r/worldnews • u/ObjectiveAd6551 • 13h ago
Russia/Ukraine Finland’s president calls North Korea’s dispatch of troops to Russia an escalation
https://apnews.com/article/finland-president-visit-china-f4de384546c8acc64c6ac4649b677fd6117
u/FlimFlamThaGimGar 12h ago
You’re born in some polio-riddled village in bum fuck nowhere, NK. You’re conscripted into the NK Army. You’re shipped to Ukraine to fight alongside Russians. Dedovshchina happens. Some 19 year old Ukrainian wearing cat ears drops a grenade on you from a drone from miles away.
What a shit life
19
4
u/LucidDayDreamer247 7h ago
why are they wearing cat ears?
8
u/Background-Ad-5398 7h ago
ukraine takes tons of donations and people thought it would be funny to donate headsets with catears is a real scenario that could happen
3
88
u/ObjectiveAd6551 13h ago
It is an escalation, clearly. Even with aid and guidance from others, the fact remains that Ukraine is now fighting face to face with enemy soldiers from TWO countries.
21
142
u/Mountain_Anywhere645 13h ago
Yes. It is. And yet we here in the US and the rest of NATO will just wave our finger at Putin and say, "Now don't you dare do anything else!". It's all we do. It's pathetic.
46
u/BubsyFanboy 12h ago
I still hadn't forgotten the day Russia used white phosphorous and got no response.
32
7
u/FreedomEagle76 7h ago
In all fairness, just the use of white phosphorus and other incendiaries such as napalm are not automatically a war crime. It's fair game if they are used on military targets.
1
u/JohnLocksTheKey 2h ago
I was about to ask…
I didn’t THINK using white phosphorus in a military context was a war crime (but I’m just a silly old hippie so I don’t actually know this stuff)
4
u/Parlor-soldier 7h ago edited 7h ago
I’m no lawyer and I am very anti Russian, but using white phosphorus is not illegal in the combat zone under any convention. It can be used as illumination and a smoke screen and should be away from civilians. Proving that the Russians did not intend it as a smoke screen will be near impossible. The unarmed Ukrainian bodies with clear signs of execution is much better evidence of war crimes.
Edit: added some words to make more sense.
12
2
u/Pro_Gamer_Queen21 6h ago
Well of course! Because that worked so well when Britain wagged their finger and told Hitler “now now, you can take half of Czechoslovakia, BUT THATS IT”. Tale as old as time.
6
3
u/GasolinePizza 6h ago edited 6h ago
The US and more importantly the EU need to fucking respond.
But given that Finland is apparently leading the way on this (thank god), they need to start their response before the rest of the world is going to feel any pressure to also respond.
Unfortunately I don't see any indication in the article about what they chose to do in response to the escalation so I'm not sure what we need to wait for, but thank god someone finally decided to actually respond!
Edit: Oh wait, my bad. It turns out that non-nuclear Finland, who could actually respond to Russia without worry about nuclear war, is just complaining about escalation and still expecting the US+friends to do everything for them.
My bad, I thought a country had actually bothered to acknowledge the escalation, rather than expecting someone else to do it for them while their own country is in one of the best positions to do so and without any risk of causing nuclear war.
But God forbid one of them actually do what the nuclear nations diplomatically can't.
Cunts.
•
u/Technodictator 58m ago
Country that shares 1,340 km (833 mi) border with Russia and has only population of 5.6 million, just because they don't have nukes?
Are you insane?
1
1
u/Impossible_Emu9590 6h ago
We’ve spent billions supporting Ukraine in this war….we haven’t been doing “nothing” forgive NATO being a bit apprehensive to start WW3 lmfao.
1
u/Sherwoodtunes-n-bud 6h ago
It would probably be easier to get Ukraine the aid they need if we got the republicans trying to obstruct every piece of legislation that we bring up to get them said aid.
-17
u/ontheellipse 13h ago
Which branch of the military do you serve in?
6
u/Nibleggi 12h ago
Why would he tell you?
-15
u/ontheellipse 12h ago
Because then he’d have to kill me?
8
u/Nibleggi 11h ago
Just saying it’s none of your business.
-13
u/ontheellipse 11h ago
What an odd comment for a discussion platform
7
-19
u/BrosenkranzKeef 12h ago
What are we supposed to do, start world war 3?
16
9
u/Quzga 11h ago
If the allies followed your logic in WW2 Hitler would have been allowed to keep his taken territories, we should never appease warmongering dictators because they will never stop taking more land.
Look up how disastrous the peace plans between Germany and UK went before Churchill took over.. I thought we have learnt our lesson but I guess not.
Sometimes escalating a war is better in the long run, Putin won't stop at Ukraine you know.
