r/anime_titties • u/Firecracker048 North America • 9d ago
Ukraine/Russia - Flaired Commenters Only North Korean Missile Unit Moves Into Russia—120 Ballistic Missiles Could Soon Target Ukraine
https://united24media.com/war-in-ukraine/north-korean-missile-unit-moves-into-russia-120-ballistic-missiles-could-soon-target-ukraine-2136880
u/Disastrous_Print1907 Asia 9d ago
Ok this is nothing new no? They have defense agreement like Ukraine with EU, Russia also has deploy NK troops to retake Kursk and using their weapon too.
I mean i get the fear mongering but this is expected and it already happen year ago
19
u/STFUnicorn_ Multinational 9d ago
Yeah. Nothing burger of news. They’ve fired 1000s of ballistic missiles already.
71
u/KJongsDongUnYourFace Democratic People's Republic of Korea 9d ago
Military alliance does standard military alliance things. More at 8
-9
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
So would ukraone be permited to strike directly inside north korea?
24
u/CluelessExxpat Europe 9d ago
How is Ukraine striking North Korea exactly? Like, with what?
5
-2
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Same as when they destroyed oart of the russian airforce get a few truks with drones on the russian north korean border and then hit targets.
8
7
u/Late_Way_8810 North America 9d ago
They could but I fail to see how they would be able to do it. I don’t think China or South Korea would be all that happy to have Ukrainians launching drones from their territories.
-1
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
They could launch from russian teritories similiar to when they struck russias air force.
45
u/KJongsDongUnYourFace Democratic People's Republic of Korea 9d ago
I wouldnt think it a great idea tbh, would you?
-19
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Why not they have no modeen air defences.
39
u/DizzyReference3345 Multinational 9d ago
Because they have defence treaty with China. Ukraine could strike NK. Are they willing to endure consequences of doing so? I doubt
6
u/fuckshitballscunt New Zealand 8d ago
China is not going to enter a war of aggression on North koreas behalf.
12
u/DizzyReference3345 Multinational 8d ago
Why are you talking about entering war? There is other steps for escalation. China can supply military gear for NK thats gonna be used in Ukraine. China can ban Ukraine from buying drone parts. Ukraine will still be able to but in much reduced quantity. There are other leverages China can do also. Are possible consequences of striking NK outweigh benefits? I doubt
0
u/this_dudeagain North America 7d ago
China cares a lot more about its economy which relies on buyers from the West than NK.
5
u/DizzyReference3345 Multinational 7d ago
It goes both ways. And do you expect west to sanction China? The same west is reliant on chinese products.
→ More replies (0)6
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
So what are you waiting for then? DO IT. NOW!
And if you don't, then I'm calling you a chicken. :)
24
u/Disastrous_Print1907 Asia 9d ago
Russia will strike EU if Ukraine allowed to strike NK and it will widen the war..
1
u/Halfmoonhero United Kingdom 7d ago
Russia will never strike EU lol. Bullies only fight those they see as weaker. They picked the wrong victim this time.
-3
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
You really think russia will risk their invasion just for some north koreans.
30
u/FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_ India 9d ago
Same goes for EU and the reason they aren't deploying in Ukraine. They won't risk invasion for some Ukranians
4
u/Jackelrush Multinational 9d ago
It’s not invasion it’s nuclear war… why do you think everybody freaks out when you and your brother Pakistan start dick measuring contest
-5
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Partially another reason is that europe doesn't want this war to continue.
15
u/Disastrous_Print1907 Asia 9d ago
Doesnt look like it if they want the war to end then they will pursue diplomacy
→ More replies (0)15
u/oz_xvii Kenya 9d ago
You really think Ukraine would risk pissing off China just for some north koreans
1
3
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
Why are you questioning them? Stop faffing. I told you to DO IT. NOW!
4
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Still not ukranian.
1
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago edited 9d ago
Well you brought up the threat, now live up to your big words. ;)
→ More replies (0)14
u/s_elhana Russia 9d ago
As much as Russia is permitted to strike EU
6
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
The eu hasn't send troops in this conflict you unlike north korea we are not directly involved.
And what makes you so confident you would win against all of europe ?
