Några inlägg på vår ofrivilliga grannblogg. Medan Sydkorea försöker fjäska för trumpedunsen, har Nordkorea erkänt vad alla redan visste: de stred mycket riktigt på Rysslands sida i Kursk-regionen. A tale of two nations?
Sydkoreas nye president besöker Trump
Nordkorea erkänner officiellt att de stridit på Rysslands sida
Det här måste vara den mest korkade rubrik som någonsin figurerat på en vänsterblogg. Eller också har Tobias Hübinette nu definitivt gått över till västimperialismens läger. Detta är hans Rubicon. Hade jag väl sagt om jag varit marxist. Vilket jag inte är.
Eller snarare västimperialismen *av igår*...
Ja, men whatever. Även denna kan vara av intresse:
This headline sounds like a joke. Like the rest of the article. Why the fuck would *Russians* want to tourist in *North Korea*? The whole thing is probably a political thing.
After all, as Russia is holding back its best troops for the impending blixtkrieg conquest of Europe (sure to happen any time now), it needs to fill the gaps in Novorossiya with North Korean soldiers, who are there strictly in the role of temporary cannon fodder. Or as anti-drone consultants. Or something.
Yeah, that must be it.
Russia opens direct commercial flights between Moscow and Pyongyang
 |
| Credit: Tam McDonald/MOD |
Flera anmärkningsvärt "konsekvensneutrala" formuleringar i den här, måste jag säga. Från Tobias Hübinettes blogg.
>>>Broman hade en nazistisk bakgrund och han anslöt sig som krigsfrivillig i mars 2022 och i juli 2023 för två år sedan sårades han och återvände därför för en period till sin hemstad i Norrland för att återhämta sig och han framträdde då i lokalmedia och bl a uttryckte han tvivel på att Förintelsen hade ägt rum.
>>>För mig som helhjärtat stöttar Ukraina i kampen mot Putins Ryssland och i förlängningen mot den nya allians av auktoritära och extremnationalistiska stater som BRICS-länderna representerar är Broman ändå en hjälte trots hans högerextrema bakgrund.
>>>De 1000-tals utlänningar som har stridit som frivilliga på Ukrainas sida sedan februari 2022 kommer från en mängd olika länder och politiska bakgrunder – exempelvis har minst ett 25-tal utländska anarkister och syndikalister hittills stupat i kriget.
>>>Och även under Finska vinterkriget 1939-40 när Sovjet-Ryssland invaderade Finland stred svenska nazister, konservativa, liberaler och socialister av alla typer sida vid sida.
Ännu en svensk krigsfrivillig har nu stupat på Ukrainas sida
Has the Servant of the People become self-serving? It seems Ukraine is in the throes of a serious political crisis as Zelensky attacks two independent anti-corruption agencies (with the full support of the "opposition" in Parliament, no less).
For the first time in three years, large crowds of people are actually protesting against the government. Zelensky himself claims that the agencies were filled with Russian spies, but that´s what he has to say, isn´t it? The sequel might prove...interesting.
Links below to Kyiv Independent.
Zelensky just betrayed Ukraine´s democracy
Zelensky dismantles Ukraine´s anti-corruption infrastructure
So Donald Trump is going to send more arms to Ukraine. Which is exactly what the European NATO partners and the EU member-states wants. Most of them, anyway.
But...Trump also threatens to sanction any nation still doing business with Russia. That presumably would include India, Brazil and similar nations. He also continues threatening the EU with steep tariffs, thereby setting the stage for a trade "war". And the only way the EU could escape such a situation would be to trade with...yes, exactly, you guessed it...Brazil, India, and so on. Exactly the nations Trump might sanction.
So it seems the economic chaos will continue. And that´s that, I suppose.
It seems the new strategy is the same as the old one. You know, support Ukraine and sanction the Russian Federation until Putin gets tired of it all. So I suppose the United States will no longer vote with North Korea in the UN General Assembly, then?
