Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
They have already hit a lot of the gates. Need to push forward some reforms. But I think 2032 is a shoe-in.
Of course it could be a NATO without US participation. Barring a Democrat win in 28 of course. On the plus side it might finally force the European members to properly militarize.
If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.
Of course it could be a NATO without US participation. Barring a Democrat win in 28 of course. On the plus side it might finally force the European members to properly militarize.
Well...it may be uneven but that rearming is under way, except in Great Britain it appears. And as more F-35s come out we will see more Warsaw Pact aircraft displaced.
“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
South Korean media reporting DPRK troops to deploy to Donetsk in July for engineering purposes. Reports that the Biden administration is moving to allow US military contractors to deploy to Ukraine to maintain and repair US equipment.
How long until both of these turn into active combat troops?
South Korean media reporting DPRK troops to deploy to Donetsk in July for engineering purposes. Reports that the Biden administration is moving to allow US military contractors to deploy to Ukraine to maintain and repair US equipment.
How long until both of these turn into active combat troops?
If that report is true and if NK actually starts transferring troops for rear area support duties in large numbers or potentially even for front line combat? Putin may find out they're more trouble than they're worth. For a start for the vast majority of them this will be their first exposure to life outside NK. And Russia will be a social and economic nirvana compared to what they're used to at home. Then of course they'll be despised and abused by the Russian officers & troops in the field and have little or no interest in fighting a war they don't understand for people who treat them like shit anyway.
On paper? It might look like a good idea but I would expect to see a spike in NK desertions over time. Certainly Ukraine can play that issue up in a phyc war campaign packaged for NK troops. Finally? To me it also sounds to me like a tacit admission by the Russian government that they, like the Ukrainians are starting to face significant manpower problems themselves.
Not going to happen. First off, this ain't the first time that NK troops have been deployed outside of NK. Africa has seen more than their fair share of NK troops. The Political Commissars have always maintained control. NK troops answered to NK Officers. Russian officers have no say. These NK troops are vetted. You will be hard pressed to find desserters amongst them.
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
Not going to happen. First off, this ain't the first time that NK troops have been deployed outside of NK. Africa has seen more than their fair share of NK troops. The Political Commissars have always maintained control. NK troops answered to NK Officers. Russian officers have no say. These NK troops are vetted. You will be hard pressed to find deserters amongst them.
That works for carefully selected units and officers and where the missions are short term and/or require limited manpower. If the idea is for NK troops to have a significant impact on the battlefield? Even if it's only by freeing up rear echelon Russian troops so they can be thrown into the grinder? Well then a small number of specially selected NK units isn't going to cut it. They will need to be present in their tens of thousands to have any real impact in the war (beyond propaganda value) and there's no way Kim is going to release a large portion of his best forces for the war in Ukraine either. He needs his most loyal/most trusted units at home to maintain control.
All of which I would argue means that if NK troops are sent in large numbers (and like you I won't be convinced until I see it happen) and assuming they then remain in place for any militarily useful period of time (think months or a year or more)? Then maintaining the type of discipline/control your referring to isn't going to assured.
That works for carefully selected units and officers and where the missions are short term and/or require limited manpower. If the idea is for NK troops to have a significant impact on the battlefield? Even f it's only by freeing up rear echelon Russian troops so they can be thrown into the grinder? Well then a small number of specially selected NK units isn't going to cut it. They will need to be present in their tens of thousands to have any real impact in the war (beyond propaganda value) and there's no way Kim is going to release a large portion of his best forces for the war in Ukraine either. He needs his most loyal/most trusted units at home to maintain control.
Yeah. This will not be a very controllable deployment. And wait till the 1st HIMARS/cruise missile lands on an NK unit...
And I can't help buit think the effect such a deployment will have on russian troops, morale wise. "Are we in such a crap situation we need these guys?!"
