South Korea wanted to fearmonger about North Korea after its (technically revived) mutual defense pact with Russia, possibly to justify a preplanned decision to arm Ukraine or at least move the policymaking needle in that direction. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov rubbished reports that North Korea will soon send engineers to Donbass, which were first introduced by South Korea’s TV Chosun in a so-called “
This story has lasted far too long. The West must go for the jugular. What I would do if I was an evil zionist to make the BRICS, checkmate🤣
1. Israel starts a war with Hezbollah in Lebanon.
In process.
2. Little bit after "someone" blows up the Saudi Arabia's oil export terminals and may be the ones of the UAE. Of course, the western media "information" machine make sure to pin pointed to the Iran/Houthis terrorists. The damages are huge, the desulfurization towers in Abqaiq are destroyed along with the pipeline to Yanbu.. The world will lose for several months 10 millions of barils/day.
3. Oil jump to 500$-1000$/Bl, the world economy grind to an halt.
- That is good for the US$ and Netflix. The US government wont have any problem then to sell his debt,
- Bad for stocks, commodities and probably gold.
- The US is oil sufficient, not china, nor India. China will be destroyed aling with many of his customers, included Europe.
- Cherry on the cacke it will be perhaps good for "green energies".
4. The US and Europe go to war with IRAN to protect the free world, Iran is destroyed, Russia and China just set "red lines" and do nothing..
If Russia is providing advanced weapons that were previously restricted to friendly nations, as they've indicated they intend to do, then it makes sense to have engineers and technicians from those nations trained in the use of those systems. The logical place to do this is in Russia where the necessary facilities already exist. If NK personnel are travelling to Russia, then my guess is that's why.
I love this quote " In brief, it could lead to North Korea opening up a hot East Asian front of this global competition IF THE US CROSSES Russia’s red lines in Eastern Europe, thus possibly getting America to think twice about upping the ante in their proxy war."
Seriously? But the West cross the Russian red lines ALL THE TIME and NOTHING happened yet.
One basic rule is NOT to set "lines in the sand" ( or red lines ) because once they are crossed and that you did not react you are not taken seriously anymore. Its exactly what is happening with Russia and the West. So the Russian so called "red lines" are just as PR for their internal audience.
What I was referring to in the hyperlinked analysis was if a large-scale NATO invasion force crosses the Dnieper, poses a credible threat to Russia's new regions, and thus provokes Moscow into using tactical nukes as a last resort out of self-defense.
I doubt NATO could get anywhere near the Dnieper, much less assemble a credible force to do so. It's all bluff and bluster from their side. I think Andrei Martyanov's analysis on that point is right on target. NATO is only good at pushing small nations around. In a peer to peer conflict they'd lose badly.
Martyanov gets on my nerves as well, and I don't like his taste in music, but those are separate issues from his knowledge of the situation. Besides, I don't rely on him as a single source, so perhaps I should have mentioned that Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter, Douglas Macgregor, Moon of Alabama and Simplicius, among others, also seem to share his opinion. I include Martyanov mainly because he's Russian and has insights the others may not possess, not because I like his style.
The reality of the situation as I understand it is this. First you'd have to assemble sufficient men and material. It's by no means certain that can even be done, plus once your intention is known, it would no doubt precipitate a political crisis in at least half the EU member states. It can't be done without conscription, and once that's introduced you'll have guys bugging out all over the place, just like in Ukraine. Next you'd have to train them, and remember, you'd be sending them against a force which already has a minimum of 2 years combat experience, far more in the case of the Donbas and Chechen militias.
Next you'd have to get them across over 500 km of mostly open ground with very limited cover. How? One of the reasons Russia's advance has been so slow is the high visibility factor combined with the constant threat of drones, which both sides possess and which are game changers as far as any sort of mass movement of forces is concerned. Then there's the highly accurate missiles which Russia can produce in abundance. I'm sure you've seen the effect of the TOS-1A which has recently been introduced. No defence against that whatsoever. Point is, the attrition rate in men and equipment would simply be unsustainable. You'd get everyone killed, and for what?
I wouldn't put it past these lunatics to station some troops in western Ukraine as a provocation, but to reach the Dnieper, as you indicated, seems a bit ambitious to say the least. As for tactical nukes, why would Russia use them when they have TOS-1A? Nuclear weapons are a last resort for the side that's losing and Russia is far from losing at this point. NATO might slow them down, but defeat them? In a major land operation with their supply lines stretched and under constant fire while Russia is fighting on home turf, at least as they see it. I just don't see it it happening, but then who could have predicted anything that's happened these last few years?
I don't see it as a question of whether Russia does or doesn’t NEED foreign engineering experience to rebuild that region, but would it be useful to have them?
