re: Why would Putin let North Korean troops fight in Ukraine

A few articles. You can believe or you decide not to

quote:

---

"The first military personnel of the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] have already come under fire in the Kursk region of the Russian Federation," said Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation head Andriy Kovalenko on Monday, referring to North Korea.

---

Independent

quote:

---

Ukrainian troops engaged with North Korean units for first time in Russia, official says

---

PBS

Jack Carter

quote:

---

Can you post that article?

---

quote:

---

North Korean troops 'gun down their own Russian comrades after shooting in the wrong direction'

---

Daily Mail

quote:

---

Austin Confirms North Korea Has Sent Troops to Russia

---

Defense.gov

quote:

---

What does North Korea get out of sending its soldiers to fight Russia's war?

---

NBC

quote:

---

said Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation

---

Seriously bro? This is The Ministry of Truth in Ukraine.

quote:

---

official says

---

Nope. Meaningless.

quote:

---

North Korean troops 'gun down their own Russian comrades after shooting in the wrong direction'

---

Sounds more plausible than "sources say" and "the ministry of truth said", but a captured prisoners confession has to be taken with a grain of salt. They will say whatever they are told to say. The Russians do this as well.

quote:

---

Austin Confirms North Korea Has Sent Troops to Russia

---

For training as many countries do. The headline is used to build the narrative. The more they push the narrative with "sources" and "the Ukrainian Disinformation Center" and public officials implying that North Koreans are fighting on the front lines, the more people will start to believe that narrative without any actual proof. Just like how the narrative was pushed that Iraq had WMDs

Some things never change

quote:

---

A few articles. You can believe or you decide not to

---

I don't believe it. I want actual evidence. Something as major as this must be backed by undeniable evidence.

How about you, do you believe it? Do you believe it enough to support an escalation?

quote:

---

The main video being passed around is a video of Laos troops acvording to google translate.

---

The one on Telegram of soldiers entering a barracks? There were three videos that I saw that said these were NK troops. One was in the barracks getting equipment, one was what appeared to be troops training and another with a Russian interacting with a NK soldier. And to be fair, the last one I can't seem to find any more. They could be videos of anything, of course, and I didn't study them to see if they were what they said they were. I'm just describing the evidence as I saw it.

quote:

---

Sounds convincing when they make declarations in that format, doesn't it? They don't have to be specific either, just use deceptive language to insinuate that North Koreans training in Russia = North Koreans fighting on the don't lines.

---

I don't think that is the insinuation. Here is Yoon's quote at the press conference with the Polish President:

quote:

---

"We agreed that North Korea's dispatch of troops to Russia is a direct violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions and the U.N. Charter and is a provocation that goes beyond the Korean Peninsula and Europe to threaten global security," 

---

That statement is broad enough to include training situations, which is well within the purview of what SK would consider threatening, as NK issues similar statements when the US and SK take part in joint drills. The setting of the statement suggests that this took place as a summary of what was discussed at the meeting between Yoon and Duda, with the overt purpose being to finalize the newly minted relations between SK and Poland on military technology.

It is also true that SK-Polish relations also play a part in relations between NK and Russia, and thus it isn’t necessarily a surprise that the subject was broached during the meeting. Both SK and NK have a very low threshold for what they consider an escalation, and the diplomatic language between the two is really explicit in diplomatic terms. Here is an example: LINK

The escalation angle is less meaningful within the context of NK-SK relations for those reasons.

quote:

---

And suddenly it becomes true enough for the masses here

---

Its okay to take a wait and see approach to what is happening. There are almost certainly the advisors and attaches from several countries both involved and not involved in the conflict on both sides. But that's just the pattern of post WW-II warfare, where every conflict has global potential when other states use these conflicts to compete with one another. Countries generally notice when combatants formally invite other powers, such as when Syria formally invited Russia to help them in the SCW. That would be the real escalation, in strictly diplomatic terms.

Because the Russian way of war isn't strategic it's just attrition with no regard to casualties.