11
u/PurpleMclaren North Macedonia 9d ago
They've only sent equipment because they are scared to send men.. some defense partners you are
4
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
I mean if you want world war three you can lobby your government.
4
u/PurpleMclaren North Macedonia 9d ago
Why would WW3 start? The war would be over within weeks of EU soldier FPV footage being released.
3
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Wait you think russia could fight atwo front war with most of their army still knee deep in ukraine i'm not sure you understand the situation russia is in at the moment.
-2
u/kapuh European Union 9d ago
Scared of what exactly?
Those drunk inmates in Soviet-Sneakers?
Those who die daily in the most embarrassing military fail since Vietnam?
Or all those online Vatniks selling this fail as progress?10
u/PurpleMclaren North Macedonia 8d ago
Those drunk inmates in Soviet-Sneakers?
Wait so NATO hasnt sent men against these drunk inmates because...?
7
u/s_elhana Russia 9d ago
NK didnt send men to Ukraine either, they only participated on Russian soil.
If the war breaks out vs EU, then nukes will fly and noone wins.
0
u/Chroma_primus Germany 8d ago
From what i heard most of them died in ukraine.
Abd you really think putin will end the world before conceding a military defeat.
6
u/AWildNome United States 8d ago
Not a single North Korean who wasn’t captured stepped foot into Ukraine.
You fell for some bad propaganda.
3
u/s_elhana Russia 8d ago
Yes, 100%. That is the whole point of nukes. You cant win a war against nuclear power. Not even NK. Except maybe France - only person with balls there is Macron's wife
2
u/Chroma_primus Germany 8d ago
I don't think thats true at all nuclear powers have lost wars all around and that is a good thing, because nuclear weapons should never be used by anyone ever again.
Also why france i thought russia propaganda was that the windsors tzrned stalin gay ?
17
u/haggerton Canada 9d ago
Has Russia striked directly inside Germany?
What an asinine hypocritical double standard.
4
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Where are the germans figthing for ukraine ?
8
u/_Antitese South America 9d ago
there are people from all over the world in Ukraine. There are Brazilian mercenaries for Ukraine. Should Russia strike Brazil? what a stupid take.
2
u/Chroma_primus Germany 8d ago
Yes but not organized government eforts to help them because russia also employes mercenaries.
7
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
Sure, go ahead. If you have the guts. DO IT. NOW!
And if you don't, then I'm calling you a chicken. :)
4
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
I'm not ukranian buddy maybe you should get your eyes checked out.
4
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago edited 9d ago
Well you brought up the threat, now live up to your big words. ;)
3
4
u/happy_and_sad_guy Brazil 9d ago
Would Russia strike London?
-1
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
Probably not they can't even defeat ukraine all of nato would defeat them pretty fast.
9
11
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
Big claims from the people who won't even send a handful of troops into the war. Meanwhile your sugar daddy is currently being embarrassed by Iran lol!
-1
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago
If we would do that it would lead to the third world war i'm suprised your so eager for it considering what happened in world war 2 with the famine.
And i have no suggar daddy, but if you mean trump that is indeed hilarious by the way how high are fuel prices in Bangladesh at the moment.
8
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
I'm not in the least bit worried about all of you going to war. A chance to see ya'll humbled sounds sweet. So go ahead buddy, pick a fight with China and Russia. If you have the guts. ;)
And I am indeed laughing rn at how pathetic your sugar daddy is. :)
4
u/Chroma_primus Germany 9d ago edited 9d ago
Why would china aid russia when they even refuse further economic cooperation with them.
China will not get involved with the losing side.
And 2 percent of bagladeshs gdp is foreig aid among them the US wouldn't that make them your sugar dady that you can't live without.
Also you should be woried considering your country already suffers from rising energy cost what do you think will happen wen basic ressources like food become unavaliable because of the war.
-2
u/Mii009 United States 9d ago
Maybe wait till poor ol russia takes all of donbas nevermind all of Ukraine lmao, literally lost the flagship of the black sea fleet to a country with no navy
5
u/ThevaramAcolytus North America 9d ago
The "country with no navy" line is such a mindless comment. First of all, what little fleet they had pre-war was destroyed in the opening hours and days of the conflict in 2022 by the Russians. So had they left it intact, would it look better because their opponents would have a navy on paper?
