4 ms·

North Korea and Russia have a military alliance. When an ally goes to war, you send your troops. Therefore, I don't understand the hysterics about the troops in

by mjfl 2y ago

North Korea and Russia have a military alliance. When an ally goes to war, you send your troops. Therefore, I don't understand the hysterics about the troops in Kursk. They are no more than 1/30th of what's currently on the front line. More of a training mission for the North Koreans than anything else.

realusername 2y ago
That's not correct no, Russia dragged North Korea into the war, they didn't have a military alliance. Then it's taken seriously because it's an escalation of the war by Russia.
- mjfl 2y ago
  Constantly amazed by the big-brain takes around here. Please see the link below describing Russia and North Korea's mutual defense pact: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-07/news/north-korea-russia-strengthen-military-ties https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-07/news/north-korea-rus...
  - realusername 2y ago
    I mean yeah, if you point Putin's visit only from a few months ago that's pretty much the definition of "dragged into the war". You should have a look at the date of your article first. That's also why North Korea bargained some goods in exchange of their support.
    - mjfl 2y ago
      you said > they didn't have a military alliance. Please just admit you were wrong. If you cannot do that then there is no point in responding to you.
      - realusername 2y ago
        No, you were wrong here, they didn't have a defense pact and got dragged into the war in exchange for goods. Maybe you can point at some pre-existing defense pact to support your claims signed before the war but I'm not aware of any existing. It's possible that I missed it though but given that Putin flew in there when the situation got worse to negotiate their war support, I doubt they had one.
- tokinonagare 2y ago
  Incredible double standards at play here: Ukraine is helped by the US and most of the EU so since the beginning of the war it's not one country against another. It makes no sense to help a belligerent then cry that the opponent is getting help too. That help is coming in form of both armaments and training such as the AFU members training in France. All that with our taxes and without popular consultation...
  - realusername 2y ago
    There's never been some foreign army officially fighting in Ukraine like North Korea does. Sure Ukraine got training and weapons from a lot of countries but so did Russia as well, now this is something new. I'd even say Russia just gave the green light for EU countries to replicate what Russia just did, they opened up the debate.
  - piva00 2y ago
    Ukraine is helped by the US and other countries through supplying equipment, not fucking troops. Also, they got help since they were invaded, the help they get is for their own defence, not as an aggressor. It makes no sense for you to write all of this argument and not consider this simple latter point, an aggressor force wanting to annex sections of a different country is getting help from a 3rd party outsider to even deploy troops. Trying to fake a play as "both sides" is underhanded and shows quite well how immoral you are.
jfengel 2y ago
I wouldn't say "hysterics", but more that it says about the war effort. North Korea didn't send troops two years ago when the war started. Russia believed it was an easy victory, and continue to believe that victory was close. They have lost a vast number of troops, and have been having trouble recruiting more. There are still plenty of people available, but they mostly wanted to recruit prisoners and others that nobody would really miss. Going to North Korea can be read as an admission that they are running out of options. As you say, it's not that many people. It won't change the situation on the ground. It just preserves the status quo, temporarily. Which is all that's needed. The US is having an election which could have enormous consequences. There is a serious possibility that the US could cease to give aid to Ukraine, dramatically altering the balance of power. If that doesn't happen, the outcome is murkier. It may be that they use the North Korean troops to give the best bargaining position for negotiation. Or they may fight until the new troops are gone, and then find more from somewhere. Either way, it's a significant development, even though it does not in itself change the situation on the ground right now.

by mjfl 2y ago

realusername 2y ago

That's not correct no, Russia dragged North Korea into the war, they didn't have a military alliance. Then it's taken seriously because it's an escalation of the war by Russia.

mjfl 2y ago
Constantly amazed by the big-brain takes around here. Please see the link below describing Russia and North Korea's mutual defense pact: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-07/news/north-korea-russia-strengthen-military-ties https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-07/news/north-korea-rus...
- realusername 2y ago
  I mean yeah, if you point Putin's visit only from a few months ago that's pretty much the definition of "dragged into the war". You should have a look at the date of your article first. That's also why North Korea bargained some goods in exchange of their support.
  - mjfl 2y ago
    you said > they didn't have a military alliance. Please just admit you were wrong. If you cannot do that then there is no point in responding to you.
    - realusername 2y ago
      No, you were wrong here, they didn't have a defense pact and got dragged into the war in exchange for goods. Maybe you can point at some pre-existing defense pact to support your claims signed before the war but I'm not aware of any existing. It's possible that I missed it though but given that Putin flew in there when the situation got worse to negotiate their war support, I doubt they had one.
tokinonagare 2y ago
Incredible double standards at play here: Ukraine is helped by the US and most of the EU so since the beginning of the war it's not one country against another. It makes no sense to help a belligerent then cry that the opponent is getting help too. That help is coming in form of both armaments and training such as the AFU members training in France. All that with our taxes and without popular consultation...
- realusername 2y ago
  There's never been some foreign army officially fighting in Ukraine like North Korea does. Sure Ukraine got training and weapons from a lot of countries but so did Russia as well, now this is something new. I'd even say Russia just gave the green light for EU countries to replicate what Russia just did, they opened up the debate.
- piva00 2y ago
  Ukraine is helped by the US and other countries through supplying equipment, not fucking troops. Also, they got help since they were invaded, the help they get is for their own defence, not as an aggressor. It makes no sense for you to write all of this argument and not consider this simple latter point, an aggressor force wanting to annex sections of a different country is getting help from a 3rd party outsider to even deploy troops. Trying to fake a play as "both sides" is underhanded and shows quite well how immoral you are.

jfengel 2y ago

I wouldn't say "hysterics", but more that it says about the war effort. North Korea didn't send troops two years ago when the war started. Russia believed it was an easy victory, and continue to believe that victory was close. They have lost a vast number of troops, and have been having trouble recruiting more. There are still plenty of people available, but they mostly wanted to recruit prisoners and others that nobody would really miss. Going to North Korea can be read as an admission that they are running out of options. As you say, it's not that many people. It won't change the situation on the ground. It just preserves the status quo, temporarily. Which is all that's needed. The US is having an election which could have enormous consequences. There is a serious possibility that the US could cease to give aid to Ukraine, dramatically altering the balance of power. If that doesn't happen, the outcome is murkier. It may be that they use the North Korean troops to give the best bargaining position for negotiation. Or they may fight until the new troops are gone, and then find more from somewhere. Either way, it's a significant development, even though it does not in itself change the situation on the ground right now.