Curious how many will defect once outside North Korea.
According to hexbear you would have to have some deranged lib mind to believe any would want to.
Server blocking hexbear is the only way to stay sane on Lemmy.
We defederated them a while ago over here. Along with some right wing instances too. The extremists from either side of the political spectrum really spoil the experience.
Look @ the tankie!
/s
deleted by creator
About 18% of North Korean defectors regret it.
The number one reason is wanting to see family and friends who are still trapped in North Korea.
About 18% of North Korean defectors regret it.
Around 20% of defectors have considered returning to North Korea. But that has less to do with the appeal of the North than the poor treatment of expats in the South.
The South Korean immigration and labor laws make finding work south of the border incredibly difficult. North Korean expats are confined to menial service sector and grueling industrial work while being largely cut out of South Korean social life due to heavy stigmas against them. Its an incredibly hard life and not remotely like the glamorous existence of social elites that Americans claim drive the periodic defections.
They need access to a better place. I suppose they just get financially stuck in S Korea? Or do the move on to other countries too, more willing to give them a chance?
North Korean expats are functionally stateless, so it is very difficult to leave South Korea even when they do have money.
The largest portion of the Korean diaspora live in China and Russia.
Is it difficult because airlines and whatnot won’t carry them, or because the receiving country won’t let them immigrate due to being “stateless”?
Are they stateless in a way someone coming from Bolivia to the US isn’t, because NK’s outside of some globally-recognized state system? I’ve never considered this before.
Why don’t we have a law for North Korea like the Cuban Adjustment Act that allows anyone who makes it out of the country to quickly become a permanent resident, without regard for how they got out of their country. The situation seems fairly similar, where encouraging more defectors makes the target country look bad, and it can deprive them of workers.
So does that mean that NATO can also start deploying troops there? I mean, so far we’ve kept out to not escalate this, but if actual foreign troops will set foot on that front line, you can only wait so long for the other side to do the same…
No, because Ukraine is not a NATO member because they cannot join while already at war. If the USA got involved directly then the international community in the UN and even NATO itself would have mixed responses, perhaps even leading to NATO withdrawals and economic sanctions.
However, the USA have started allowing private mercenary companies to participate directly in the conflict, and they’ve had indirect support specialists from the US Military in the region for a long time.
So it’s OK for Ukraine to invite friends along to help too?
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the US announced it would lift the ban on American contractors going to Ukraine at the same time as this. Russia reaps what it sows. Ukraine gets highly payed and skilled contractors, in return, Russia gets malnourished and untrained Korean conscripts.
I dont think it’s quite the same thing though. US contractors won’t be fighting, I think they’ll just be maintaining and repairing equipment.
Arguably, a much more critical job for a capital-intensive army.
Yes, it’s actually huge. Especially for maintaining a weapon as complicated as an Abrams tank. If it can be repaired close to the front lines then that has the potential to cut days off the turnaround time compared to towing it over to Poland.
I will never understand why the American military think it’s a good idea to send them tanks that are so complicated. Especially when they’re going up against cold war era relics.
Long term investment. Same as in Israel. Trying to save democracies from annihilation.
Not to worry! Li’l Kim’s Bestest Buddy and Honorary Number One Chief Saluter will be ready to help NK help Russia destroy Ukraine and NATO.
All you MAGA service “losers” and “suckers” got quite the cognitive dissonance jam rockin’ huh.
That military man looked really important. Even a king would salute.
It’s the hat that did it.
deleted by creator
50 US Marines, of which he is their Commander in Chief.
North Korea has been an American rival since 1950. Imagine if any other President had done this.
But you don’t even have to, just look at the response to Obama bowing to the emperor of Japan, an ally.
If I were President, and I were meeting with an enemy face to face, and they saluted me, I’d salute them back.
I have not served in any military and am not aware of the official meaning of a salute.
But I have had enemies and if I were meeting with one of my enemies and they saluted me, I would salute them.
This is just based on my gut feel of the gesture’s meaning from watching movies. My gut feel is it’s a combination of:
- This handshake indicates we’re both listening intently and ready to talk
- I see you. We are the same despite our ranks, because we’ve both put ourselves here, and because we’re both equally susceptible to bullets.
I could be wrong, and I’m asking for correction if I am, but based on that I’d salute an enemy soldier if he was standing there ready to meet with me.
Thing is though, with a politician it’s different. I don’t know if Trump’s ever been shot at. Probably not. So the “hello, spiritual brother” thing that can apply to any other soldier even enemy is less there with a politician.
I don’t know. Just saying it seems natural to me to salute an enemy. Like “this sucks, maybe we can end it today” feeling to it for me. Framing the war as a problem they’re facing together.
If US and NATO are supporting Ukraine I didn’t see what’s the problem if China and North Korea support Russia…
It’s almost like Ukraine is better than NK, from a moral and logical perspective. Ukraine isn’t starving their own people, nor are they “disappearing” the local Muslim population á-la China. They’re simply defending themselves.
Remind me how many Neo-Nazi battalions are in the DPRK? Or where in the DPRK constitution there is a provision to protect their gene pool?
According to you logic US it’s supporting Israel so I believe your “moral” and “logic” is pretty twisted…
The US isn’t sending troops into Gaza. This story is about NK sending troops into Ukraine. It’s not hard to see the clear difference.
Nice slippery slope…
Edit: Israel didn’t even need soldiers, Palestinians didn’t even have weapons to defend themselves and are starving to death, so money and weapons will do the work to continue with the genocide.
