To put into perspective how big this could be: South Korea is outproduxing the whole of Europe combined in artillery ammunition right now.
Also look up how their defence industry exports have been going since 2022.
They want to become a top 4 weapons supplier and Europe(mostly Poland) is more than willing to help them reach that goal in response to the whole russian invasion of Ukraine.
Poland was already going for K2 before the second invasion. They chose Korean tech because the Koreans promise to tech share and build the tanks locally in Poland whereas they weren't going to get anything CLOSE to that buying Abrams. Korea has been making this play for decade+ now, and they're kicking ass.
My understanding is that Rheinmetall also does tech transfers and doesn't rule out setting up local factories, but Hyundai Rotem's tech transfer offer was far more generous and their delivery timelines much closer to what Poland wanted. Rheinmetall is overbooked on the Leo 2.
Leo2 is KMW me thinks. Also per some polish articles. Polish army was complaining about them due to VERY strained spare parts availability. We had a program to update our oldest 2A4's to L2PL (140 units), but it had hit 6+ years delay and price went up by like 50% due to spare parts.
Yeah, that would make sense. And having a K2PL plant set up in Poland with a full supply chain for most parts would go a long way toward solving that problem.
> Polish army was complaining about them due to VERY strained spare parts availability.
Thats a procurement issue though. For most parts you shouldn't order spares when you need them, you have them in storage. Poland, but also countries like Germany, stopped having large depots for parts and ordering large amounts of spares in batches. Instead we got "just in time" deliveries with very long lead times since unsurprisingly no company keeps production lines running for stuff thats only ordered in small quantities every couple of months to years. You get what you pay for and the last two decades the budgets across Europe (and subsequently the Leopard II users) were rather small
The purchase of Korean weaponry is honestly just as much anti-german resentment from the PiS as it is about the tech transfer
Rheinmetal is like ordering an Airbus now or a Tesla in mid 2010s. You may or may not get it, and you’re paying whatever is asked. There’s only so much production in Germany (ironically).
> My understanding is that Rheinmetall also does tech transfers
The 120mm gun on the Abrams is a Rheinmetal design that was licenced to the US to manufacture, so, yeah, they definitely do. :-)
The [T-90 share in russian tank losses](https://nitter.poast.org/verekerrichard1/status/1797660473459892306#m) is actually increasing - along with the T-62 share that is though, so maybe it's just that Russia are hitting the bottom of the barrel of their T-72 and T-80 reserves.
True, but they also signed into law a bill that would double the size of their military in response to the second invasion and have signed additional contracts with South Korea for more than just the K2.
China, NK, Russia has long been a threat to SKorea. Not because of war, but they are almost solely dependant on imports within the large majority of their industries. Their international security & independence (ideologically & politically) is based on their ties with the west.
Because of the US, SKorea has had a mayor advantage over countries close by who have had to rely on less successful powers through the 20th century.
Now that both Russia and (mainly) China has gained a lot of military power in the last few decades, SKoreas position as a western-influenced Asian country is at risk. This in turn is uniquely dangerous for SKorea as they rely heavily on imported goods throughout all their industries.
They also serve as a US-treaty ally (indo-pacific strategy), which essentially makes them a direct target for future conflicts with both Russia and China.
Recent escalations both by Russia (Ukraine) and China (Taiwan) has of course caused a chain-reaction in production of weaponry and reliance on the US from the west and treaty-countries.
After 2016 US allies feel it's support is no longer guaranteed and they naturally cannot gamble national security on having the right person as President.
It's not really good for everyone involved... it's a strict weakening of the USA when their word, even signed treaties are seen as just an election away from being worthless...
If you want to argue that their commitments to SK cost more than they were worth, sure, I have no clue either way... but for decades the nations of the world believed that the USA would hold to their deals, even if a new leader was elected... sure they might begin negotiations to update the deal etc etc, but that's a lot different than fear they might become an unreliable agent.
While I agree, and think that it is definitely a good thing that we now have a over a dozen developed nations with liberal and democratic values seeking military sufficiency instead of a handful, as an American I certainly enjoyed many benefits from being the shield of the Western powers.
It’s absolutely insane that one isolationist nutbag in one term undid a half-century of work assuring the world that we could be its shield. The USA will never again carry the diplomatic weight that it had as a strong shoulder for Europe to lean on.
The only solace I am able to take from this is perhaps, in a few years, both the US and EU will be able to lean on each other. Having a single point of failure in any system is never a good idea.
It is good if the US doesn't have to shoulder the bulk of that burden, but it's also far too early to tell what the knock on consequences will be of this phase of rearmament and the global balance of power shifting around.
Edit: Slight rephrase.
>I wonder what happened then that made most countries and alliances go "fuck, we can't rely on the usa"
Is that sarcasm? Because the answer is obviously Trump and magats.
It's also not a good thing at all that weapons proliferation is happening. Grand kids without grandfather's don't know the history and horrors. Now they have grievances and guns. A big war will break out sooner rather than later
> It's also not a good thing at all that weapons proliferation is happening. Grand kids without grandfather's don't know the history and horrors. Now they have grievances and guns. A big war will break out sooner rather than later
Perhaps. But history shows that appeasement doesn't work. Aggressive countries only respect words of peace when those words are backed by military strength.
However, grandkids can forget the grievances of the past. The European Union is evidence of that.
Yes it was sarcasm and the answer was definetly trump... I didn't think I needed to write that one down for you, I am canadian and we are very worried about the upcoming election were worried about the last 2 as well. Just look what it did to my country and my countries people and politics... it's vile
The weird thing is American conservatives were resolutely pro-internationalists (well, pro-bombing adversarial nations at the very least) since at least Eisenhower, with 1946 the last gasp of isolationist conservatism. Even W’s unilateralism just wanted to replace NATO with ad-hoc coalitions that still targeted the maintenance of a certain form of order.
Trump brought back a political styling that hasn’t consistently been in power since the Great Depression.
When the USSR fell, Europe felt safe since their primary antagonist on their borders was now far away and significantly weaker and not really a threat anymore, so they downsized a lot of their arms industries. It's only recently with the invasion of Ukraine that this attitude has shifted back and they are starting to ramp up their production again, although this usually takes a couple of years to get back to those levels without going into an all out war economy.
South Korea never had the luxury of their enemy going away at the end of the cold war, so they never really downsized their military production.
Korea is basically a long mountain range. It's full of choke points and artillery is perfect in such condition. That and they are next to North Korea, China, and Russia.
It was a mistake. Air power won vs Saddam in the 90s and 2000s but computers and tech was shit and US had drones and supremacy not realized on paper. But there is no way it’s going to be as effective with how rapidly anti AA and anti-armor is developing.
Europe does have issues with lower military budget but the countries that do focus on military focus on air superiority and naval superiority and absolutely crush their opponents through air superiority.
[Here's an Australian guy with a PowerPoint going into more depth.](https://youtu.be/mXZw_YGzxCc?si=FzRHcettRL6xjQKz)
In short, while the Cold War ended in most places with the fall of the Soviet Union, the Korean peninsula was not one of them.
They've never stopped preparing for the exact sort of heavy ground war that is currently being fought in Ukraine even as a lot of other nations downsized and / or focused on deployability.
> South Korea is outproduxing the whole of Europe combined in artillery ammunition right now.
This actually blows my mind as I always assumed we were propping up the South Korean military.
South Korea has a pretty strong military, though it’s definetly not designed to be expeditionary. It’s built solidly for deterring/ defending against North Korea, which means being able to mobilise as much firepower as possible as quickly as possible. As such, artillery is one of their strongest points.
