Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Poopymonster]

I mildly disagree, I mean the German cultural identity was changed rather quickly as well. But without occupation I fully agree and that's just not going to happen.

Germany got their dick stomped on in WW1. Once a certain Chancellor got in power and gave "Those People" promos, they got their dicks stomped on again in WW2.
Hey, Hanz. Maybe we shouldn't do that again. My father remembered the first time. I've been through it this time. This sucked. Let's make cars.

Russia never had their dicks totally stomped on once by a majority of the powers in the world, much less twice in a short period of time. They never had their "Let's make cars" moment.

[Makabreska]

Err... their worship of autocracy lasted only for a very short time. They weren't really like that before it. So the change back was "relatively" easy.
But with ruZZia, there is no changing back. They've always had a boner for autocracy.

Yup. Tzars, Lenin and the crew, Putler. They all kept Russians on a tight leash. No wonder they turned their glorious leaders into cult objects.

[Nymrohd]

I mildly disagree, I mean the German cultural identity was changed rather quickly as well. But without occupation I fully agree and that's just not going to happen.

I think it also has to do with competing influences in German identity. Prussian militarism was stomped out and the rest got an opportunity to bloom. I am not that well versed on the contributing cultures of Russia (and there must be many given the size of that country). Ultimately what I see in Russia is the importance of the bourgeoisie in transforming from a feudal to a democratic country and that never truly happened for them. There needs to be a moment of individualist empowerment. It doesn't have to sacrifice collectivism (it did not in most of Europe were democracies were strongly social). You can see it happening even in China (and that the Party is probably not enthusiastic about it but will struggle to squash it without destroying everything that brings them power). But in Russia I don't think they ever had a moment where every individual felt they had a right to power.

[Gabriel]

I mildly disagree, I mean the German cultural identity was changed rather quickly as well. But without occupation I fully agree and that's just not going to happen.

You are still somewhat off the target. The issue isn't just the "roooossia stronk!", but the entire culture of lies and corruption. To my knowledge, Germany never had that sort of thing, and the issue with russia I'm talking about has existed for hundreds of years at this point.

I have to go search through some archives to see if I have this photocopy of some book from more than hundreds years ago where the author was laying out the fundamental flaws with russian military and how it stems from the overall russian culture...

[zealo]

Err... their worship of autocracy lasted only for a very short time. They weren't really like that before it. So the change back was "relatively" easy.
But with ruZZia, there is no changing back. They've always had a boner for autocracy.

That "before it" where in itself something that only lasted a short time.

There were significant autocratic elements in the way Imperial Germany were run prior to WW1. They were not a constitutional monarchy in the sense of the likes of Britain being now, but one where the monarch wielded actual significant political power alongside the existence of the parliament, and made use of it too, at that.

[Corvus]

Russian state TV is saying up to 100,000 north Korean 'volunteers' could be sent to Ukraine to help fight and rebuild.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...to-help-russia

You know Russia is struggling when they are relying on NK to bail them out.

[Iphie]

Russian state TV is saying up to 100,000 north Korean 'volunteers' could be sent to Ukraine to help fight and rebuild.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...to-help-russia

You know Russia is struggling when they are relying on NK to bail them out.

I'm not sure how much effect those North Koreans would have, what is the quality of the North Korean army? However, I do note it's NK and not China which appears to be committing troops. I'm ALSO noting that this appears to be another way of not mobilizing. I do wonder what China thinks of this. I read somewhere that recently there had been a little bit of a spat between Pyongyang and Beijing because of some high profile anti Chinese statements in NK. (not sure where I read it, nor what the aftermath was.) Additionally...HOW are they going to be supported logistically?

Wouldn't this backfire though, like wouldn't this be akin to admitting the cause is lost?

[Santti]

Russian state TV is saying up to 100,000 north Korean 'volunteers' could be sent to Ukraine to help fight and rebuild.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...to-help-russia

You know Russia is struggling when they are relying on NK to bail them out.

Wow. Really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Just embarrassing. Can't help but wonder how eager they are to fight, when Russians themselves are struggling with morale.

[Shadowferal]

I'm thinking that sending North Korean troops is China's way of appeasing Russia. That North Korean troops are likely going to bite it is a good 2 for 1 deal. Russia gets what they want and NK gets spanked.

[Kaleredar]

I'm thinking that sending North Korean troops is China's way of appeasing Russia. That North Korean troops are likely going to bite it is a good 2 for 1 deal. Russia gets what they want and NK gets spanked.

