North Korea to send more troops, arms to front lines.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-putin-north-korea-drone-latest-updates-b2669012.html

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

At least 60% of the ammunition being used by Russia is being supplied by North Korea.

https://news.google.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?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

[bornontheblue]

They will be bullet sponges 

[Chile_Ute]

On 12/23/2024 at 1:05 PM, bornontheblue said:

They will be bullet sponges 

Probably a better quality of life than if they stayed home.

[InnZoneU]

Why does Russia need NoKo troops and arms if they are totally crushing Ukraine on their own?

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/23/2024 at 4:34 PM, InnZoneU said:

Why does Russia need NoKo troops and arms if they are totally crushing Ukraine on their own?

Why wouldn't they take the cannon fodder and discounted arms?

And yeah, even Zelensky sees the writing on the wall.

[InnZoneU]

On 12/23/2024 at 3:46 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Why wouldn't they take the cannon fodder and discounted arms?

And yeah, even Zelensky sees the writing on the wall.

OK buddy.

[UtGrizfan]

On 12/23/2024 at 4:34 PM, InnZoneU said:

Why does Russia need NoKo troops and arms if they are totally crushing Ukraine on their own?

A war of attrition favors Russia they haven't mobilized nearly the entirety of their Reserves and manpower that they could. And technically it's Russia and Allies vs NATO, to much supplying on both sides to claim its just Russia vs Ukraine.

[stanfordchef]

All I hope is Rocketman doesn’t decide to attack Seoul while I’m there on Christmas lol. 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/23/2024 at 5:04 PM, InnZoneU said:

OK buddy.

Russia is getting cannon fodder to further supplement their front line forces.  They have turned NK into basically one giant arms manufacturing plant for them in exchange for tech transfers, missle, rocket, nuclear.

North Korea is using this to modernize their capabilities.  It's been a win, a huge win for our adversaries.

This is bad for global stability.

Prolonging this war has increased the threat of our adversaries for no gain.

End this fucking shit now 

[The San Diegan]

Attrition is taking its toll on both sides for sure. Here's a fascinating video showing how the side representing free democracies and sovereignty is adapting - this guy's former infantry and I enjoy watching (most of) his videos:

 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

Good read about what we were discussing last month @sean327

https://www.businessinsider.com/nato-problem-ammunition-strategy-rand-report-2024-12

 

The USA and NATO do/did not have the manufacturing capability or stockpiles to supply the type of munitions Ukraine needs/needed on top of what we have given them that has proven effective. 

They would have been infinitely better off with billions in shells and artillery than the absolutely worthless F16s.  But NATO did not have the stockpiles nor ability to produce them.

Valuable lesson here.  In a large near to peer conflict there must be quantity as well as quality.

 

[The San Diegan]

On 12/23/2024 at 6:18 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Russia is getting cannon fodder to further supplement their front line forces.  They have turned NK into basically one giant arms manufacturing plant for them in exchange for tech transfers, missle, rocket, nuclear.

North Korea is using this to modernize their capabilities.  It's been a win, a huge win for our adversaries.

This is bad for global stability.

Prolonging this war has increased the threat of our adversaries for no gain.

End this fucking shit now 

This is not a good take. What this has done to neuter Russia's ability to use force to project influence (see: Syria) and the damage this has done to Russia's nascent alliance with China far offsets any perceived "win" for our adversaries. To the contrary, the intelligence gains we have realized have benefited us and our allies far more than any minimal land gains the Russians have achieved. Also, the value of the technology transfer to DPRK is highly overstated - not only had DPRK made significant advancement in both their SLMB and ICMB capabilities, but Russia's "advanced" capabilities are already overrated.

It is incorrect to portray Russia's ask for North Korean boots on the ground as some sly "4D chess" maneuver; it is not. It is a desperation move due to Putin's increasingly perilous grip on power. Every Ukrainian drone strike on Russian soil and every sunken Russian surface combatant or oil tanker brings the oligarchy closer to removing Putin from power. This is the only reason why he hasn't mobilized, not due to some bullshit made-up psyop.

Multiple European powers have already expressed a willingness to get directly involved in the conflict. 

Love ya man, but I am absolutely relieved appeasers and capitulators aren't defining our foreign policy in this conflict. So long as there is a single Ukrainian with any fight left in them, we should be by their side. Period.

Make no mistake about it: the Ruso-Ukrainian war is about to enter its 3rd year and will only end when Russia can no longer use direct aggression to project influence.

[The San Diegan]

On 12/26/2024 at 11:25 AM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Good read about what we were discussing last month @sean327

https://www.businessinsider.com/nato-problem-ammunition-strategy-rand-report-2024-12

 

The USA and NATO do/did not have the manufacturing capability or stockpiles to supply the type of munitions Ukraine needs/needed on top of what we have given them that has proven effective. 

They would have been infinitely better off with billions in shells and artillery than the absolutely worthless F16s.  But NATO did not have the stockpiles nor ability to produce them.

Valuable lesson here.  In a large near to peer conflict there must be quantity as well as quality.

 

Yes we do. It just take time to ramp up arms production. In fact, the ammunition production capacity of the US and our allies dwarfs that of Russia. 