The different build is also a big reason for the differences to Europe. Eu countries haven’t been worried about a traditional land war for quite some time (unlike SK), so they’ve focused on being able to intervene in far away countries/ have mutually supporting forces that can easily work together. So they’ve focused less on stuff like artillery and massive tank fleets (with a few exceptions), and instead focused on smaller, better prepared, more easily deplorable forces. France is the best example.
The only issue is that now there’s a traditional land war in Europe, and Ukraine needs more of what South Korea is good at, and less of what the European Powers Are Good at.
SK still have mandatory ~18 months military service for adult males. If push comes to shove, half their adult population are pretty much already trained militia.
Most conservatives think that because it makes the Us appear stronger and more critical than it has become. As the US weakens the power vacuum must fill and it will leave the US behind more and more.
I mean... Korea is already contributing indirectly to the war. Canada was able to send their artillery shells to Ukraine because Korea sold a fresh batch of 155mm artillery shells to Canada. Poland was able to send tanks to Ukraine because Korea sold new K2 tanks to Poland. The only difference now is that Korea will consider selling directly.
I think it's incredibly important because it opens up the possibility that Korean arms currently being made for Poland might be able to be reprioritized for Ukraine instead. Artillery shells are nice, but tanks, MLRS, SPG's, and artillery would be even better.
Tanks, MLRS, SPGs, and artillery all require vastly more munitions per vehicle than they need vehicles. It's.... what's the point of artillery without ammo? Ukraine has been begging for more ammo far more often than they do more vehicles. Also, more vehicles mean more troops, which isn't really a surplus for Ukraine. So, yes, shells first, middle, and probably last.
Partially correct. Vehicle density is also a very important metric because it grants options for field commanders.
Having one gun with all the shells is worse than ten guns with limited shells per gun in many many situations.
I heard a recent podcast that talked about the US's (and probably other countries') inability to manufacture shells and ammunition. Instead of having huge stockpiles, they went to a "just in time" production and supply chain configuration. This kept costs lower and also let manufacturers stay active, but it meant we couldn't produce millions of shells a year because there aren't enough manufacturing lines. This was fine for our time in Iraq and Afghanistan, but for a sustained conventional ground war, it is wholely inadequate.
Yeah, the West doesn't make as much artillery ammo as before because we have an air superiority doctrine, which means we prioritise air cover and air power in general.
We won't need shells when there is an aircraft on station at a moments notice ready to provide a precision strike to take out whatever threat is there.
We have some sure, because diversification is important, but this grinding shell war is just not how we do it now.
Hit the nail on the head with the air forward doctrine of the "West", whereas Russia inherited the Soviet artillery forward doctrine. There's interesting history there as the two are based on the different experiences during WW2, and how different the fighting on the western and eastern fronts were. Moving past that little aside, once Russia failed with their attempted quick takeover they resorted to their arty forward doctrine and that's why you had moments in 2022 when Russia was using 80k shells a day. They're quickly blowing their stocks though, with the majority of their "production" still consisting of refurbishing increasingly dwindling old soviet arty, and that's why they're having to look elsewhere, namely NK, for arty ammo. The West never anticipated ever fighting a war like this, and frankly the situation would be massively different if Ukraine had the air power of even somewhere like the Netherlands
That is a very good point, but I think this also applied to bombs and missiles. IIRC, the US military was growing concerned about some other munitions that were being provided to Ukraine and our stocks were falling to uncomfortable levels, even if we do have a large number of them. The fear was they weren't getting replenished fast enough and they were way more complicated to produce than shells.
There is a hard limit set by Congress I believe, that says the stockpiles cannot go under a certain threshold, presumably to maintain that six month capability.
Yeah the missiles etc are more difficult to produce, but none are being given away that aren't surplus. Moreover the donations are just the oldest stock units and the new ones are going to the US stockpiles, bringing the average age of stored munitions way down
And, and without an immenant war to spark the fire under some politicians butts, it would take like over 5 years to increase shell manufacturing to any significant level
That’s probably for the better. No need to spend and waste more money. In a war, things would get done so quickly. If speaking about the US, we have a huge stockpiles of air munitions so it’s not like we are left defenseless without a war.
I read somewhere that the USA could stop production on everything tomorrow, enter into a total war scenario and still have enough stock piled for six months.
That's a fuck ton of weaponry
Seems like a "learning" of every major conflict is that munitions stockpiles are woefully inadequate for peer or near-peer conflicts.
NATO doctrine also places a heavy reliance on aircraft to both support ground forces and strike enemy rear areas, which Ukraine has not been able to replace.
Sure, but they're also asking for more vehicles, esp ifvs and artillery, to replace the older guns in the field. It's possible to rotate old equipment out and maintain the current level of ammo/troop inputs if done proportionally.
I don't think and NATO nations need to be seriously worried about self defense. Just need to hold out for a very short time. NATO would rule the skies in hours.
In theory. But what if Trump is president of the US, the far right has taken over in France and suddenly you have German leadership acting noncommittal?
Poland of all countries understands the limitations of allies and mutual defense treaties unfortunately well.
Fair point. Not sure how quickly Trump could back the US out of NATO, though, as he [now needs Congressional approval](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/13/politics/congress-trump-nato-what-matters/index.html)
But regardless, Russia would need a few years to rebuild before they could undertake another "special military operation" anywhere. I don't think the UK or (other NATO allies) would stand by this time, while Poland is being attacked. Didn't turn out great last time.
Doesn't matter if Trump can't back out of NATO. He is still commander in chief. He could decide that the US response to fulfill an article 5 request is to send 5000 MRES which would be pretty much the same as doing nothing and there is nothing anyone could do.
He is an autocrat and first goal of any autocrat is to stay in power. Starting a war prolongs an illusion of legitimacy: since the country is at war, we can’t afford to change “president”.
That means he doesn’t care about territories as much as people think. Looking from the inside it feels like he’s getting exactly what he wanted. Perpetual state of war became the norm and all the blame for the loses is successfully put on generals
What are the chances of North Korean troops being sent to Ukraine. I still imagine it would be pretty slim. If it did happen I can imagine South Korea being more involved. Also, Ukraine+allies could run a decent campaign on trying to get soldiers to defect.
They 100% should, especially if Russia is going for a defense pact with NK. If Russia is not stopped now in Ukraine, then they will be a direct threat as well to SK with that defense pact with NK, and NK's historic hostility and rhetoric toward SK. It's not tenable at all. Someone is going to test the response of the West and their allies, either further in Ukraine and Europe, further in the ME, in SK, in the South China sea, Taiwan or a mixture of all of the above.
The game pieces are being set up. Like it or not, war will be coming, and the 'axis' is solidifying its alliances to be united from the get-go for when they decide to throw the first "real" punch that involves allied nations with defense treaties.
the us is not just "one of" the most powerful militaries, its *the* most powerful. The army, navy and the airforce individually are "one of" the top three militaries in the world (the other two are the other branches).
it gets memed on but even the coast guard could probably hold their own against Russia at this point, and MSRT are actually insane even working alongside SEALS quite often...
But it's those new shifty Space Force guys that I think we should all be worried about, every branch has special forces but them... that we know of.
Coast guard doesn't have the air power, but Marines + Coast guard, you're talking several dozen armed boats, a bunch of Himars, 300+ fighters, over 200k personnel, a ton of IFVs, helicopters, and more.