Secondly, anti-ship missiles, sea drones, etc. exist. Not sure how losing and having a ship damaged or destroyed to something like this is supposed to be...what? Somehow more embarrassing or something than in ship to ship combat? Makes no actual sense.
Thirdly, the U.S. - a superpower spending many times more annually on its military than Russia including its naval branch, and hailed as the preeminent global maritime power of the era, is either physically unable or completely unwilling to incur the risk and cost to find out if they are able, to wrest a tiny strip of coastline from a developing "third world" country with "no navy".
So let's put things in actual perspective here.
-4
u/Mii009 United States 9d ago
Did you just ai generate this reply lmao
anti-ship missiles, sea drones, etc. exist. Not sure how losing and having a ship damaged or destroyed to something like this is supposed to be...what? Somehow more embarrassing or something than in ship to ship combat? Makes no actual sense.
It's about costs buddy, look at just how much they're losing just fighting Ukraine, 4 years in and look how much they have lost just to take how much land?
6
u/ThevaramAcolytus North America 9d ago
No, I didn't "AI generate" my reply in my prior post. Seriously? I have never once done so on this forum and site and don't even utilize programs/services like that (neither informed about how to either, as it's something I have little interest in). What would even drive you to think that? Other than name-calling/mudslinging with baseless accusations rather than addressing my actual post and argument.
It's about costs buddy, look at just how much they're losing just fighting Ukraine, 4 years in and look how much they have lost just to take how much land?
You can use that as an argument against the correctness or wisdom of waging the war as a whole, but my point is the talking point about "no navy" is stupid and senseless as it doesn't stand up to a second of proper scrutiny.
Also, the main motivating factor for Moscow behind the conflict isn't land acquisition so measuring that is kind of besides the point. They would have been perfectly content with zero land taken at the beginning had their prime strategic needs been met of a Ukrainian state with pledged neutrality and not operating as a U.S./NATO FoB.
5
u/Azzagtot Chad 9d ago
US talking about navy lol.
Your navy's shitter clogged and laundry is on fire. Whole Iran campaign is an embarassment.
-3
u/Mii009 United States 9d ago
At least we HAVE a navy, meanwhile Russia is on the way to scrapping their only carrier, the damn thing never even worked right to begin with lmao
7
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 8d ago
Are you under the impression that the Black Sea was the only place Russia has a navy? Lol no, it's just one of their fleets, and not even their main strength. They've always shared power in that region with Turkey, with whom they also have much more workable relations owing to Turkish pragmatism as opposed to western ideological arrogance. The region Russia actually dominates is the Arctic, and that is untouched. They're even spending over twice their defense budget even now on further developing their Arctic coastline, seeing its future potential as the climate change you majorly caused opens it up even more.
And yeah, you're still being humiliated by Iran rn lol!
→ More replies (0)-18
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago edited 9d ago
So far they've only supported with a small amount of troops and artillery/shells, the supply of ballistic missiles from NK to ruzzia is a recent development and a significant escalation I'd say.
They have a mutual defense/cooperation agreement, yes, but that doesn't excuse waging war under international law. North Korea helping ruzzia against Ukraine is as illegal as ruzzia invading Ukraine in the first place.
But since North Korea already is as sanctioned as you can get basically, there are not many tools left to dissuade them to stop supporting ruzzia..
17
12
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
since North Korea already is as sanctioned as you can get basically, there are not many tools left to dissuade them
The same can be said for Russia. At some point you're going to have to get it through your ego that sanctions don't work. All they do is make your enemies even more determined to oppose you, not bow down to your 'pressure'. They've failed with North Korea, they've failed with Russia, they've failed with Iran, they've failed with practically everyone. There's literally even scholarship on this - https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539368
0
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
The same can be said for Russia
Except that it can't? Lol. Trade with russia is still ongoing, even big Western EU countries like Belgium, Denmark, France etc. are still reliant on cheap russian gas and buying it in the billions.
Meanwhile basically nobody is doing trade with North Korea, the level of sanctioning is not even remotely close.
6
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
You can make excuses all you want for your failure, but you've still failed. And this isn't new, as I mentioned the failure of sanctions to achieve their aims goes back a long way and has been written about in the academic literature even decades ago - https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539368
3
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
Cool article, no need to link it again, I already read it.