Assuming Ukraine has HIMARS after November this year? (which isn't looking as likely as it should be) correct on both points. But the first thing your average, barely trained half starved, grass eating NK conscript is going to do is try to steal and or eat everything they can. Which is not exactly the kind of behavior any army wants in its rear echelon logistics and transport units even at the best of times.
What the hell is wrong with you two? You both know enough history to know your points are wrong. Extremely wrong!
ONE, asingle bomb IS NOT ENOUGH to get any unit to surrender. It took DAYS of B-52 FLIGHTS of carpet bombing to get the Iraqis to surrender. Even day, WEEKS of artillery strikes did NOT render WWI Armies to quit. The Ukrainians have been raining HIMARS on the Russians and the Russians are shrugging them off. The Ukrainians can spend every HIMARS rocket on the November Kilos and the November Kilos will still fight!
2nd point, the KIms deployed ENTIRE REGIMENTS (3-5000 men) to Africa. None of them quit. They're vetted along the same lines Stalin vetted Soviet Central Armies. The soldier's family is being held hostage.
3rd point, the Russians are flushed with cash and wheat. Yeah, STARVING and POOR November Kilos NOT wanting to be FED and PAID by the Russians.
4th point. The November Kilos is a WWI Army, ie bayonet charge. To put this into context, the smallest SOVIET combat echelon is the REGIMENT. The smallest NK (and Chinese) combat echelon is the DIVISION and that's because THEY WILL DO A REGIMENTAL BAYONET CHARGE! Yeah, show that in front of Russian troops!
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
What the hell is wrong with you two? You both know enough history to know your points are wrong. Extremely wrong!
ONE, asingle bomb IS NOT ENOUGH to get any unit to surrender. It took DAYS of B-52 FLIGHTS of carpet bombing to get the Iraqis to surrender. Even day, WEEKS of artillery strikes did NOT render WWI Armies to quit. The Ukrainians have been raining HIMARS on the Russians and the Russians are shrugging them off. The Ukrainians can spend every HIMARS rocket on the November Kilos and the November Kilos will still fight!
2nd point, the KIms deployed ENTIRE REGIMENTS (3-5000 men) to Africa. None of them quit. They're vetted along the same lines Stalin vetted Soviet Central Armies. The soldier's family is being held hostage.
3rd point, the Russians are flushed with cash and wheat. Yeah, STARVING and POOR November Kilos NOT wanting to be FED and PAID by the Russians.
4th point. The November Kilos is a WWI Army, ie bayonet charge. To put this into context, the smallest SOVIET combat echelon is the REGIMENT. The smallest NK (and Chinese) combat echelon is the DIVISION and that's because THEY WILL DO A REGIMENTAL BAYONET CHARGE! Yeah, show that in front of Russian troops!
You two are better than this!
What is wrong from my perspective (in no particular order) is that:
1) It's an assumption that the NK army of 2024 has the same level of training, discipline and preparedness as the NK army of the 1970s and 80's i.e. before the collapse of Soviet Union and China's pivot westwards. As far as I can determine there is little or no evidence to support that contention and plenty of evidence to suggest that due to generational economic collapse and chronic mismanagement the overall quality of the average NK soldier has declined significantly over the past 30 to 40 years.
2) Following on from the above the last significant deployment of NK troops I am aware of was in the 70's and 80's during the bush wars in Africa and even then according to all the records I can find the numbers deployed were limited and restricted mainly to adviser/support roles not front line combat roles. To wit? The Politico website indicates there is no record of NK ever deploying large numbers of combat troops overseas since its formation. So while there may have been upwards 3000 or more men deployed by NK in those theaters (as you state) it would appear those numbers are cumulative and reflect total numbers for the duration of a specific war. I can certainly find no record of significant deployments of NK troops (i.e. up to 5000 men) at once place for one specific mission or for any significant combat casualties ever being suffered by NK troops posted abroad. In fact I could only find evidence for single figure casualties at best.