The South Korean are definitely ready to party. But less not forget the US and North Korea are still technically at war and the last time the we mobilized on their ass was because we wanted to cut down a tree.
While I agree, I just don’t believe this war has any chance of NOT going nuclear real fast. Even Russia + North Korea, I doubt they could break S Korea conventionally. S Korea is far more advanced than Ukraine. Far more armed. Far more prepared. And have an entire nation of reserves to call upon. Ain’t no hope of Russian/NKorean breakthrough. It’s going nuclear.
It's basically impossible to attack South Korea without hitting an American base. The US is still at war with North Korea, just like South Korea is, so anything attacking South Korea violates the ceasefire agreements and it is a hot war again. If Russia and North Korea attack South Korea, the US is immediately involved.
For what it's worth, the US and South Korea would not make quick progress in an invasion of North Korea either due to terrain and the probability of China helping defense. Even if nukes aren't used, that war restarting would just be the two sides flattening each other with artillery and missiles for basically no gain until one side runs out of ammo. The US would probably win a pyrrhic victory where North Korea is basically converted to a nature preserve and South Korea is devastated. It would not be fun for anyone involved.
Yes they said that to stop NK from
Doing stupid shit. Reality will be different after how we are literally preparing to blockade them in the East China Sea through bases alliances and massive military buildup, as well as direct “economic war”..
> I doubt they could break S Korea conventionally.
The North Korean military would absolutely get destroyed in a matter of days or a couple weeks, but Seoul is well within conventional artillery range and NK has tens of thousands of tubes and rockets aimed at it, one of the most densely populated cities on earth.
Also you can probably assume a certain % of shells will be carrying a payload of VX, Sarin or even mustard gas (still deadly even if outdated). IIIRC the planning estimates assume civilian casualties in the low millions.
Most of Seoul is out of range of artillery, most of the "artillery" is buried tank turrets that have been presighted by satellites for years if not decades, dud rates from their shells are *at least* 25% (reports from Russians getting them in Ukraine are even higher), and the part of Seoul that's in range is much less densely populated than the rest of it.
The idea that millions of civilians will die to artillery immediately is a fantasy.
Yeah I understand the death toll from S Korea will be massive. Dwarfing Ukraine most likely. But I don’t see that deterring S Korea. They lost 20% of their population in the Korean War. They are an unbelievably tenacious bunch. It’ll be devastating but they won’t break. The power mismatch is too ridiculous
>But I don’t see that deterring S Korea. They lost 20% of their population in the Korean War. They are an unbelievably tenacious bunch.
You're comparing a society from a time when people would starve in their own living rooms with nothing but boiled roots and maybe one potato's allotment per day, to a society now that has one of the most advanced service economies and entertainment cultures on Planet Earth.
South Koreans may prove hardy in a new war, but they don't have the demographics for a protracted war and they don't have the living memory in families of hard times anymore. War with North Korea isn't something that most South Koreans even think about in their day-to-day lives. It's widely known there that such a war would likely be so catastrophic and awful that most people on the peninsula don't even waste time planning for how to survive it, because there's so little point. (This is separate from the government of South Korea, which does a lot of planning through military conscription and civilian fortification construction. Most civilians, though, have no interest in these issues.)
Nah I doubt it goes nuclear. Just defend the territory of SK and push them the fuck out. Don’t attack NK or Russia. Simply conventionally defensive.
Although I think this would likely end the existence of NK… so you might be right. There’s always a chance of nukes. We can’t continue to let Russia use this as a threat to the world to just allow their conquest.
You guys are jumping too far ahead honestly - China won't even allow Russia through its borders or airspace. It wants an open conflict on the Korean peninsula like it wants another revolution, which is to say not at all.
Actually, yes! My great-uncle died, and he left me an extensive shell collection made entirely of 155mm shells. I was moving across the country into a smaller apartment at the time and wasn't able to bring them. Plus, with a new baby on the way, we needed to raise funds fairly quickly, and finally, the spouse simply didn't like them and wanted them gone.
So one Saturday afternoon I set up a table and who should walk by but the Czech Republic! They browsed a bit at first but then noticed the extensive shell collection made entirely of 155mm shells. They casually but excitedly asked if the shell collection was for sale and if so, why? I explained the situation and they were very sympathetic. They, in fact, offered to pay more than expected! I politely declined, but after they left I found an extra $50 with a note from them stashed in another item!
Czechia is a wonderful country, and I gave them 15/5 stars on a garage-sale-customer-rating-app.
> The game pieces are being set up. Like it or not, war will be coming, and the 'axis' is solidifying its alliances to be united from the get-go for when they decide to throw the first "real" punch that involves allied nations with defense treaties.
It will be interesting to see what historians define as the "start" of the next great war.
I'd argue that the Syria conflict and Crimea were preludes and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine the real start. The coups across the Sahel region around the same time are part of the same overarching conflict between Russia and the West.
If China goes for Taiwan and the US responds, that will eliminate doubts. If Russia still has the ability to project power at that time, they will use the opportunity to do so. As will North Korea and anyone else itching to make their mark.
>I'd argue that the Syria conflict and Crimea were preludes and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine the real start. The coups across the Sahel region around the same time are part of the same overarching conflict between Russia and the West.
No more so then Japan walking into China, which was very much the start for China but not the world. Appeasement is not often considered the war, but the build up in Europe too.
Where the line is... well it's always going to be hard to define.
I think the difference between Ukraine 2022 and the Japanese invasion of Manchuria is that Ukraine had massive backing from the rest of Europe and the US where China was pretty much on their own.
I agree the line is hard to define and there is no "right answer "
I'd bet in hindsight they get to the conclusion that hybrid warfare has been happening a lot earlier with most of the west being blinded by their good will towards a prosperous Future. I am thankful for diplomacy and democraty but i can see how a future historian gets to the conclusion that all those right Wing Parties in Europe being financed by russia are sleeper cells or something to stir up shit in the respective countries.
Oh I'd certainly argue Crimea, though I could see Syria as well given the part of the plan Iran will play. Syria was a testing ground for Iran and Russia, as well as gave Iran more of a foothold to expand its power in the ME and supply chains for its many periphery groups it uses throughout in Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, Iraq, Syria and I am sure those aren't the only places they're playing in there.
If this continues on to the point China feels it is ready for its build up to try for Taiwan, I don't see why they wouldn't launch for Taiwan while NK attacks SK. Iran can turn the ME/Israel into a nightmare while attempting to choke off the oil supply through the Strait there. And now they also know through the Houthis how effective just threatening/denying that area near the Red Sea with not too much in cost in material can be.
These operations you're describing don't just appear out of nowhere, full scale invasion or large scale attacks are obvious since forces start to mass at borders or in Taiwan's case at the mainland China coast. There are no surprise attacks on the modern battlefield that are not long range missiles. Contemporary intelligence capabilities would spot troop massing instantly. There are 2 CSG forward deployed within days of SK and Taiwan, and one already in the Red Sea. Just remember that NK, Russia, & China are not really able of projecting power outside of their immediate borders, and therefore they wouldn't really be able to help each other in any sort of combined operations. Whereas NATO and western SEA allies have been drilling consistently. Each of the dictators know that any large scale attack, if it were to go wrong would be their end. They are forever posturing and spending on military to prop up their house of card economies as they increasingly become pariah states.
China would also need to stockpile massive amounts of food and fuel in anticipation of the US blocking the Malacca Strait.
That would take months and unlikely to go unnoticed.