There is a labor shortage in the Russian federation, maybe not critical but with more work to be do and a limited number of workers the price of labor is going up. Even if there are enough workers with more workers for the same job the job is done faster.
A group of disciplined men who can use heavy machinery, travel and work quickly to clear (or lay) mines, build bridges roads railways etc. is going to be useful.
It just depends on the politics and the price, and considering North Korea's political isolation and economy the price Pyongyang will ask from Moscow is likely to be very good.
I'm personally of the view that seasonal North Korean migrants, particularly those engaged in hard labor like agriculture, could be suitable "replacement migrants" for Central Asians.
Considering the recent tightening of immigration policy regarding the former soviet republics of Central Asia, you could see Koreans taking on all sorts of jobs - trucking, construction, taxis, hotel and restaurants for example. The language might be an issue at first, but I'm guessing Russians would be more favourably disposed to Koreans given recent events. Koreans aren't going to cause problems.
As a student of foreign languages (French, Spanish, Japanese, Punjabi and Russian) I always thought Korean was similar to Japanese which has a fairly simple syntax and grammar. Boy was I wrong! Korean is even more convoluted than Russian! Take a look! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_grammar
I don't think Koreans are going to have much trouble learning Russian.
There's another aspect to this as well, which is education. There's a growing population of foreign students in Russia, so it's not hard to imagine N Koreans being sent to Russia to study science, engineering and technology. Looking further down the road, if this gets off the ground it will have a modifying effect on the authoritarianism that we're told characterizes N Korea, which no doubt has some truth to it once you filter out the western propaganda.
Another though that crossed my mind. Is this a move to take N Korea off China's hands, since NK is a bulwark, but in some respects also a thorn in China's side? Maybe I'm overthinking this, but there are significant differences between Russian and Chinese culture which makes importing Chinese labour problematic. Perhaps this is a viable alternative? I love the people of UZ and TJ but it has to be recognized that some of them cause serious problems, and for that, Russians tend to regard them unfavourably. Overthinking it even further, it seems to me Korean brides would fit right in with traditional Russian society, which is still very much alive outside the big cities.
You have feet on the ground, so is this a 'thing' in Russia the same as in N. America? Western men marrying east Asian women for their traditional values? I'm an example of that BTW. Wife is Japanese. Not that I'm especially conservative compared to Asian men, but then that's a selling point as far as the women are concerned.
This story has lasted far too long. The West must go for the jugular. What I would do if I was an evil zionist to make the BRICS, checkmate🤣
1. Israel starts a war with Hezbollah in Lebanon.
In process.
2. Little bit after "someone" blows up the Saudi Arabia's oil export terminals and may be the ones of the UAE. Of course, the western media "information" machine make sure to pin pointed to the Iran/Houthis terrorists. The damages are huge, the desulfurization towers in Abqaiq are destroyed along with the pipeline to Yanbu.. The world will lose for several months 10 millions of barils/day.
3. Oil jump to 500$-1000$/Bl, the world economy grind to an halt.
- That is good for the US$ and Netflix. The US government wont have any problem then to sell his debt,
- Bad for stocks, commodities and probably gold.
- The US is oil sufficient, not china, nor India. China will be destroyed aling with many of his customers, included Europe.
- Cherry on the cacke it will be perhaps good for "green energies".
4. The US and Europe go to war with IRAN to protect the free world, Iran is destroyed, Russia and China just set "red lines" and do nothing..
Goodbye BRICS. See you next century!
If Russia is providing advanced weapons that were previously restricted to friendly nations, as they've indicated they intend to do, then it makes sense to have engineers and technicians from those nations trained in the use of those systems. The logical place to do this is in Russia where the necessary facilities already exist. If NK personnel are travelling to Russia, then my guess is that's why.
I love this quote " In brief, it could lead to North Korea opening up a hot East Asian front of this global competition IF THE US CROSSES Russia’s red lines in Eastern Europe, thus possibly getting America to think twice about upping the ante in their proxy war."
Seriously? But the West cross the Russian red lines ALL THE TIME and NOTHING happened yet.
One basic rule is NOT to set "lines in the sand" ( or red lines ) because once they are crossed and that you did not react you are not taken seriously anymore. Its exactly what is happening with Russia and the West. So the Russian so called "red lines" are just as PR for their internal audience.
Clownish again.
What I was referring to in the hyperlinked analysis was if a large-scale NATO invasion force crosses the Dnieper, poses a credible threat to Russia's new regions, and thus provokes Moscow into using tactical nukes as a last resort out of self-defense.
I doubt NATO could get anywhere near the Dnieper, much less assemble a credible force to do so. It's all bluff and bluster from their side. I think Andrei Martyanov's analysis on that point is right on target. NATO is only good at pushing small nations around. In a peer to peer conflict they'd lose badly.