So they want to allow the US, via it supporting Ukraine with arms and logistics, to effectively corrode the military and financial strength of two foreign adversarial powers without risking a single American life to do it at the same time.

That's a bold strategy, Cotton.

[Iphie]

So they want to allow the US, via it supporting Ukraine with arms and logistics, to effectively corrode the military and financial strength of two foreign adversarial powers without risking a single American life to do it at the same time.

That's a bold strategy, Cotton.

100000 troops aren't exactly a lot for NK, so it's hardly corroding the ability of NK. It would show how much of a paper tiger NK is and that would make Kim look weak. Whichever way you look at this someone is going to look weak at home and will open themselves up for domestic trouble. Which is likely why Lukashenka/o is doing his level best to stay out of it as much as he can.

[DarkTZeratul]

I wonder how many of those hundred thousand North Korean troops will take the opportunity to defect.

[zealo]

I wonder how many of those hundred thousand North Korean troops will take the opportunity to defect.

North Korea practises generational punishments where if someone defects, their family and relatives they still have their hands on gets punished, too.

It's fucked up, but if they do that arrangement with Russia the ones sent are likely chosen accordingly to how much leverage they have over them through their family.

[Unholyground]

I wonder how many of those hundred thousand North Korean troops will take the opportunity to defect.

All of them lol

[Liftbrul]

I'm thinking that sending North Korean troops is China's way of appeasing Russia.

I hardly think China needs to appease Russia. If anything, it's the other way around. And while China has North Korea on a fairly short leash, I don't think they exert enough influence to conscript a hundred thousand North Korean soldiers on Russia's behalf to send halfway across the world fight in some other despot's war. The logistics of it alone is far beyond what North Korea or Russia can do, and if China suddenly helps ferry all that meat to the front line, it wouldn't go unnoticed by anyone.

[Jastall]

I hardly think China needs to appease Russia. If anything, it's the other way around. And while China has North Korea on a fairly short leash, I don't think they exert enough influence to conscript a hundred thousand North Korean soldiers on Russia's behalf to send halfway across the world fight in some other despot's war. The logistics of it alone is far beyond what North Korea or Russia can do, and if China suddenly helps ferry all that meat to the front line, it wouldn't go unnoticed by anyone.

Yeah, I'm questioning the logistics behind that as well. NK definitely has no means of ferrying those soldiers by ships, and it seems supremely unlikely either China or Russia will give such a huge contingent a ride considering even these two are short in troop transport ships. So that means trains? Not even sure how feasible that is and it sounds like an enterprise that will take a good month at best, probably more, and Russia is short enough on supplies as it is to not want to waste them on brainwashed NK conscripts that have literally 0 combat experience across the entire army and are probably led by buffoons more used to clapping at party rallies, embezzling funds and licking their superior's boots than prosecuting an actual war. Although I guess that last part seemingly also applied to the Russian army.

Of course all this assumes 100k NK soldiers are actually intended to make it there eventually and it's not all just empty posturing and fodder for the Russian masses.

[Corvus]

Russia had previously claimed 40000 Syrians were going to join the war and they never turned up. This may be the same.

Russia does currently lease NK workers already. NK gets hard cash, Russia gets slave labour.

[Gorsameth]

Yeah I don't think this has anything to do with China really. It would be Russia paying premium prices for 100k bodies of cannon fodder because as said those NK troops have no combat experience and no Russian experience.
They are literally bodies being send to die in a meatgrinder.

At least with the supposed Syrians Russia was buying experienced soldiers who have been in conflicts and used to fighting over cities.

[Yunru]

Russan dies in this video:


But holy shit, why would you use a truck for military use that has a wheel just under. Imposible to survive landmine.

[Shadowferal]

McConnell gets win on Trump in NATO vote

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) clinched a victory on Wednesday when the Senate — including 48 of the chamber’s 50 Republicans — voted overwhelmingly to admit Finland and Sweden to NATO.

The resolution, which cleared the chamber in a bipartisan 95-1 vote, was a top priority for the Republican leader, who wanted to send a signal about the direction of a GOP that had drifted toward isolationism under former President Trump.

The GOP leader definitely won the battle, even if he lost Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), the only member of either party in the Senate to vote “no.”

Most strikingly, Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) both shifted in their votes. The two were the only senators to vote against resolutions in 2017 and 2019 adding Montenegro and North Macedonia, respectively, to NATO.

On Finland and Sweden, the two libertarian-leaning lawmakers took a different stance: Lee voted for the resolution, and Paul voted present.