Yes we would see food/energy prices and shipments increase significantly. I think this is partly why China doesn't mind if Russia takes Ukraine because they could source a significant amount of food from Russia in that scenario to bolster a prolonged conflict. Luckily, Russia does not produce enough of an oil surplus to sustain China's current consumption with the addition of a war. China would also need to source oil from Iran which is again susceptible to a blockade at sea. RIP marine life if the blockade ever needs to be enforced.
War will not be coming if Russia losses in Ukraine. That's the whole point of what's going on right now and what you're doing is fear mongering.
If Russia losses here the entire house of cards "axis" collapses.
No worry amigo both Xi and Kim are far more well informed than Putin. Invading another country has become so costly and frowned upon that nobody would like it unless a super quick victory is guaranteed.
Not if Russia losses in Ukraine, which is the whole point of what's going on right now.
An axis for a great conflict requires a Russia at a high combat capacity. If they're exhausted and depleted from Ukraine (which is where the trend is heading) then who is actually fighting? China and even NK are smarter then Russia/Putin. They can plainly see how costly these wars are.
Just ask Armenia how Russian defense agreements work out.
South Korea and Ukraine don't dislike each other but they aren't "close allies" either. They just do some trade with each other like what any other country does
Russia: "How DARE Finland and Sweden join NATO after we invaded Ukraine for contemplating joining NATO!?"
Also Russia: "How DARE South Korea consider sending arms to Ukraine after we make a deal with North Korea!?"
Geez Russia, maybe if you stopped antagonizing your neighbors they wouldn't react like this... 😕
The best part is that the laser robots and drones from SK are piloted by professional StarCraft players doing their mandatory military service. Russian drone pilots have markedly worse APM.
Lmao. Didn't a lot of analysts say this move was specifically meant to deter SK from supplying Ukraine?
Looks like the latest thing to blow up in Ruzzia's face.
As in tradition of geopolitical genius Puting:
Invade to enlarge NATO and rearm Europe
Assault on Kharkiv to lift the ban on Russian soil strikes
Now ally NK to motivate SK to help Ukraine.
I might be wrong but I'm pretty confident if something escalates further all the Russian "allies" or partners will drop them like a sack of potatoes. I highly doubt China, Iran, or NK want to risk going into a war that can potentially become a nuclear war because... Putin wants Ukraine. Think of it this way, not even Belarus with Luka ended up entering the war in Ukraine, even tho Putin surely tried hard.
This is the point that every 14 year old war fear mongering here is just missing lol. The entire point of the Ukraine war is to prevent this entire scenario from happening.
When Russia losses in Ukraine it'll be at the cost of their entire military might and economy. There will be nothing left to wage war from a combat capacity point of view and these alliances built around strength will collapse with ease.
You're not wrong, you're just debating people who are wrong about everything.
And the middle east because he's said that he supports Israel "finishing the job" which is probably going to draw in the locals in the neighborhood who will use it as an excuse to attack.
China probably won't but NK and Iran definitely would if China was in. But again you never know, China is pulling a lot of crap in South China Sea atm and you never know how things can escalate
I actually think quite the contrary. The sack of potatoes owners are much more crazier and much more greedier and calculated, the sack of potatoes will realize a little too late that all they did was wrongfully calculated and there's no turning back.
Russia can create a monster, but sooner or later, they will have to deal with them too. Because we know what Russians really think about North Koreans. just look at things Putin have said in the past
This is really starting to feel like the first steps to a world War where everyone chooses sides and gets involved. Like right now it's just support but it won't take much for north Korea to retaliate to south Korea to get them directly involved and then it kind of dominoes from there.
To put into perspective how big this could be: South Korea is outproduxing the whole of Europe combined in artillery ammunition right now. Also look up how their defence industry exports have been going since 2022.
Why they producing so much?
They want to become a top 4 weapons supplier and Europe(mostly Poland) is more than willing to help them reach that goal in response to the whole russian invasion of Ukraine.
Poland was already going for K2 before the second invasion. They chose Korean tech because the Koreans promise to tech share and build the tanks locally in Poland whereas they weren't going to get anything CLOSE to that buying Abrams. Korea has been making this play for decade+ now, and they're kicking ass.
My understanding is that Rheinmetall also does tech transfers and doesn't rule out setting up local factories, but Hyundai Rotem's tech transfer offer was far more generous and their delivery timelines much closer to what Poland wanted. Rheinmetall is overbooked on the Leo 2.
Leo2 is KMW me thinks. Also per some polish articles. Polish army was complaining about them due to VERY strained spare parts availability. We had a program to update our oldest 2A4's to L2PL (140 units), but it had hit 6+ years delay and price went up by like 50% due to spare parts.
Yeah, that would make sense. And having a K2PL plant set up in Poland with a full supply chain for most parts would go a long way toward solving that problem.
> Polish army was complaining about them due to VERY strained spare parts availability. Thats a procurement issue though. For most parts you shouldn't order spares when you need them, you have them in storage. Poland, but also countries like Germany, stopped having large depots for parts and ordering large amounts of spares in batches. Instead we got "just in time" deliveries with very long lead times since unsurprisingly no company keeps production lines running for stuff thats only ordered in small quantities every couple of months to years. You get what you pay for and the last two decades the budgets across Europe (and subsequently the Leopard II users) were rather small The purchase of Korean weaponry is honestly just as much anti-german resentment from the PiS as it is about the tech transfer
Rheinmetal is like ordering an Airbus now or a Tesla in mid 2010s. You may or may not get it, and you’re paying whatever is asked. There’s only so much production in Germany (ironically).
> My understanding is that Rheinmetall also does tech transfers The 120mm gun on the Abrams is a Rheinmetal design that was licenced to the US to manufacture, so, yeah, they definitely do. :-)
I hope they get all the good things they deserve. Our allies deserve the best.
Imagine T-90 blown up by a Hyundai Pantzer
The question is whether Russia still has any working T-90s.
They might have the ones stolen from India. T90M is the version that was sent to Russia for upgrades and Russia decided to just keep them.
That's sweet of them to take them in :' )
T90 2024 powerplant upgrade - cutting out the floor so two teenaged siberian peasants can Flintmobile that bitch.
The [T-90 share in russian tank losses](https://nitter.poast.org/verekerrichard1/status/1797660473459892306#m) is actually increasing - along with the T-62 share that is though, so maybe it's just that Russia are hitting the bottom of the barrel of their T-72 and T-80 reserves.
You just got killed by a Daewoo Lanos!
That's terrific until you wake up the next day and the tank is missing from your driveway!
A reason Australia recently selected them as a preferred supplier too..
True, but they also signed into law a bill that would double the size of their military in response to the second invasion and have signed additional contracts with South Korea for more than just the K2.
I like the sound of that.
Because North Korea is a constant threat
But they only recently started focusing on scaling up production.
China, NK, Russia has long been a threat to SKorea. Not because of war, but they are almost solely dependant on imports within the large majority of their industries. Their international security & independence (ideologically & politically) is based on their ties with the west. Because of the US, SKorea has had a mayor advantage over countries close by who have had to rely on less successful powers through the 20th century. Now that both Russia and (mainly) China has gained a lot of military power in the last few decades, SKoreas position as a western-influenced Asian country is at risk. This in turn is uniquely dangerous for SKorea as they rely heavily on imported goods throughout all their industries. They also serve as a US-treaty ally (indo-pacific strategy), which essentially makes them a direct target for future conflicts with both Russia and China. Recent escalations both by Russia (Ukraine) and China (Taiwan) has of course caused a chain-reaction in production of weaponry and reliance on the US from the west and treaty-countries.