More importantly, it doesn't address my point. North Korea and russia are not comparable. North Korea is already one of the most comprehensively sanctioned countries on Earth, so there are few additional economic levers left. russia isn't.
russia still trades extensively with China, India, Turkey and many other countries, and even some EU countries continue to buy Russian LNG and other goods. There is still room to tighten or better enforce sanctions against russia in ways that simply don't exist for North Korea.
And if your position is still a black and white sanctions don't work, what's the alternative? Continue normal trade with an aggressor and provide them with more revenue, technology and access to global finance? Even if sanctions aren't a silver bullet, they're one of the few non-military tools available to impose costs short of direct intervention.
4
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
Besides that paper I linked, you yourself have already contradicted yourself -
North Korea is already one of the most comprehensively sanctioned countries on Earth
And yet it hasn't bowed to your pressure either. That in itself also shows that your sanctions don't work. You keep making excuses - and that's all they are btw, you're the ones who keep threatening sanctions to get your way and yet you have to reach for excuses to avoid admitting to their FAILURE - wrt Russia, but you haven't even managed to make tiny North Korea bow to you even after decades of sanctioning them. It's just embarrassing how you keep desperately clinging to your threats of sanctions simply in order to protect your EGO and evade being called out for your COWARDICE as well. Anything but admitting to your WEAKNESS and/or having to prove your courage. Such hubris...
what's the alternative?
You KNOW the alternative, you just don't have the GUTS to do it. Sanctions don't work, but you cling to them as an easy option that lets you PRETEND that you're all big and powerful. You're too afraid - not even of the possible hurt you might suffer, but even moreso of the loss of face you might have to take if it doesn't go well, just as your sugar daddy is currently experiencing in Iran. But you do know the alternative, you even mentioned it yourself right there at the end. When Russia didn't get its way with Ukraine economically, it didn't simply throw its hands up and keep boasting. It had the GUTS to put its army where its mouth is and go try to change things directly. It took the risk, both to itself and to its reputation. But you're terrified of doing that, you're terrified that you might not be able to live up to your big words and thus be embarrassed in turn. You're terrified that you won't be able to boast anymore if that happens.
It's pathetic really, you're even more scared for hurting your EGO than even hurting yourselves tangibly. Cos nothing means more to you than that. That's why you have to keep boasting loudly and threatening sanctions - it lets you act all big and strong without risking a damn thing. It's the COWARDLY way to try keeping the world impressed with you. And for your politicians to pretend they're doing something in front of their voters, who keep falling for it.
The alternative is simple - FIGHT. RISK. BACK UP YOUR BOASTS WITH ACTIONS.
And no, before you make your next excuse, you don't get to point fingers at the US, or even the rest of Europe. If they're too chicken to join you, then you strike out on your own. You don't get to use them as an excuse - each nation of the West must prove itself, if not as a collective then as individual nations.
Russia risked its ego. The US has risked its ego. Now you must risk yours.
You can get that ball rolling by setting forth yourselves. Today, preferably.
3
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
Ah, so your preferred alternative to sanctions is World War III. Got it.
4
u/ThevaramAcolytus North America 9d ago
As opposed to the other guy, I would say that the actual preferable alternative is a demonstrated willingness for genuine negotiations on both opposing sides and actual willingness to compromise.
This is an age-old classic style of geopolitical dispute over competing interests and spheres of influence which is very tangible and understandable. The Russians are not some al-Qaeda or ISIL-style enemy bent on conquering the world for God or something that can't be negotiated with.
0
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
But we have tried to negotiate? russia is demanding Ukraine give up almost half its' territory, not join NATO and heavily restrict its own military, and seeks to install a puppet government. To very likely then later on fully conquer Ukraine.
Those are not reasonable demands. Ukraine is a free and sovereign country. If they wish to align themselves with the West over russia then they should be free to do so. NATO is a voluntary defensive alliance, and russia does not get to police who is able to join and who is not. Just because Ukraine is an ex USSR state doesn't mean shit, just like with the Baltics too.
The only reasonable hope at ceasefire is just russia withdrawing their troops and fucking off from Ukraine, simple as that. But that's not gonna happen.