I disagree and believe that the threat of a conventional intervention of any scale and in whichever form is a very serious possibility.
I also consider Martyanov to be another "5D chess master plan" conspiracy theorist along the lines of The Saker.
I therefore don't take him seriously, his insufferable arrogance is also off-putting, and he seems like a genuinely angry person.
Martyanov gets on my nerves as well, and I don't like his taste in music, but those are separate issues from his knowledge of the situation. Besides, I don't rely on him as a single source, so perhaps I should have mentioned that Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter, Douglas Macgregor, Moon of Alabama and Simplicius, among others, also seem to share his opinion. I include Martyanov mainly because he's Russian and has insights the others may not possess, not because I like his style.
The reality of the situation as I understand it is this. First you'd have to assemble sufficient men and material. It's by no means certain that can even be done, plus once your intention is known, it would no doubt precipitate a political crisis in at least half the EU member states. It can't be done without conscription, and once that's introduced you'll have guys bugging out all over the place, just like in Ukraine. Next you'd have to train them, and remember, you'd be sending them against a force which already has a minimum of 2 years combat experience, far more in the case of the Donbas and Chechen militias.
Next you'd have to get them across over 500 km of mostly open ground with very limited cover. How? One of the reasons Russia's advance has been so slow is the high visibility factor combined with the constant threat of drones, which both sides possess and which are game changers as far as any sort of mass movement of forces is concerned. Then there's the highly accurate missiles which Russia can produce in abundance. I'm sure you've seen the effect of the TOS-1A which has recently been introduced. No defence against that whatsoever. Point is, the attrition rate in men and equipment would simply be unsustainable. You'd get everyone killed, and for what?
I wouldn't put it past these lunatics to station some troops in western Ukraine as a provocation, but to reach the Dnieper, as you indicated, seems a bit ambitious to say the least. As for tactical nukes, why would Russia use them when they have TOS-1A? Nuclear weapons are a last resort for the side that's losing and Russia is far from losing at this point. NATO might slow them down, but defeat them? In a major land operation with their supply lines stretched and under constant fire while Russia is fighting on home turf, at least as they see it. I just don't see it it happening, but then who could have predicted anything that's happened these last few years?
Concerning North Korean Engineers in Ukraine
I don't see it as a question of whether Russia does or doesn’t NEED foreign engineering experience to rebuild that region, but would it be useful to have them?
There is a labor shortage in the Russian federation, maybe not critical but with more work to be do and a limited number of workers the price of labor is going up. Even if there are enough workers with more workers for the same job the job is done faster.
A group of disciplined men who can use heavy machinery, travel and work quickly to clear (or lay) mines, build bridges roads railways etc. is going to be useful.
It just depends on the politics and the price, and considering North Korea's political isolation and economy the price Pyongyang will ask from Moscow is likely to be very good.
I'm personally of the view that seasonal North Korean migrants, particularly those engaged in hard labor like agriculture, could be suitable "replacement migrants" for Central Asians.
Considering the recent tightening of immigration policy regarding the former soviet republics of Central Asia, you could see Koreans taking on all sorts of jobs - trucking, construction, taxis, hotel and restaurants for example. The language might be an issue at first, but I'm guessing Russians would be more favourably disposed to Koreans given recent events. Koreans aren't going to cause problems.
You're right, if they learned the basics of the Russian language, then they could take on all sorts of jobs here in the service sector.
As a student of foreign languages (French, Spanish, Japanese, Punjabi and Russian) I always thought Korean was similar to Japanese which has a fairly simple syntax and grammar. Boy was I wrong! Korean is even more convoluted than Russian! Take a look! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_grammar
I don't think Koreans are going to have much trouble learning Russian.
There's another aspect to this as well, which is education. There's a growing population of foreign students in Russia, so it's not hard to imagine N Koreans being sent to Russia to study science, engineering and technology. Looking further down the road, if this gets off the ground it will have a modifying effect on the authoritarianism that we're told characterizes N Korea, which no doubt has some truth to it once you filter out the western propaganda.
Another though that crossed my mind. Is this a move to take N Korea off China's hands, since NK is a bulwark, but in some respects also a thorn in China's side? Maybe I'm overthinking this, but there are significant differences between Russian and Chinese culture which makes importing Chinese labour problematic. Perhaps this is a viable alternative? I love the people of UZ and TJ but it has to be recognized that some of them cause serious problems, and for that, Russians tend to regard them unfavourably. Overthinking it even further, it seems to me Korean brides would fit right in with traditional Russian society, which is still very much alive outside the big cities.
You have feet on the ground, so is this a 'thing' in Russia the same as in N. America? Western men marrying east Asian women for their traditional values? I'm an example of that BTW. Wife is Japanese. Not that I'm especially conservative compared to Asian men, but then that's a selling point as far as the women are concerned.