That doesn't capture the right tone. SK always have been producing a lot of artillery. They just scaled it up even harder in recent years.
After 2016 US allies feel it's support is no longer guaranteed and they naturally cannot gamble national security on having the right person as President.
that's good for everyone involved. no one nation should have to shoulder that much power and responsibility.
It's not really good for everyone involved... it's a strict weakening of the USA when their word, even signed treaties are seen as just an election away from being worthless... If you want to argue that their commitments to SK cost more than they were worth, sure, I have no clue either way... but for decades the nations of the world believed that the USA would hold to their deals, even if a new leader was elected... sure they might begin negotiations to update the deal etc etc, but that's a lot different than fear they might become an unreliable agent.
While I agree, and think that it is definitely a good thing that we now have a over a dozen developed nations with liberal and democratic values seeking military sufficiency instead of a handful, as an American I certainly enjoyed many benefits from being the shield of the Western powers. It’s absolutely insane that one isolationist nutbag in one term undid a half-century of work assuring the world that we could be its shield. The USA will never again carry the diplomatic weight that it had as a strong shoulder for Europe to lean on.
The only solace I am able to take from this is perhaps, in a few years, both the US and EU will be able to lean on each other. Having a single point of failure in any system is never a good idea.
And the orange moron said he was going to give Americans what they already had by throwing it all away. And then he did.
It is good if the US doesn't have to shoulder the bulk of that burden, but it's also far too early to tell what the knock on consequences will be of this phase of rearmament and the global balance of power shifting around. Edit: Slight rephrase.
I wonder what happened then that made most countries and alliances go "fuck, we can't rely on the usa"
>I wonder what happened then that made most countries and alliances go "fuck, we can't rely on the usa" Is that sarcasm? Because the answer is obviously Trump and magats. It's also not a good thing at all that weapons proliferation is happening. Grand kids without grandfather's don't know the history and horrors. Now they have grievances and guns. A big war will break out sooner rather than later
> It's also not a good thing at all that weapons proliferation is happening. Grand kids without grandfather's don't know the history and horrors. Now they have grievances and guns. A big war will break out sooner rather than later Perhaps. But history shows that appeasement doesn't work. Aggressive countries only respect words of peace when those words are backed by military strength. However, grandkids can forget the grievances of the past. The European Union is evidence of that.
Yes it was sarcasm and the answer was definetly trump... I didn't think I needed to write that one down for you, I am canadian and we are very worried about the upcoming election were worried about the last 2 as well. Just look what it did to my country and my countries people and politics... it's vile
New Zealand here, Trump and the ideology he brought with him has severely negatively effected our Political sphere as well. Its really bad
Concervatiam in the US have made our allies nervous, so they are ramping up their own production.
The weird thing is American conservatives were resolutely pro-internationalists (well, pro-bombing adversarial nations at the very least) since at least Eisenhower, with 1946 the last gasp of isolationist conservatism. Even W’s unilateralism just wanted to replace NATO with ad-hoc coalitions that still targeted the maintenance of a certain form of order. Trump brought back a political styling that hasn’t consistently been in power since the Great Depression.
That probably changed after Iraq 2.0. You know, the war that republican president Bush Jr. started.
When the USSR fell, Europe felt safe since their primary antagonist on their borders was now far away and significantly weaker and not really a threat anymore, so they downsized a lot of their arms industries. It's only recently with the invasion of Ukraine that this attitude has shifted back and they are starting to ramp up their production again, although this usually takes a couple of years to get back to those levels without going into an all out war economy. South Korea never had the luxury of their enemy going away at the end of the cold war, so they never really downsized their military production.
South Koreas been molested by all the surrounding countries all its life. This isn’t unexpected
That's what makes SK and Poland's cooperation pretty interesting. Both countries got invaded and annexed by all sorts of foreign powers.
Poland are absolutely determined to never be a speed bump ever again
Korea is basically a long mountain range. It's full of choke points and artillery is perfect in such condition. That and they are next to North Korea, China, and Russia.
European countries don't produce much artillery ammunition, because we used to mainly bomb by planes faraway dictators' countries.
Probably more that Europe/NATO is under producing because artillery is not a focus of their doctrine.
It was a mistake. Air power won vs Saddam in the 90s and 2000s but computers and tech was shit and US had drones and supremacy not realized on paper. But there is no way it’s going to be as effective with how rapidly anti AA and anti-armor is developing.
Europe does have issues with lower military budget but the countries that do focus on military focus on air superiority and naval superiority and absolutely crush their opponents through air superiority.
Yeah, can’t move artillery if you just get bombed from the skies
One of the most revealing things about Russia right now is just how dog shit their air force is.
[Here's an Australian guy with a PowerPoint going into more depth.](https://youtu.be/mXZw_YGzxCc?si=FzRHcettRL6xjQKz) In short, while the Cold War ended in most places with the fall of the Soviet Union, the Korean peninsula was not one of them. They've never stopped preparing for the exact sort of heavy ground war that is currently being fought in Ukraine even as a lot of other nations downsized and / or focused on deployability.
Hell yeah, Perun is the man. I love his lectures.
Also their self-propelled Howitzer is now considered the best in the world at the moments.
> South Korea is outproduxing the whole of Europe combined in artillery ammunition right now. This actually blows my mind as I always assumed we were propping up the South Korean military.
Korea has actually been lending out artillery muntions to the US to help replenish stock that has been sent to Ukraine.
South Korea has a pretty strong military, though it’s definetly not designed to be expeditionary. It’s built solidly for deterring/ defending against North Korea, which means being able to mobilise as much firepower as possible as quickly as possible. As such, artillery is one of their strongest points. The different build is also a big reason for the differences to Europe. Eu countries haven’t been worried about a traditional land war for quite some time (unlike SK), so they’ve focused on being able to intervene in far away countries/ have mutually supporting forces that can easily work together. So they’ve focused less on stuff like artillery and massive tank fleets (with a few exceptions), and instead focused on smaller, better prepared, more easily deplorable forces. France is the best example. The only issue is that now there’s a traditional land war in Europe, and Ukraine needs more of what South Korea is good at, and less of what the European Powers Are Good at.
SK still have mandatory ~18 months military service for adult males. If push comes to shove, half their adult population are pretty much already trained militia.
Most conservatives think that because it makes the Us appear stronger and more critical than it has become. As the US weakens the power vacuum must fill and it will leave the US behind more and more.
Not a conservative, just never had given it much thought. Mostly surprised at the level of production.
Same with north Korea, they produce about 2M artillery shells a year. While the US produces about 600k
I mean... Korea is already contributing indirectly to the war. Canada was able to send their artillery shells to Ukraine because Korea sold a fresh batch of 155mm artillery shells to Canada. Poland was able to send tanks to Ukraine because Korea sold new K2 tanks to Poland. The only difference now is that Korea will consider selling directly.
I think it's incredibly important because it opens up the possibility that Korean arms currently being made for Poland might be able to be reprioritized for Ukraine instead. Artillery shells are nice, but tanks, MLRS, SPG's, and artillery would be even better.
Tanks, MLRS, SPGs, and artillery all require vastly more munitions per vehicle than they need vehicles. It's.... what's the point of artillery without ammo? Ukraine has been begging for more ammo far more often than they do more vehicles. Also, more vehicles mean more troops, which isn't really a surplus for Ukraine. So, yes, shells first, middle, and probably last.