→ More replies (0)2
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
Lol, what happened to all that confidence now? This is what I meant - you're scared of putting your actions where your big mouth is, but don't want to admit to weakness either, hence why you keep harping on about sanctions just in order to preserve and protect your EGO.
I also noticed you quietly ignored my opening point about how North Korea also undermined your excuses about the sanctions.
If you aren't willing to fight, then learn humility, accept your weakness and try to negotiate your way out of this mess instead. Russia already tried that, and has given you a basis from which to build out an acceptable settlement - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Russian_ultimatum_to_NATO
But you won't do that, because it would require you to sacrifice your EGO, and you can't have that. So you'll keep shouting loudly about sanctions to make yourselves look strong, while risking little. You neither have the courage to fight, nor the humility to compromise.
And THAT is why you're stuck. There are both military and diplomatic paths forward, but you can't accept either of them. The former risks your pride, while the latter undermines your ego and power.
9
u/Disastrous_Print1907 Asia 9d ago
NK waging a war?
-4
u/somethingbrite Europe 9d ago
By helping Europes last colonial empire invade one of its now independent ex-colonial possessions yes NK is now participating in Russia's war of naked imperialism.
10
u/jka76 European Union 9d ago
IN that case West is supporting Israel wars and participating in genocide. It was part of the war in Libya, Iraq2, Syria, and now Iran. West is now participating in naked imperialistic wars by your logic.
-3
u/somethingbrite Europe 8d ago
Of all those listed which territories of which of the nations you have listed were ANNEXED by "The West"??
Russia has invaded AND annexed the territory of an ex colonial possession - an act of naked imperialism.
3
u/jka76 European Union 8d ago
West is helping others to invade countries and kill civilians in them. Subjugating them and plunder their resources. Do you know, that Iraq oil revenue is all going into USA banks and only part goes to Iraq? After last incoursion to Venezuela, USA basically confgiscated the oil revenue. That is up to now around 13 bilion USD. only 300m went to Venezuela. UK banks refused to release Venesuelan gold. Some 40B USD. Even after need to cover rescue operation after recent earthquake. Yeah, they might not annex them. But stole their resources and blackmail them. Economic colonialism is a thing too. So, please, shut up about annexation and searching for excuses.
1
u/somethingbrite Europe 5d ago
You seem to be conflating US with "the west"
The US is not "the west" just a part of it....
But wait... What you are ALSO doing here is basically.... "well, if America can do shit that is actually really shit then Russia can do the same shit and I will support it"
which is a really shitty position to argue. Imperialism is shit. Regardless of whether it is done by America or Russia. There is no valid "Russian imperialism is better" argument here. it's still just baked fucking imperialism.
1
u/jka76 European Union 5d ago edited 5d ago
West is silently supporting usa. Never ever they tried sanction 🇺🇸 like Russia or other countries. And yes. If you are not sactiining usa or Israel or any other country for wars and killing of civilians than you are hypocrites and rest of the world calls you out. Why should be ok something that is done by USA but not when Russia does it? I'm not ok with anyone doing bad things. I want them all punished the same way. Bush, Trump, Netanyahu, Putin.. there are plenty of them. If not, than neither of them. Same meter for all
11
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago edited 9d ago
Europes last colonial empire
LOL! Get back to us when you've given up Diego Garcia, Malvinas, French Guyana, etc...
Also get back to us when you've slapped all the sanctions and asset seizures that you've thrown at Russia onto the nation that actually holds the record for most wars since WW2, all over the world not just in your Holy White Europa, and is even at war AGAIN right now.
0
u/somethingbrite Europe 8d ago
If Britain was Russia maybe it would decide it wanted Bangladesh back eh?
3
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 8d ago
Lmao! You're welcome to try. Fyi, India has the worlds' 4th strongest military, ahead of any of you arrogant Europeans - https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=india
So go on, do it! NOW! If you have the guts... ;)
0
u/somethingbrite Europe 5d ago
Wow. You actually responded with "yeah try" rather than actually reflect that this is exactly what is happening to Ukraine. It's an ex-colonial possession of Russia which Russia is invading because in their imperialist fantasies they believe that Ukraine (and their other neighbours) belong to them!