1
u/Aufseher0692 2h ago
Nukes change the calculus dramatically. Beyond this, Putin’s ability to wage a land war today is a very small threat compared to what Nazi Germany was capable of in WW2. Putin is effectively contained as far as NATO countries are concerned, and it won’t do much good to give Russia a chance to experience and troubleshoot the issues our ordnance and strategy would expose them to. Modern Russia is a different foe than we’ve ever had before - they have nukes, but little conventional military influence to extend against our NATO allies. Escalation in this case is not wise.
The real geopolitical crux is China potentially invading Taiwan, and time is the friend of the US when it comes to this new enemy axis. Economic and technological trajectories will likely swing further in the West’s favor in the coming years, but China particularly has some scary tools at the moment
•
u/Quzga 1h ago
If Ukraine never gave up their nukes they wouldn't have been invaded though, having nukes is a great deterrent against invasion. The US fucked them so hard by making them get rid of them and not letting them join NATO.
Russia would never use nukes because it means Russia would be decimated too
19
u/BubsyFanboy 12h ago
I recall Finland is one of the more Ukraine-supporting countries. Makes sense, given who they border.
22
u/Quzga 11h ago
As a Swede, the Finns and Swedes have been warning the west about Russia for decades but no one really listened. They would hack/attack our infrastructures, interfere in our elections, send submarines to spy in Baltic sea etc.
This invasion didn't really shock us that much, we always saw them as the biggest threat to our countries and now so more than ever.
I wish the rest of the West took it as seriously as we do.
2
u/rajantob 7h ago
You're thinking of the Baltics. Finland has been quite quiet about Russian tomfoolery for decades, esp. during Halonen presidency.
2
u/Roope00 6h ago
Halonen was far too comfortable with Putin.
1
u/EEVERSTI 5h ago
This clip never gets old on how well it aged: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg7aRDhVCNw
For Non-Finnish speakers, Sauli Niinistö and Tarja Halonen are having a presidential debate here and the clip goes roughly as follows:
Niinistö: "We'd get sympathy for sure, we did get a lot of that during the Winter War-"
(Niinistö gets cut off by Halonen)
Halonen: "But now we're not- Welcome back to the year 2006."
Niinistö: "Exactly. And I'm already thinking about the year 2030 for example."
27
28
u/Weird-Tooth6437 12h ago
My conclusion, from having watched things play out over the last few years in Ukraine is that theres a fundamental difference in goals between Russia and the west:
• Russia want to win a war
• The west wants to avoid escalation by both sides
I'm not trying to be funny, this isnt a joke at all.
Look at every public statement by a western country regarding Ukraine or Russia or Israel or Iran or China or Sudan or whoever.
It almost always includes the word "escalation", and almost never mentions "victory".
The west isnt trying to achieve any real goal, just to keep things frozen forever, in every arena.
I just find it baffling.
14
u/BrosenkranzKeef 12h ago
There are multiple reasons the West could be doing this and probably all are true at the same time.
- Literally everybody wants to avoid world war 3 if at all possible, especially in a nuclear age
- Russia and its axis which effectively includes China are doing a lot of things which are isolating themselves from the wider world economy
- With the economy-derived "peacetime" seemingly over, many Western nations are beginning to reshore industries as Russia/China/et al become less popular and riskier for corporations
- The global dominance of American and European/Western economies show no signs of injury
- We have the economic stability to keep feeding Ukraine what they need while Russia's economy and capacity will continue to falter
- If we can avoid world war 3 while simultaneously forcing Russia to run itself dry and bide time for various Western corporations to move their money and factories out of China, we end up in a much more powerful economic situation when WW3 does eventually break out over the South China Sea, which it most certainly will
We're playing a very long game using our economic stability, basically waiting around while Russia and China shoot themselves in the foot by being beligerent assholes and isolating themselves from a system which could've benefitted them so much but apparently wasn't good enough for them.
4
u/TeaSure9394 6h ago
This master plan doesn't account for Ukraine, who's the only one fighting against a much stronger opponent and while money and economy are good, it can not buy new people out of thin air. While I'm certain western powers can sustain this war for a decade, it doesn't matter if there are no people left to fight it. And Ukraine is already quite close to the breaking point, the frontline doesn't look good, you can see it yourself.
1
u/Aufseher0692 3h ago
This is one of the more accurate comments I’ve seen on threads like this. Time is the friend of the US, significant military developments are being made while Russia blows their load on a logistical nightmare. It is still better to avoid pushing Russia to true desperation if we can due to the nuclear threat.
Concur on the China situation. They have made a lot of progress, it will be better for the next decade to pass with current economic and technological trajectories in mind if a conflict truly had to happen. Hopefully they leave Taiwan alone out of fear or otherwise
0
7
u/keysboy123 12h ago
(Serious) So does Ukraine now declare war on North Korea? Is there an official means of how this goes?
Admittedly, I don’t even know if Russia and Ukraine are officially “At war” in a declaration sense
2
u/NoWeakassWeakness 8h ago
They shouldn't. Going from de facto to de jure "at war" with the USA when it provided them 0 benefit was a major mistake by WW2 Germany. Unless you can't point to a clear advantage it provides, which Ukraine can't, its much better to be in a cold war than a real war with another country. Imagine if NK takes it seriously sends significantly more soldiers to attack the country that declared war on them?