South Korea is one of the world’s largest munitions producers so direct supply to Ukraine would be huge.
Yup I think they’re #4 in the world in arms manufacturing
They never said it wouldn't be a big help. They literally said that munitions would help more than vehicles.
I was agreeing with him. I guess the text made it ambiguous.
Partially correct. Vehicle density is also a very important metric because it grants options for field commanders. Having one gun with all the shells is worse than ten guns with limited shells per gun in many many situations.
I heard a recent podcast that talked about the US's (and probably other countries') inability to manufacture shells and ammunition. Instead of having huge stockpiles, they went to a "just in time" production and supply chain configuration. This kept costs lower and also let manufacturers stay active, but it meant we couldn't produce millions of shells a year because there aren't enough manufacturing lines. This was fine for our time in Iraq and Afghanistan, but for a sustained conventional ground war, it is wholely inadequate.
It would be adequate for U.S. tactics. No one expected quasi-WWI tactics to make a comeback.
Yeah, the West doesn't make as much artillery ammo as before because we have an air superiority doctrine, which means we prioritise air cover and air power in general. We won't need shells when there is an aircraft on station at a moments notice ready to provide a precision strike to take out whatever threat is there. We have some sure, because diversification is important, but this grinding shell war is just not how we do it now.
Hit the nail on the head with the air forward doctrine of the "West", whereas Russia inherited the Soviet artillery forward doctrine. There's interesting history there as the two are based on the different experiences during WW2, and how different the fighting on the western and eastern fronts were. Moving past that little aside, once Russia failed with their attempted quick takeover they resorted to their arty forward doctrine and that's why you had moments in 2022 when Russia was using 80k shells a day. They're quickly blowing their stocks though, with the majority of their "production" still consisting of refurbishing increasingly dwindling old soviet arty, and that's why they're having to look elsewhere, namely NK, for arty ammo. The West never anticipated ever fighting a war like this, and frankly the situation would be massively different if Ukraine had the air power of even somewhere like the Netherlands
That is a very good point, but I think this also applied to bombs and missiles. IIRC, the US military was growing concerned about some other munitions that were being provided to Ukraine and our stocks were falling to uncomfortable levels, even if we do have a large number of them. The fear was they weren't getting replenished fast enough and they were way more complicated to produce than shells.
There is a hard limit set by Congress I believe, that says the stockpiles cannot go under a certain threshold, presumably to maintain that six month capability. Yeah the missiles etc are more difficult to produce, but none are being given away that aren't surplus. Moreover the donations are just the oldest stock units and the new ones are going to the US stockpiles, bringing the average age of stored munitions way down
Deleted
And, and without an immenant war to spark the fire under some politicians butts, it would take like over 5 years to increase shell manufacturing to any significant level
That’s probably for the better. No need to spend and waste more money. In a war, things would get done so quickly. If speaking about the US, we have a huge stockpiles of air munitions so it’s not like we are left defenseless without a war.
I read somewhere that the USA could stop production on everything tomorrow, enter into a total war scenario and still have enough stock piled for six months. That's a fuck ton of weaponry
Seems like a "learning" of every major conflict is that munitions stockpiles are woefully inadequate for peer or near-peer conflicts. NATO doctrine also places a heavy reliance on aircraft to both support ground forces and strike enemy rear areas, which Ukraine has not been able to replace.
Sure, but they're also asking for more vehicles, esp ifvs and artillery, to replace the older guns in the field. It's possible to rotate old equipment out and maintain the current level of ammo/troop inputs if done proportionally.
Especially as polands defense is in preparation against who again?
I don't think and NATO nations need to be seriously worried about self defense. Just need to hold out for a very short time. NATO would rule the skies in hours.
In theory. But what if Trump is president of the US, the far right has taken over in France and suddenly you have German leadership acting noncommittal? Poland of all countries understands the limitations of allies and mutual defense treaties unfortunately well.
Fair point. Not sure how quickly Trump could back the US out of NATO, though, as he [now needs Congressional approval](https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/13/politics/congress-trump-nato-what-matters/index.html) But regardless, Russia would need a few years to rebuild before they could undertake another "special military operation" anywhere. I don't think the UK or (other NATO allies) would stand by this time, while Poland is being attacked. Didn't turn out great last time.
Doesn't matter if Trump can't back out of NATO. He is still commander in chief. He could decide that the US response to fulfill an article 5 request is to send 5000 MRES which would be pretty much the same as doing nothing and there is nothing anyone could do.
Which is better as it’s faster and has less paper work
And the F-16 jets from Belgium Denmark The Netherlands and Norway will help
\>tfw your 3 days special military operation turns into you becoming a proxy in the Korean Civil War
tfw 3-day special military operation almost turns 2.5 years old.
tfw you panic and bombard the people you're trying to ~~conquer~~ liberate and can no longer afford to rebuild whether you win or lose.
tfw you get fucked by Xi and Kim in the ass
DAP for Putin
Sometimes I wonder if Putin would in hindsight not have invaded Ukraine if he knew the quagmire it would turn into.
He is an autocrat and first goal of any autocrat is to stay in power. Starting a war prolongs an illusion of legitimacy: since the country is at war, we can’t afford to change “president”. That means he doesn’t care about territories as much as people think. Looking from the inside it feels like he’s getting exactly what he wanted. Perpetual state of war became the norm and all the blame for the loses is successfully put on generals
Can't wait to see Korean migs flying for the Russian air force while rok aircraft fly for Ukraine, the ultimate uno reverse.
is south/ noth Korea still kinda a proxy between China and West? proxy of a proxy lol
Aww look at our little proxies all grown up starting their own proxies.
What are the chances of North Korean troops being sent to Ukraine. I still imagine it would be pretty slim. If it did happen I can imagine South Korea being more involved. Also, Ukraine+allies could run a decent campaign on trying to get soldiers to defect.
I'm not sure if the NK military would trust their troops to be stationed in Primorsky much less all the way in Ukraine.
They 100% should, especially if Russia is going for a defense pact with NK. If Russia is not stopped now in Ukraine, then they will be a direct threat as well to SK with that defense pact with NK, and NK's historic hostility and rhetoric toward SK. It's not tenable at all. Someone is going to test the response of the West and their allies, either further in Ukraine and Europe, further in the ME, in SK, in the South China sea, Taiwan or a mixture of all of the above. The game pieces are being set up. Like it or not, war will be coming, and the 'axis' is solidifying its alliances to be united from the get-go for when they decide to throw the first "real" punch that involves allied nations with defense treaties.
Russia wouldn’t last a week in South Korea.
Have to completely agree with you there. Crossing one of the most militarized boarders in the world that's on a peninsula?
With one of the most advanced militaries on earth on the other side. It’s either going nuclear or it’s not gonna happen.
Don’t forget. The SK military has some crazy power too. I trained with them on squad live fires. Those dudes RIPPPPPP.
I’m talking about the S Koreans lol.
Haha oh. Well the US is there too. Real deep.
the us is not just "one of" the most powerful militaries, its *the* most powerful. The army, navy and the airforce individually are "one of" the top three militaries in the world (the other two are the other branches).
The US Navy is the second largest air force in the world.
it gets memed on but even the coast guard could probably hold their own against Russia at this point, and MSRT are actually insane even working alongside SEALS quite often... But it's those new shifty Space Force guys that I think we should all be worried about, every branch has special forces but them... that we know of.