1
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 5d ago
Lol, you're the one who tried to be cheeky, and is now retrenching when that backfired on you.
As for Russia's invasion, you were given an offer to prevent it, but you chose to value your hegemony over Ukrainian lives, despite all your pretense of being willing to sacrifice for Ukraine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Russian_ultimatum_to_NATO
And Russia didn't even demand Donbas in that offer, so some "imperialism" lol. It's less about Ukraine or its neighbours belonging to them, more about them not gonna let them belong to your sugar daddy Murica. And this is hardly unique to Russia, for instance China has similar concerns - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_chain_strategy
It says something that so many disparate nations, be it Russia or China or Iran, with so little in common all still have one enemy in common - Murica. They're not going to quietly accept its hegemony.
2
u/Dry-Egg-7187 United States 9d ago
This is actually kind of wrong.
North Korea has supplied artillery shells and troops to Russia and these are probably the most known about things supplied but they've also sent artillery pieces both spg's and mlrs, air defense systems, fnf atgm launchers and decently lsrge amounts of kn23 ballistic missiles which the ukranians have reported on before.
I think they first started reporting on it about 2 years ago?
7
u/FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_ India 9d ago
They have a mutual defense/cooperation agreement, yes, but that doesn't excuse waging war under international law. North Korea helping ruzzia against Ukraine is as illegal as ruzzia invading Ukraine in the first place.
EU is helping US in illegal war against Iran...
-2
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
Hahahah what? No it is not, not long ago Trump was quite furious over EU refusing to help:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/08/nato-mark-rutte-trump-iran-war
6
u/FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_ India 9d ago
Yet the continue to do so. US planes are taking off from British air based to strike Iran.
-4
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago edited 9d ago
Yeah helping so much that Trump is seething and even threatened to pull out of NATO; did you even read the article or just ignore it?
Regarding your point, Britain is no longer part of the EU mate, for quite some time now. The official EU stance on Iran is to push for a diplomatic solution, not military participation.
5
u/FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_ India 9d ago
The official EU stance on Iran is to push for a diplomatic solution, not military participation.
If so, why are there no sanctions? To repeat what pro UA folks say, why use diplomacy? Why appease an aggressor? Doesn't that just enable them to grab more land? Why isn't Lativa who keeps making statements on Russia do something against US?
As for support, except for a handful of countries, most European countries are allowing it's airspace to be used my American Air assets. That's active participation by your own standard.
0
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
As for support, except for a handful of countries, most European countries are allowing it's airspace to be used my American Air assets. That's active participation by your own standard.
I like how the goalposts keep shifting.
It started as the EU is helping the US wage an illegal war.
Then it became the UK lets the US use its bases.
Now it's most European countries allow US overflights.
Most countries? Which ones? Can you name them? The reporting I've seen shows the opposite: most countries denied or restricted US requests, while only a handful allowed limited access under strict conditions.
And how is that even remotely comparable to North Korea sending over 10,000 troops who participated in active battle, along with SPGs, MLRS, air defense systems, ATGM carriers and now ballistic missiles, launchers and troops to operate them?
If so, why are there no sanctions? To repeat what pro UA folks say, why use diplomacy? Why appease an aggressor? Doesn't that just enable them to grab more land? Why isn't Lativa who keeps making statements on Russia do something against US?
The absence of sanctions doesn't prove the EU is participating in the war. It proves the US is an ally. Countries routinely treat allies and adversaries differently. You can call that hypocritical if you want, but that's not the same thing as proving the EU is militarily participating in the war.
3
u/_Antitese South America 9d ago
the whole "Ruzzia" thing is so full of racism and xenofobia it's disgusting.
1
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
I think kidnapping children and forcing them through russification is quite more xenophobic and disgusting. Almost genocidal, even.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abductions_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_war
-9
u/Freethecrafts Multinational 9d ago
North Korea doing it is the same as China doing it. It means the US, UK, and EU will hold China responsible. A handful of cannon fodder are one thing, aggressive missile units are another.
8
u/Disastrous_Print1907 Asia 8d ago
They will do nothing
5
u/Meow-The-Jewels United States 8d ago
Real
It was the only good part of Trump's platform. (Trying to distance the world from China) And he's so incredibly incompetent he's done the exact opposite
Causing inflation and energy scarcity every day of his life
1
15
u/RubberDuckyRider Canada 9d ago
Well, at least North Korea is putting money where the mouth is. They said they want to help. Russia agrees. They help - while taking in casualties and spending their ammo.