3) And while the Russians might be 'flush with cash and wheat" as you put it the vast bulk of those riches will be directed to the regime in Pyongyang directly for its uses and certainly NOT into the pockets of individual NK soldiers fighting on the front line. That much is a certainty.The average NK soldier? Will be better fed and see some extra NK currency (or if he's lucky rubles) in his pocket as combat pay. But that's about all. And from his (and his officers) perspective? there will be a world of riches sitting around behind the front lines. You can see the problem. Theft and corruption were rampant in the Russia defense forces at the start of the war, why would anyone expect the average NK soldier with his lived life experience to be any better?
4) So while it's still an assumption that they will be sent (because the entire story could just be Kremlin deception effort designed to heighten anxiety in the West's chattering classes and God knows we've al seen enough of those for this to be a possibility!) I also believe it's an assumption that any NK troops deployed to Ukraine now would perform as well as you seem to expect.
But as always happy to be proven wrong Colonel if you can locate the evidence. I've tried and couldn't.
What is wrong from my perspective (in no particular order) is that:
1) It's an assumption that the NK army of 2024 has the same level of training, discipline and preparedness as the NK army of the 1970s and 80's i.e. before the collapse of Soviet Union and China's pivot westwards. As far as I can determine there is little or no evidence to support that contention and plenty of evidence to suggest that due to generational economic collapse and chronic mismanagement the overall quality of the average NK soldier has declined significantly over the past 30 to 40 years.
2) Following on from the above the last significant deployment of NK troops I am aware of was in the 70's and 80's during the bush wars in Africa and even then according to all the records I can find the numbers deployed were limited and restricted mainly to adviser/support roles not front line combat roles. To wit? The Politico website indicates there is no record of NK ever deploying large numbers of combat troops overseas since its formation. So while there may have been upwards 3000 or more men deployed by NK in those theaters (as you state) it would appear those numbers are cumulative and reflect total numbers for the duration of a specific war. I can certainly find no record of significant deployments of NK troops (i.e. up to 5000 men) at once place for one specific mission or for any significant combat casualties ever being suffered by NK troops posted abroad. In fact I could only find evidence for single figure casualties at best.
Try adding in North Korean construction workers. You did better than me in finding that they actually saw combat. I merely noted their deployment, not any actual combat.
3) And while the Russians might be 'flush with cash and wheat" as you put it the vast bulk of those riches will be directed to the regime in Pyongyang directly for its uses and certainly NOT into the pockets of individual NK soldiers fighting on the front line. That much is a certainty.The average NK soldier? Will be better fed and see some extra NK currency (or if he's lucky rubles) in his pocket as combat pay. But that's about all. And for his (and his officers) perspective? there will be a world of riches sitting around behind the front lines. You can see the problem. Theft and corruption were rampant in the Russia defense forces at the start of the war, why would anyone expect the average NK soldier with his lived life experience to be any better?
They will be fed by the same Russian logistics train and North Korean troops do get a combat stipend.
4) So while it's still an assumption that they will be sent (because the entire story could just be Kremlin deception effort designed to heighten anxiety in the West's chattering classes and God knows we've al seen enough of those for this to be a possibility!) I also believe it's an assumption that any NK troops deployed to Ukraine now would perform as well as you seem to expect.
It's a bayonet charge. Nothing special about it. It's WWI tactics and needs little training at that. Just lots of vodka and an anti-retreat machine gun.
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
It's a bayonet charge. Nothing special about it. It's WWI tactics and needs little training at that. Just lots of vodka and an anti-retreat machine ghun.
Heck, German troops were on methamphetamines during the Bulge.
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
The Washington Post obtains evidence of Russian glide bombs falling on Russian territory – infographic
Ukrainska Pravda
Mon, July 1, 2024 at 2:06 AM EDT·4 min read
The Washington Post has obtained internal documents from the authorities of Russia’s Belgorod Oblast which confirm that glide bombs launched by the Russians on Ukraine have fallen on Russian territory. The documents specify the locations where the bombs fell and address issues regarding the defusing of bombs and evacuation in the event of an emergency.