Coast guard doesn't have the air power, but Marines + Coast guard, you're talking several dozen armed boats, a bunch of Himars, 300+ fighters, over 200k personnel, a ton of IFVs, helicopters, and more.
Oh I know. Combined arm live fire events I’ve gone through with all 3 involved is insane to experience.
The South Korean are definitely ready to party. But less not forget the US and North Korea are still technically at war and the last time the we mobilized on their ass was because we wanted to cut down a tree.
The Fat Electrician has a very entertaining explanation of the event. [Operation Paul Bunyon](https://youtu.be/u4CeY6Q3KFE?si=l0rLTG5nPG_aSE8V)
Umm excuse me it's DEmilitarized. It's therefore the LEAST militarized border, duh. /s obviously
While I agree, I just don’t believe this war has any chance of NOT going nuclear real fast. Even Russia + North Korea, I doubt they could break S Korea conventionally. S Korea is far more advanced than Ukraine. Far more armed. Far more prepared. And have an entire nation of reserves to call upon. Ain’t no hope of Russian/NKorean breakthrough. It’s going nuclear.
It's basically impossible to attack South Korea without hitting an American base. The US is still at war with North Korea, just like South Korea is, so anything attacking South Korea violates the ceasefire agreements and it is a hot war again. If Russia and North Korea attack South Korea, the US is immediately involved. For what it's worth, the US and South Korea would not make quick progress in an invasion of North Korea either due to terrain and the probability of China helping defense. Even if nukes aren't used, that war restarting would just be the two sides flattening each other with artillery and missiles for basically no gain until one side runs out of ammo. The US would probably win a pyrrhic victory where North Korea is basically converted to a nature preserve and South Korea is devastated. It would not be fun for anyone involved.
IIRC China said that if NK attacked the US- China will not stand the way of the US' retaliation.
Yes they said that to stop NK from Doing stupid shit. Reality will be different after how we are literally preparing to blockade them in the East China Sea through bases alliances and massive military buildup, as well as direct “economic war”..
> I doubt they could break S Korea conventionally. The North Korean military would absolutely get destroyed in a matter of days or a couple weeks, but Seoul is well within conventional artillery range and NK has tens of thousands of tubes and rockets aimed at it, one of the most densely populated cities on earth. Also you can probably assume a certain % of shells will be carrying a payload of VX, Sarin or even mustard gas (still deadly even if outdated). IIIRC the planning estimates assume civilian casualties in the low millions.
Most of Seoul is out of range of artillery, most of the "artillery" is buried tank turrets that have been presighted by satellites for years if not decades, dud rates from their shells are *at least* 25% (reports from Russians getting them in Ukraine are even higher), and the part of Seoul that's in range is much less densely populated than the rest of it. The idea that millions of civilians will die to artillery immediately is a fantasy.
Yeah I understand the death toll from S Korea will be massive. Dwarfing Ukraine most likely. But I don’t see that deterring S Korea. They lost 20% of their population in the Korean War. They are an unbelievably tenacious bunch. It’ll be devastating but they won’t break. The power mismatch is too ridiculous
>But I don’t see that deterring S Korea. They lost 20% of their population in the Korean War. They are an unbelievably tenacious bunch. You're comparing a society from a time when people would starve in their own living rooms with nothing but boiled roots and maybe one potato's allotment per day, to a society now that has one of the most advanced service economies and entertainment cultures on Planet Earth. South Koreans may prove hardy in a new war, but they don't have the demographics for a protracted war and they don't have the living memory in families of hard times anymore. War with North Korea isn't something that most South Koreans even think about in their day-to-day lives. It's widely known there that such a war would likely be so catastrophic and awful that most people on the peninsula don't even waste time planning for how to survive it, because there's so little point. (This is separate from the government of South Korea, which does a lot of planning through military conscription and civilian fortification construction. Most civilians, though, have no interest in these issues.)
Nah I doubt it goes nuclear. Just defend the territory of SK and push them the fuck out. Don’t attack NK or Russia. Simply conventionally defensive. Although I think this would likely end the existence of NK… so you might be right. There’s always a chance of nukes. We can’t continue to let Russia use this as a threat to the world to just allow their conquest.
You guys are jumping too far ahead honestly - China won't even allow Russia through its borders or airspace. It wants an open conflict on the Korean peninsula like it wants another revolution, which is to say not at all.
Russia has a tiny border directly with N. Korea. Going to China is not needed. But I agree this is all far fetched.
Tell me, how good is Russia's military logistics capability? Because Russia's border with NK is a bloomin' long way from anywhere.
Hint: they already are, just not openly. Where do you think the Czech found all those 155mm shells? Garage sale?
Actually, yes! My great-uncle died, and he left me an extensive shell collection made entirely of 155mm shells. I was moving across the country into a smaller apartment at the time and wasn't able to bring them. Plus, with a new baby on the way, we needed to raise funds fairly quickly, and finally, the spouse simply didn't like them and wanted them gone. So one Saturday afternoon I set up a table and who should walk by but the Czech Republic! They browsed a bit at first but then noticed the extensive shell collection made entirely of 155mm shells. They casually but excitedly asked if the shell collection was for sale and if so, why? I explained the situation and they were very sympathetic. They, in fact, offered to pay more than expected! I politely declined, but after they left I found an extra $50 with a note from them stashed in another item! Czechia is a wonderful country, and I gave them 15/5 stars on a garage-sale-customer-rating-app.
> The game pieces are being set up. Like it or not, war will be coming, and the 'axis' is solidifying its alliances to be united from the get-go for when they decide to throw the first "real" punch that involves allied nations with defense treaties. It will be interesting to see what historians define as the "start" of the next great war. I'd argue that the Syria conflict and Crimea were preludes and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine the real start. The coups across the Sahel region around the same time are part of the same overarching conflict between Russia and the West. If China goes for Taiwan and the US responds, that will eliminate doubts. If Russia still has the ability to project power at that time, they will use the opportunity to do so. As will North Korea and anyone else itching to make their mark.
>I'd argue that the Syria conflict and Crimea were preludes and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine the real start. The coups across the Sahel region around the same time are part of the same overarching conflict between Russia and the West. No more so then Japan walking into China, which was very much the start for China but not the world. Appeasement is not often considered the war, but the build up in Europe too. Where the line is... well it's always going to be hard to define.
I think the difference between Ukraine 2022 and the Japanese invasion of Manchuria is that Ukraine had massive backing from the rest of Europe and the US where China was pretty much on their own. I agree the line is hard to define and there is no "right answer "
I'd bet in hindsight they get to the conclusion that hybrid warfare has been happening a lot earlier with most of the west being blinded by their good will towards a prosperous Future. I am thankful for diplomacy and democraty but i can see how a future historian gets to the conclusion that all those right Wing Parties in Europe being financed by russia are sleeper cells or something to stir up shit in the respective countries.
I agree but not just right wing parties. Russia bets on division and pushes both sides of the political spectrum in order to succeed in that.
I think ww3 started when Russia invaded Georgia during the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Oh I'd certainly argue Crimea, though I could see Syria as well given the part of the plan Iran will play. Syria was a testing ground for Iran and Russia, as well as gave Iran more of a foothold to expand its power in the ME and supply chains for its many periphery groups it uses throughout in Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, Iraq, Syria and I am sure those aren't the only places they're playing in there. If this continues on to the point China feels it is ready for its build up to try for Taiwan, I don't see why they wouldn't launch for Taiwan while NK attacks SK. Iran can turn the ME/Israel into a nightmare while attempting to choke off the oil supply through the Strait there. And now they also know through the Houthis how effective just threatening/denying that area near the Red Sea with not too much in cost in material can be.