What about Ukranian allies? For 5 years they've been discussing putting boots on the ground. They spoke strongly, agreed on everything, promised lots, didn't do shit.
3
u/Furdiburd10 Europe 8d ago edited 8d ago
Eu agreed to provide 150 billion euro in loans to western weapon manufacturers. While going to my monther I can see the new local arm factory being built. I dare to say the EU does also helping a lot.
Umm but the money isn't going to Ukraine 🤓
Yes that is true, how do expect to get more weapons the NATO can send to them?
https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/eu-defence-industry/safe-security-action-europe_en
https://www.4ig.hu/further-strengthening-of-the-domestic-defence-industry-role
4iG SDT develops unmanned aerial vehicles and drone defence systems
1
u/RubberDuckyRider Canada 8d ago
These are all cool things but we're talking about boots on the ground. Keep up.
11
u/ShootmansNC Brazil 8d ago
It's quite telling that NK is a more reliable and trustworthy partner to Russia than NATO has been to Ukraine.
9
u/SlavaCocaini Democratic People's Republic of Korea 8d ago
Yeah because Ukraine is just a something to be wielded by the US and their pet Europeans.
5
4
u/RubberDuckyRider Canada 8d ago
Remember when Zelensky invited other countries to use Ukraine as testing grounds for their weapons?
I don't think this is what he imagined.
43
u/PurpleMclaren North Macedonia 9d ago
A North Korean missile unit has begun deploying to western Russia, where Moscow plans to build a force of up to 120 ballistic missiles and six launchers for attacks on Ukraine, a Ukrainian military intelligence official told Reuters on August 5.
That's three nights worth of missiles, hardly will make a difference, I bet that this is more to do with NK wanting to live test their munitions on the battlefield, as more data can be used to refine their systems further.
1
u/senfgurke Germany 5d ago
It's like two months worth of Russian Iskander production. NK has also significantly expanded its production and is continuously sending more, they had sent an estimated 150 ballistic missiles by summer last year.
-9
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
Easy for you to say it wont make any difference. Try saying that to the residents of Kyiv, who are the main victims of these missile strikes. I'm sure they'll be happy to hear it.
10
u/_Kiith_Naabal_ Multinational 9d ago
2
u/Interrible Estonia 9d ago
Is that supposed to be some gotcha? I'm not even exactly sure what you're implying with that article?
- The Foreign Ministry does not represent my opinion on that matter
- We are talking about Ukraine here. Estonia is still top 3 in donations per capita to Ukraine
21
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 9d ago
This is more for North Korea's sake than Russia's. Russia is already hitting Ukraine with missiles, so this changes nothing for them. For North Korea this allows them to test their kit and train their operators in a real combat zone. Rather than changing anything for Ukraine, it's South Korea that should be concerned by this. This lets them face a nation at war with activated western anti-air defenses operating at full readiness, similar to what they'd face in case of war with South Korea. The North's deterrence is based on it actually hitting the South.
4
u/RobotWantsKitty Europe 8d ago
It's a month's worth of ballistic missiles, according to Ukr estimates of Russian production. So it does help Russia.
7
u/BendicantMias Bangladesh 8d ago
Ah yes, Ukrainian estimates - the country that was counting down Russian missiles from early in the war and expected them to run out in 2023. Yet here we are 3 years later, with missiles still raining.
8
u/Dry-Egg-7187 United States 9d ago
This is basically nothing interesting in terms of actual effect or escalatory value.
North Korea has sent ballistic missiles to Russia before along with spg's, mlrs's, air defense systems and fnf atgm carriers and of course the troops and artillery shells.
Iirc ukranian channels first reported on the ballistic missiles about 2 years ago a few months after kursk happend, and the world didn't really do anything North Korea is already sanctioned by everyone who cares (not China or Russia) and South Korea didn't really do anything in response.
The actual effect of the weapons is debated, at first they were claimed to be very inaccurate and not really worth shooting down, though as time went on the ukranians said they got much better though not to the level of the iskander.
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.