The United States has a Director of National Intelligence who is parrroting Russian talking points. Surreal. I mean, it´s surreal even if it´s just red meat for the "base". And who are the "base" anyway? The last remaining faithful of the Communist Party USA?
Note also the bizarre timing of Gabbard´s video. You know, Israel and Iran cough cough...
ChatGPT on the current state of the Russian military, etc.
Can you comment the following claim: Russia hasn´t deployed its best troops in Ukraine, but are purposefully holding them back for a future confrontation with NATO. This explains why the casaulties on the Russian side is mostly untrained conscript troops ("cannon fodder") and various mercenary companies. Thus, Russia can both defeat Ukraine and threaten NATO at a later point.
This claim — that Russia is deliberately holding back its best troops for a future confrontation with NATO, using mostly low-quality forces in Ukraine — is an assertion that deserves careful scrutiny. Let's break it down and comment on its plausibility based on available evidence and strategic logic.
Reality:
Yes, many of them. At the beginning of the invasion in February 2022, Russia did commit elite units, such as airborne (VDV), Spetsnaz, and tank divisions. Many of these units suffered significant losses in the early months of the war, particularly in battles near Kyiv, Kharkiv, and the Donbas.
VDV and other elite forces have been heavily degraded — multiple analysts and Western intelligence sources confirm that these units were not only deployed, but also took disproportionate casualties. Some had to be rebuilt or replenished with less experienced troops.
Partially true, but misleading.
Russia has increasingly relied on mobilized reservists, volunteer contract soldiers, prisoner recruits (Wagner Group), and regional militias — many of whom are poorly trained and equipped.
However, by late 2023 and into 2024, Russia began reconstituting better-trained brigades, incorporating battle-hardened veterans, and professionalizing units as part of a longer war effort. So it’s not purely “cannon fodder” anymore.
Wagner, for instance, was a key offensive force, especially in battles like Bakhmut. But after the 2023 Wagner mutiny and the death of Prigozhin, their role changed.
Highly speculative and strategically questionable.
Russia’s ability to fight NATO directly is currently limited. The war in Ukraine has severely strained its conventional forces — equipment losses, manpower attrition, and sanctions-induced limitations on replenishment are all significant.
If Russia were seriously preparing for war with NATO, it would be rebuilding high-readiness reserves, modernizing command and control, and deploying more troops to borders with NATO countries — but open-source data does not strongly support this narrative.
Moreover, Russia’s doctrine assumes nuclear deterrence as its primary check against NATO, not conventional parity.
Unlikely under current conditions.
The Ukrainian military, heavily supported by Western intelligence, weapons, and logistics, has proven resilient. Even if Russia gains ground, it will be costly and slow, not a quick conquest.
If Russia could “defeat” Ukraine easily with second-rate troops, it would already have done so. The fact that the war has dragged on for more than two years indicates that Russia has been forced to use more of its conventional capacity than it might have liked.
The claim overstates Russia’s strategic flexibility and underestimates the toll the Ukraine war has taken on its military.
Russia did use many elite troops and suffered for it.
Its current force structure is a mix, but not mostly cannon fodder.
The idea of “saving” elite forces for a NATO fight assumes a level of foresight and capability that doesn’t match how Russia has been forced to fight.
So, while there might be some element of strategic reserve in play (every major power does this to some extent), the core of the claim — that Russia has held back its best troops and is playing a long game for a NATO conflict — lacks solid support and appears more like strategic speculation or propaganda than a robust military analysis.
Exactly — that line of reasoning is crucial.
Putin's original plan in February 2022 seems to have been a rapid decapitation of the Ukrainian government — a quick advance to Kyiv, the installation of a pro-Russian regime, and minimal resistance.
A fast win would have minimized sanctions, preserved Russia’s conventional forces, and demonstrated power to both NATO and internal audiences.