Details: The document indicates that at least 38 bombs, attributed to recent territorial gains by Russia, fell in Belgorod Oblast on the border with Ukraine between April 2023 and April 2024, although most of them did not explode.
Additionally, at least four bombs fell on Belgorod itself, a regional centre with a population of about 400,000 people. Another seven were found in the surrounding suburbs. The highest number, 11, fell in the border Graivoron district, where some could not be located due to the "difficult operational situation".
Initially intercepted by Ukrainian intelligence and passed on to The Washington Post, the document contains a table of incidents with references to emergency decrees for bomb disposal and evacuation and was produced by the emergency department of the city of Belgorod.
Most of the bombs were discovered by civilians – forest rangers, farmers, or residents of nearby villages. In most cases, the Russian Defence Ministry did not know when the bombs were launched, indicating that some of them might have been there for several days.
Independent Russian media outlet Astra confirmed that many of the incidents described in the document correspond with information it had received from local authorities and reports in local media.
Local authorities generally remain silent about these incidents, describing them only as "accidents," blaming Ukrainian attacks, or simply not reporting the various explosions in the region, especially recently.
Astra has estimated that Russia accidentally dropped over a hundred bombs on its own territory and on occupied areas in the east of Ukraine over the past four months – the same period when there was a significant increase in the use of glide bombs.
The Russian government did not respond to The Washington Post’s request for comment on the document or the reports of the failed use of glide bombs.
For reference: Glide bombs are a Soviet relic from the Cold War era, designed as "dumb bombs" for dropping on targets. Russia has adapted this large arsenal of unguided bombs to modern warfare by upgrading them with guidance systems known as UMPC (unified planning and correction module) kits – cheap retractable wings and navigation systems.
This allows Russian Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft to launch them from about 40 miles away, which is unreachable for most Ukrainian air defence systems. The Washington Post notes that glide bombs have put additional pressure on Ukraine's ground-based air defences and played a significant role in the destruction of Avdiivka, which Russian forces captured in mid-February.
"Ukraine’s best defence against them is the US Patriot surface-to-air missile that can destroy a Russian aircraft before it approaches to release the bomb, but the systems are in short supply," the publication writes.
At the end of March, the Russian Defence Ministry announced the development of a new, heavier version of the glide bomb, the FAB-3000. It was finally deployed on 21 June against the Ukrainian village of Lyptsi. The Russian military also reported that the production of the lighter FAB-500 and FAB-1500 bombs had been sharply increased.
Background:
In April 2023, the Russian Defence Ministry reported that the explosion in the Russian city of Belgorod was caused by the fall of an aircraft munition during the flight of a Su-34 fighter-bomber belonging to the Russian Aerospace Forces. Military sources said that residential buildings had been damaged as a result of the incident.
Also, in January 2024, a Russian munition fell in the village of Petropavlovka (Voronezh Oblast, Russia), located near the border with Ukraine, during a missile attack on Ukraine. A resident in a video said that an entire street had been destroyed as a result of the explosion. He said that a missile had fallen.
Previously: Earlier, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that over the past week alone, Russia had used more than 800 guided aerial bombs against Ukraine. "Ukraine needs necessary forces and means to destroy the carriers of these bombs, mainly the Russian attack aircraft where it is deployed. This step is needed," he said.
Zelenskyy said that to effectively counter Russian guided aerial bombs, the Ukrainian Armed Forces need not so much Patriot air defence systems as long-range ATACMS missiles.
“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
GPS jamming? Poorly designed targeting system & software? Poor operator training? Poorly designed and built weapon systems?
Its the Russian Version of JDAM-ER. So Wings not deploying properly,,weapon released early, or Weapons released from one aircraft to close together and bumping each other.
Ours have the same issues but the failure rate is around 5%
For as many as they are dropping 38 failures in't a big deal
Tweet
Barring a Democrat win in 28 of course. On the plus side it might finally force the European members to properly militarize.
Comment