodder.
You know, it would be a horribly evil plan to try and start WW3 while the new president is being confirmed.
Hell, given today’s modern technology, a leader may be able to plan the opening shots for a few minutes before or after the transition of power, essentially starting a war while the US is asleep. A traditional war may not be really affected by a transition of power, as all of the US military leadership is still able to make limited decisions about how to respond to being fired at.
However, use of nuclear weapons could be severely limited by a presidential transition. The US nuclear arsenal can only be used at the sole discretion of the acting president. The president is the only one with physical access to the launch codes, and the only one that has the authority to order a launch. So what would happen if say, North Korea or Russia launched an ICBM or dropped a nuclear bomb from a traditional bomber, or worse, launched a sub launched ballistic missile that can hit its target in under 20 minutes. MAD dictates that any use of nuclear weapons requires an immediate and proportional response. But with the president having just been confirmed, how long would it take to get them to a secure location, get the codes, order a launch, and have it be carried out? Probably too long. In the case of an ICBM, it only takes about 30 minutes to get from the launch location to anywhere in America.
Now NATO does have some nuclear bombs, but I am fairly sure most of them are provided by the United States and still require US presidential orders to launch. Britain and France have their own nuclear weapons, but far less than the US possesses. Maybe there is enough of a difference where taking the US out of the picture could allow an attacking nuclear country to not be totally glassed.
I could see how an absolutely insane leader might want to try something like that. There’s no way to win a nuclear war, but there may be a way to crawl away alive from one in the form of decapitating your enemy while they’re busy figuring out who can actually launch the damn bombs. Maybe enough of your government can survive the exchange to rebuild an 18th century style empire. The empire will have holes in it like Swiss cheese because of the cities that are now unusable wastelands, but it’s still technically an empire. And of course, the course of human history will now be irreparably altered, setting the species back by centuries of technological and industrial innovation due to all of the EMPs and human knowledge that got turned into carbon dust.
Could be insane enough to work. But I’m sure there’s some ultra classified, so top secret you get shot for seeing the folder, type plan that magically fixes this by giving the Strategic Commander sole launch authority for one day while the president transitions. I mean, the government wouldn’t be so stupid as to leave a glaring hole in nuclear security for decades, right? They fixed the issue with all ICBMs having to fly over Russia to get to Korea, right? Oh wait. Well at least we have anti ballistic missile platforms all along the coast, right? Oh those are all in other countries. At least the Exo-Atmospheric kill vehicles work 50% of the time in the simulations. And we’ve got like 40 of those, so I’m sure that’s enough to deal with hundreds of warheads.
Hey, Tony, is there something to come from it? Like, some answer.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian’s op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.
Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a “blogposts” tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Media Bias/Fact Check - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Media Bias/Fact Check:
Wiki: unreliable - There is consensus that Media Bias/Fact Check is generally unreliable, as it is self-published. Editors have questioned the methodology of the site’s ratings.
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America