Instead, the failure to take Kyiv quickly turned the war into a prolonged, grinding campaign — something Russia almost certainly didn’t want or plan for initially.
Blitzkrieg works best with surprise, speed, and overwhelming force. Russia attempted this in 2022, but:
Poor intelligence underestimated Ukrainian resistance.
Logistical weaknesses undermined Russian armored thrusts.
Coordination failures between air, armor, and infantry created bottlenecks.
Elite units were committed and badly mauled, especially airborne and Spetsnaz troops in Hostomel and elsewhere.
So the war shifted to attrition not by choice, but by necessity.
After the initial failure, Russia had to fall back on a deep reserves model, using mass mobilization and long-range fires (artillery, missiles, drones) to wear Ukraine down.
This is not a high-efficiency strategy — it’s costly, slow, and politically risky (mobilizations stir dissent).
But it’s what Russia has left. The alternative — rotating in unused elite troops — would only make sense if such troops existed in sufficient quantity and readiness, which seems doubtful.
If Russia had held back elite units in meaningful numbers, NATO intelligence would likely detect this via satellite and electronic surveillance. Western planners have not indicated the presence of a large, unused elite strike force.
What has been observed is efforts to rebuild units degraded in Ukraine, not whole elite armies waiting in the wings.
Russia tried and failed to win quickly. It did not voluntarily choose a war of attrition — it was forced into it by Ukrainian resistance and its own operational failures. The idea that Russia is holding back its “real army” for NATO is far more likely to be:
Propaganda to intimidate,
Wishful thinking by some analysts or commentators,
Or a misreading of Russia’s actual force-generation capabilities.
If a blitzkrieg had been feasible, it would have been the logical and preferred path. The fact that we’ve seen the opposite speaks volumes.
North Korea has deployed a substantial military contingent to Russia's Kursk region, primarily consisting of elite special operations forces from the 11th Army Corps, also known as the "Storm Corps." This unit includes specialized brigades such as the 16th Sniper Brigade and the 43rd Mountain Infantry Sniper Brigade .thesun.co.uk+4longwarjournal.org+4reddit.com+4en.wikipedia.org
Initial deployments began in late 2024, with approximately 12,000 troops sent to support Russian operations in Kursk . These forces were integrated into Russian units, often wearing Russian uniforms and carrying Russian military identification . Their roles included front-line infantry assaults, often accompanying Russian paratrooper companies .forbes.comlongwarjournal.org+1apnews.com+1kyivindependent.com
In early 2025, North Korea dispatched an additional 1,000 to 3,000 specialist troops to bolster their presence. These reinforcements included motorized infantry, sappers, and electronic intelligence units, aiming to enhance operational effectiveness in modern warfare environments .kyivpost.com
Initially, North Korean forces employed large-scale, company-sized assaults, which resulted in significant casualties due to vulnerability to Ukrainian artillery and drone strikes . Recognizing these losses, tactics shifted to smaller, platoon-sized units to reduce detectability and improve maneuverability on the battlefield .
The deployment has come at a high cost. Reports indicate that approximately one-third of the initial 12,000 troops have been killed or wounded . Despite these losses, North Korean forces have contributed to Russian efforts in contested areas of Kursk, though their overall impact on the broader conflict remains limited.theguardian.com+16theguardian.com+16reddit.com+16kyivindependent.com+4kyivpost.com+4forbes.com+4
The involvement of North Korean troops marks a significant development in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, highlighting the deepening military ties between Moscow and Pyongyang.thesun.co.uk
Yes, the deployment of North Korean troops—especially elite special forces from units like the 11th Army Corps—strongly suggests that Russia is facing a shortage of elite, high-readiness troops and is compensating by drawing on foreign manpower.
Here’s why that conclusion is plausible:
For a nuclear-armed state with one of the world’s largest militaries, relying on North Korean special forces in an active combat zone is highly irregular.