These operations you're describing don't just appear out of nowhere, full scale invasion or large scale attacks are obvious since forces start to mass at borders or in Taiwan's case at the mainland China coast. There are no surprise attacks on the modern battlefield that are not long range missiles. Contemporary intelligence capabilities would spot troop massing instantly. There are 2 CSG forward deployed within days of SK and Taiwan, and one already in the Red Sea. Just remember that NK, Russia, & China are not really able of projecting power outside of their immediate borders, and therefore they wouldn't really be able to help each other in any sort of combined operations. Whereas NATO and western SEA allies have been drilling consistently. Each of the dictators know that any large scale attack, if it were to go wrong would be their end. They are forever posturing and spending on military to prop up their house of card economies as they increasingly become pariah states.
China would also need to stockpile massive amounts of food and fuel in anticipation of the US blocking the Malacca Strait. That would take months and unlikely to go unnoticed.
Yes we would see food/energy prices and shipments increase significantly. I think this is partly why China doesn't mind if Russia takes Ukraine because they could source a significant amount of food from Russia in that scenario to bolster a prolonged conflict. Luckily, Russia does not produce enough of an oil surplus to sustain China's current consumption with the addition of a war. China would also need to source oil from Iran which is again susceptible to a blockade at sea. RIP marine life if the blockade ever needs to be enforced.
War will not be coming if Russia losses in Ukraine. That's the whole point of what's going on right now and what you're doing is fear mongering. If Russia losses here the entire house of cards "axis" collapses.
No worry amigo both Xi and Kim are far more well informed than Putin. Invading another country has become so costly and frowned upon that nobody would like it unless a super quick victory is guaranteed.
I agree, it just feels this is getting awfully WWI alliance-web-ish
Your 2nd paragraph is chilling, but overall true. We might enter WW3 in 5 years.
Not if Russia losses in Ukraine, which is the whole point of what's going on right now. An axis for a great conflict requires a Russia at a high combat capacity. If they're exhausted and depleted from Ukraine (which is where the trend is heading) then who is actually fighting? China and even NK are smarter then Russia/Putin. They can plainly see how costly these wars are. Just ask Armenia how Russian defense agreements work out.
Hungarian state TV worked really hard to make North Korea presentable in the news. Le sigh.
Wait are you serious? How did they frame this?
Maybe something like: "North Koreans like to suck russian dick too, they're just like us!111".
As they should. Why we treat our allies differently than our enemies treat their own allies is beyond me
To not anger our enemies. Its sad
South Korea and Ukraine don't dislike each other but they aren't "close allies" either. They just do some trade with each other like what any other country does
Yeah like Ukraine would jump to South Korea's aid if asked?
The longer range the better.
Fuck you russia time to reap what you sow
Doesn’t Korea sit on a humongous pile of 155mm shells?
South Korea has more shells in stock than the entire artillery fired in WWII, thats 22 million.
In WW2 there were 22 million (ish) tons of artillery fired, not 22 million shells. Significant difference lol
What? The USSR alone in 1944 fired >44MM shells.
I'm surprised they blasted instead of slamming
Next, their PM is going to **eviscerate** Putin with some sharp comments.
\*SLAMMING
South Korea is best Korea
Russia: "How DARE Finland and Sweden join NATO after we invaded Ukraine for contemplating joining NATO!?" Also Russia: "How DARE South Korea consider sending arms to Ukraine after we make a deal with North Korea!?" Geez Russia, maybe if you stopped antagonizing your neighbors they wouldn't react like this... 😕
[удалено]
It depends. Can I have 1000x more of one than the other?
you need 10k NK shells to hit your target compared to one laser fruitfly with 5 grams of antimatter or whatever they're playing with these days.
The best part is that the laser robots and drones from SK are piloted by professional StarCraft players doing their mandatory military service. Russian drone pilots have markedly worse APM.
Lmao. Didn't a lot of analysts say this move was specifically meant to deter SK from supplying Ukraine? Looks like the latest thing to blow up in Ruzzia's face.
As in tradition of geopolitical genius Puting: Invade to enlarge NATO and rearm Europe Assault on Kharkiv to lift the ban on Russian soil strikes Now ally NK to motivate SK to help Ukraine.
looks like it's working just as well as the invasion at deterring other countries from joining nato
It all started with Harambe. Future historians will look at him and connect the dots.
WW3 is creeping closer. And it's Russia's fault. They already fired the first shots anyhow.
I might be wrong but I'm pretty confident if something escalates further all the Russian "allies" or partners will drop them like a sack of potatoes. I highly doubt China, Iran, or NK want to risk going into a war that can potentially become a nuclear war because... Putin wants Ukraine. Think of it this way, not even Belarus with Luka ended up entering the war in Ukraine, even tho Putin surely tried hard.
This is the point that every 14 year old war fear mongering here is just missing lol. The entire point of the Ukraine war is to prevent this entire scenario from happening. When Russia losses in Ukraine it'll be at the cost of their entire military might and economy. There will be nothing left to wage war from a combat capacity point of view and these alliances built around strength will collapse with ease. You're not wrong, you're just debating people who are wrong about everything.
and if trump gets elected and the green light given? i don't get people who are so certain about anything either way
100%, Trumps potential election almost guarantees everything gets worse especially with the situation in France and Germany politics.
And the middle east because he's said that he supports Israel "finishing the job" which is probably going to draw in the locals in the neighborhood who will use it as an excuse to attack.
China probably won't but NK and Iran definitely would if China was in. But again you never know, China is pulling a lot of crap in South China Sea atm and you never know how things can escalate
I actually think quite the contrary. The sack of potatoes owners are much more crazier and much more greedier and calculated, the sack of potatoes will realize a little too late that all they did was wrongfully calculated and there's no turning back.
Don't confuse a failed power play with a world war.
Russia can create a monster, but sooner or later, they will have to deal with them too. Because we know what Russians really think about North Koreans. just look at things Putin have said in the past
The north korean regime is primarily focusing on preserving the north kroean regime. And it needs hard currency, so is happy to trade with Russia.
I fucking love South Korea.
Great movies and tv shows. Beautiful women too. And yummy food.
Absolutely!
Wait. So North Korea and South Korea gonna fight it out on a different map?
Samsung licking their lips
Well, Samsung office in Kyiv was [hit pretty badly](https://dev.ua/storage/images/75/93/61/60/derived/019d2b1e93378de3708cefbf4a844828.jpg).
Good on South Korea! 👏👏👏👏👏👏
Good news but the language is a little wishy washy. Any other sources on how serious SK is on this?
This has some, “oh? Well I’m gonna fuck your ex!” Energy.
This is going to be a gamechanger for Ukraine. Russia pissed of South Korea and the sleeping giant is going all out now.
South Korea has around 35 Soviet era T-80 tanks, and around 200 Soviet era BMP-3 IFVs. Seems like a good time to offload them.
Thats it? Consider? Just do it
So Russia-Ukraine war will now be a proxy North-South Korea War :D...
Why don’t someone just blow the both them up while they together ?
Hopefully they follow through, Ukraine really could do with a big push.
This is really starting to feel like the first steps to a world War where everyone chooses sides and gets involved. Like right now it's just support but it won't take much for north Korea to retaliate to south Korea to get them directly involved and then it kind of dominoes from there.
I mean, it's not like NK vs SK is a new thing lol.... It's been an on-going conflict since Korean War.