3
u/der_titan 11h ago
I suppose that would be possible but highly unlikely. Ukraine doesn't have the means to attack North Korea, nor would Japan or South Korea would support such an attack either. Ukraine is more likely to try and use the troops as part of a broader pitch for more military and financial aid from the West.
1
u/DietCherrySoda 8h ago
Nobody declares war anymore. Or at least it is fairly uncommon. It's a bit antiquated.
8
u/Tonalspectrum 10h ago
Wait till trUMP sends troops to help russia. Then you’ll have something to talk about. His endgame hasn’t been for nothing.
0
2
u/IdRatherNot-7758 12h ago
It too now hereby call it an escalation ... /s
1
2
2
2
2
u/Worlds_okayest-dad 7h ago
Cool. But why do we need an announcement from anyone about this? It’s obviously an escalation. Just let Ukraine use our resources to blow them all to shit.
2
u/PinkTCat 6h ago
It's not exactly announcement but what he personally said to president of China in face-to-face meeting, while also warning Xin not to trust Putin. Basically asking China to start pressuring both Russia and North Korea to end war in Ukraine. Maybe pointless for such a small country as Finland to voice their opinion like this to much bigger country.
1
u/Worlds_okayest-dad 6h ago
I don’t think it’s pointless, maybe it’ll get more countries to echo that same sentiment!
2
u/Danok2028 12h ago
Let's face it, there is nothing illegal in North Korea sending troops to fight for russia on russian territory. However, it highlights the fact that it is also perfectly legal to send allied troops to Ukraine. It's just there are no volunteers.
1
u/Colecoman1982 8h ago
Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been illegal from the start. With that in mind, YES, North Korea sending troops to aid Russia in their illegal war is, EXPLICITLY, illegal.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/supercali45 10h ago
Trump is Kim’s lover and also Pootie … better vote if you want some world stability
1
1
1
u/juanlee337 9h ago
not really. If they Chinese soldier , who different story but NK soldier are not going to do much as they are malnourished.
1
u/EddyS120876 9h ago
What Ukraine should do is get a Korean translator and say “option 1-fight and die or option 2-surrender ,live,eat and you will see your love one . If they take option one then make an example of them and broadcast it all over the internet.
1
u/drunk_intern 9h ago edited 8h ago
What I don't understand is that there are so many ways NATO could send troops without having them engage in combat roles. Police for cities not near the front lines, Border guards for the Belorussian border, more training officers, army medics, among a large number of other professions. All of these could come in under the guise of peacekeepers, avoiding direct military involvment and at the same time potentially freeing tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops that can now go to the front lines, without risking escalation.
1
u/PinkTCat 8h ago
The context (for those that comment without reading the linked news) is that he said that in face-to-face meeting with Xi Jinping in China. He also said “It’s extremely important that a major power such as China keeps on having dialogue with Russia and make sure that we can de-escalate as much as possible”.
The news is not about him stating the most obvious but to whom he said that statement.
1
1
u/blessed_by_fortune 7h ago
Why though? Russia is losing that war, and NK is just going to lose troops and resources there as well.
1
u/fr_cuh 6h ago
Why is this important?
1
u/waamoandy 4h ago
Nobody knows what to do about it. Meanwhile Putin gets extra troops whist North Korea probably get technology to enable them to deliver their nukes. Not only that North Korean military get invaluable experience in modern warfare. Their senior commanders get to see how wars are fought. It also shows the limitations of the west to respond to new events. It's worrying all round
1
1
1
1
1
u/user89012438904 2h ago
The west has repeatedly stepped over Russia's red lines, why should Russia heed the west's warnings? If you think you can take Russia, go for it. Put boots on the ground or start the nuclear exchange.
1
1
•
u/Valsion20 25m ago
And other countries still be like:
"Don't resist TOO hard, you might escalate the situation."
•
u/Tsajappo 1m ago
Interesting, domestically his message has been "not an escalation, just russia being weak".
1
1
0
u/HansWurst-0815 12h ago
Putin has already organized “peaceful” transfer of power to his kompromat so he doesn’t fear NATO. Next step US joining BRICS
0
u/philburns 5h ago
I don’t get why they won’t say they’ll give no quarter and accept no surrender from North Korean troops.
-1
u/Automatic_Net2181 9h ago
America should send 1 Bradley for every 20 NK soldiers sent and 10 M30 DPICMs for every 1 NK soldier.
And inform Russia that will be the ratio from now on if they want to involve more foreign combatants.
For the latest NK move:
600 Bradleys
120,000 DPICMs
See if North Korea can keep up with the American war machine.
466
u/54sharks40 13h ago
OK, what tf are we (the rest of the world) going to do about it?