Major powers typically prefer to retain control over their operations and avoid political entanglements from foreign boots on the ground.
If Russia had a large surplus of ready, elite forces, it would be illogical to bring in North Korean troops, especially given the coordination, logistical, and language barriers.
Many of Russia’s top-tier units (e.g. VDV, Spetsnaz GRU, Naval Infantry) suffered heavy casualties in the first two years of the war.
Western intelligence and independent analysis confirm that these units had to be reconstituted using conscripts or minimally trained personnel.
Even by late 2024, Russia was rotating wounded or depleted brigades out of front-line roles, indicating a need for reinforcement.
Reports indicate that North Korean forces were deployed into active combat zones in Kursk, sometimes integrated into Russian formations, and even wearing Russian uniforms.
This level of integration implies they are filling operational gaps, not just playing a symbolic or training support role.
Pyongyang would not lightly risk sending its best troops abroad unless the strategic or economic benefits were high — or unless Russia desperately needed competent manpower in key sectors.
If Russia still had a large pool of reliable, elite soldiers, it would likely prefer to:
Reinforce overstretched sectors with its own vetted units.
Avoid political complications from foreign troop presence.
Retain tight control over operational security and command structure.
That they’re not doing this suggests either:
Severe depletion of high-quality Russian forces, or
An effort to preserve what remains of their elite units for higher-priority threats or future contingencies.
The North Korean deployments are a strong signal of Russian force strain, particularly at the elite level.
It suggests:
Russia’s best units are degraded, recovering, or being conserved.
Moscow is increasingly relying on unconventional partnerships to maintain pressure along multiple fronts.
The strategic situation for Russia is likely more brittle than public messaging suggests — at least in terms of manpower quality.
It’s a sign not of strength, but of strategic necessity.
Probably true. Translation: Russia doesn´t want peace. Wow. So the United States voting with North Korea in the UN General Assembly didn´t work. I mean, who could have predicted that?
I assumed Trump had cut the funding to these guys? As for the scams, well, that was entirely predictable. And those complaining are probably just envious...
Guess who allegedly inspired this guy to allegedly kill his parents and allegedly plot the assassination of Donald Trump? Here we (allegedly of course) go again...
17-year old allegedly killed his parents as part of a plot to kill Trump
Zelensky himself claims that Chinese soldiers are fighting for Russia in the Donbass. Which may or may not be true. While China is officially neutral, it´s hardly a secret that they back Putin.
But note the implication: Trump is ramping up his confrontation with China, while still trying to negotiate with Russia. By publicly displaying captured Chinese soldiers, Ukraine might want to remind the US administration about certain geopolitical realities...
Germany has been funding a French alternative to Elon Musk´s Starlink, which provides Ukraine with intelligence on Russian troop movements. Since Musk has threatened to cut off Ukraine from his satellites, an alternative has to be found...and it seems that one exists (although not as efficient - yet).
Gaullism in outer space?
Germany funds French satellite network as Musk tensions grow
So Putin just proposed to include North Korea (!) in the ceasefire negotiations concerning Ukraine, while still demanding that Ukraine itself be excluded. Dude, it´s almost as if the peace talks aren´t serious, or something.
Let´s see what Trump does now. Meanwhile, his sycophant-in-chief Vance is campaigning for the opposition in Greenland...
The enigmatic and seemingly chaotic actions of the Trump administration could be just that: enigmatic and chaotic. But if taken at face value, there does seem to be a certain "method in madness". The American imperial nationalism (Nixon?) might be morphing into American isolationism. The United States are preparing to severe the trans-atlantic link to Europe, and there may even be questions concerning their willingness to confront China.
The seemingly absurd territorial demands on Greenland and Canada (!) makes sense geopolitically if the goal is to isolate the United States from the rest of the world. A single North American union is presumably easier to militarily defend. Obviously, other great powers can´t be permitted to have leverage in the New World through Canada or Greenland. Compare the Monroe doctrine. The threats to take over the Panama Canal and re-assert US authority in its Latino near abroad (or "backyard") fit the same pattern.