Let RU continue source as much shit shells from DPRK as they can, as they have a failure rate approaching 50%.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:47 PM, The San Diegan said:

This is not a good take. What this has done to neuter Russia's ability to use force to project influence (see: Syria) and the damage this has done to Russia's nascent alliance with China far offsets any perceived "win" for our adversaries. To the contrary, the intelligence gains we have realized have benefited us an d our allies far more than any minimal land gains the Russians have achieved. Also, the value of the technology transfer to DPRK is highly overstated - not only had DPRK made significant advancement in both their SLMB and ICMB capabilities, but Russia's "advanced" capabilities are already overrated.

It is incorrect to portray Russia's ask for North Korean boots on the ground as some sly "4D chess" maneuver; it is not. It is a desperation maneuver do to Putin's increasingly perilous grip on power. Every Ukrainian drone strike on Russian soil and every sunken Russian surface combatant or oil tanker brings the oligarchy closer to removing Putin from power. This is the only reason why he hasn't mobilized, not due to some bullshit made-up psyop.

Multiple European powers have already expressed a willingness to get directly involved in the conflict. 

Love ya man, but I am absolutely relieved appeasers and capitulators aren't defining our foreign policy in this conflict. So long as there is a single Ukrainian with any fight left in them, we should be by their side. Period.

Make no mistake about it: the Ruso-Ukrainian war is about to enter its 3rd year and will only end when Russia can no longer use direct aggression to project influence.

Oh I agree it has incapacitated Russias ability to wage conventional war.  Absolutely.  

It's the PROLONGING war of attrition where the benefit is not out-weighing the cost.  Most of that damage was done within the first 8 months.

China was very, very upset with Russia in the first year.  Not so now, they have drawn closer.  And the DPRK modernizing their military with tech transfers is not a good thing.  Our allies in the region are concerned about it, even if you are not.

China/Russia/NK/Iran are all closer now than they were before.  They are all, also benefiting from intelligence gains and what works and doesn't in large conflicts, and are more assured their "spend the least for the most" doctrine is more sound than before, while seeing how more advanced platforms can be utilized in connection with that.

Yes, we should continue to support Ukraine but use our influence to wind this down to a cold war.  Allow Ukraine time to rebuild and re-prepare to more deadlier than before 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/26/2024 at 1:50 PM, The San Diegan said:

Yes we do. It just take time to ramp up arms production. In fact, the ammunition production capacity of the US and our allies dwarfs that of Russia. 

Let RU continue source as much shit shells from DPRK as they can, as they have a failure rate approaching 50%.

Did you read the link?  Yes, it takes time, however we are were not prepared and many nations have less stock piles now, obviously without investing into addressing the issue.

The longer the war of attrition goes on, the worse it becomes for Ukraine.  That's why even Zelensky is wanting to bring this to a cold war now.

The soldiers overwhelmingly want to stop fighting, on both sides

[halfmanhalfbronco]

@The San Diegan I really appreciate these good discussions with you.

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/26/2024 at 2:04 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Did you read the link?  Yes, it takes time, however we are were not prepared and many nations have less stock piles now, obviously without investing into addressing the issue.

The longer the war of attrition goes on, the worse it becomes for Ukraine.  That's why even Zelensky is wanting to bring this to a cold war now.

The soldiers overwhelmingly want to stop fighting, on both sides

To continue on this what Ukraine needed and needs now is fucking shells.  We gave them some FANTASTIC equipment that worked amazingly, the small arms and small platforms.  We were able neutralize Russias Air and Armor superiority with these arms we supplied early on.

The more advanced and sophisticated platforms have been little bang for the buck.

They needed shells, not Abrams and F16s.  We couldn't provide them with what they needed because we didn't have it, or the ability to manufacture it in a timely manner.

We learned a lesson.  Trump needs to shove his boot up the ass of Europe and get them to actually manufacture mass use shit.

[CoachKenFTW]

On 12/26/2024 at 12:50 PM, The San Diegan said:

Yes we do. It just take time to ramp up arms production. In fact, the ammunition production capacity of the US and our allies dwarfs that of Russia. 

Let RU continue source as much shit shells from DPRK as they can, as they have a failure rate approaching 50%.

Thanks Karl Rove.

[CoachKenFTW]

On 12/26/2024 at 12:47 PM, The San Diegan said:

This is not a good take. What this has done to neuter Russia's ability to use force to project influence (see: Syria) and the damage this has done to Russia's nascent alliance with China far offsets any perceived "win" for our adversaries. To the contrary, the intelligence gains we have realized have benefited us and our allies far more than any minimal land gains the Russians have achieved. Also, the value of the technology transfer to DPRK is highly overstated - not only had DPRK made significant advancement in both their SLMB and ICMB capabilities, but Russia's "advanced" capabilities are already overrated.

It is incorrect to portray Russia's ask for North Korean boots on the ground as some sly "4D chess" maneuver; it is not. It is a desperation move due to Putin's increasingly perilous grip on power. Every Ukrainian drone strike on Russian soil and every sunken Russian surface combatant or oil tanker brings the oligarchy closer to removing Putin from power. This is the only reason why he hasn't mobilized, not due to some bullshit made-up psyop.

Multiple European powers have already expressed a willingness to get directly involved in the conflict. 

Love ya man, but I am absolutely relieved appeasers and capitulators aren't defining our foreign policy in this conflict. So long as there is a single Ukrainian with any fight left in them, we should be by their side. Period.

Make no mistake about it: the Ruso-Ukrainian war is about to enter its 3rd year and will only end when Russia can no longer use direct aggression to project influence.

Oreshnik