Note also the trade wars against *US allies*. Which brings me to the East Asian theatre. High tariffs were recently imposed on Japan. I think Trump said already during his first tenure that Japan should pay more for its military defenses. He has also threatened tariffs on Taiwan! Note also that Trump´s buddy and de facto close advisor Elon Musk still has considerable economic interests in mainland China. None of this makes much sense if the goal is to confront the PRC and perhaps even wage a new world war with them. It makes more sense if the eventual goal is to reach a modus vivendi with China. The world would then be divided into two main power blocs: a Sino-Russian alliance controlling most of Eurasia and the United States, directly or indirectly in control of the New World.
The biggest loser in this new geopolitical landscape is (of course) the European Union with associates. To a large extent, this is self-inflicted. Take Germany, where the insane political elite could carry out their experiment with "green transition" in the safe knowledge that Russian fossil fuels would bail them out. And - in the event of an all-out war with Russia - the US military and/or nuclear umbrella would take care of the problem. As far as I understand, Poland has a stronger military at present than Germany. The idea that a bureaucratic behemoth like the EU could do anything really effective to counter Russian threats (or a unilateral US take-over of Greenland) is ridiculous, to say the least. The EU can´t even get rid of Viktor Orbán! Add to this a rapidly declining birth rate, mass immigration, the growth of pro-Russian political parties, attacks on domestic agriculture, and the effects of climate change. Europe might become a Russian backwater...or collapse altogether. The only European nation with enough political and military clout to "save the day" seems to be France, and even that only barely.
Of course, the Trump administration might simply be a fluke. Trump doesn´t have an obvious successor as "god-emperor" of MAGA. Many Republicans are probably still "RINOs" (Neocons or even liberals) and are just faking support for the old don, hoping for better days in 2028-29. I think it´s obvious that Lindsey Graham and Mike Johnson really want to continue supporting Ukraine, and wanted Zelensky to schmooze for Trump and sign the mineral deal as a way to "tie down" the United States in Ukraine. Hence their dismay when Zelensky decided to push back in public at that White House event. There is also one glaring anomaly in the crypto-isolationist foreign policies: Trump´s strong support for Israel, specifically Netanyahu and at least rhetorically even his far right coalition partners. Here, the entire Republican party is presumably still united...behind a Neocon agenda!
So it´s certainly possibly that everything will go back to normal in 2028-29. Except of course that it won´t. Trump probably isn´t a strange mutant distraction in the American body-politic. He is the warning that something fundamental is about to change, indeed, probably already has. He demonstrates that "America First" is a viable political option, something that hasn´t been the case since at least 1941. This in itself will create tensions and insecurities between the United States and its supposed allies in both Europe and Asia. The "pseudomorphosis" which made America more European may have come unglued, with the United States reverting to its true barbarian self. The next MAGA-like movement will probably be even more "populist", even more authoritarian, and decidedly less Zionist.
"Woke" liberalism is really also an American barbarity, but since it wants to Wokify the world (or the West), this particular mind-virus doesn´t mind the trans-atlantic or trans-pacific links, rather using them as vectors. America First nationalism, by definition, only cares about the territory its forebears managed to snatch from the Natives.
And since we *do* live in a world of chaos and downright enigmatic insanity, everything I just said above might be overrun by events by the time I actually post this...
Imagine an alliance of Europe and Canada, also comprising Ukraine and a Turkey liberated from Erdogan. And, of course, Greenland!
But sure, it would have to become a bit more "based" than it is presently...
Bizarre rumor just now: Putin´s DNA proves that he is from Kosovo, is related to Hitler, and has a genetic predisposition to paranoia. Which is why he is hiding his own shit so his enemies can´t test it.
I´m sure this information is absolutely reliable.
