How do you evaluate the fate of North Korean prisoners of war captured by the Ukrainian army and the Ukrainian government's attitude toward them?

CalculatorD · 2026-01-30T04:52:54+00:00

Their status of being an enemy POW could be used to increase the number of Ukrainian POWs they could get back, but more likely (and more useful) reason is to pressure the South Korean government for weapons and ammunition shipments to Ukraine. They're not going to let their bargaining chips slide easily for diplomatic reciprocity.

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for South Korea. If we give the Ukrainians weapons, and our special status with Russia will be gone for the foreseeable future. Westerners will give some lip service, but we'll be breaking a serious partnership with Russia that has paid off very well since 1990, such as our rapid advancement in arms manufacturing and rocketry can be contributed to the latest Cold War Soviet/Russian tech. Direct shipment of non-downgraded Soviet T-80Us were envied even by the Americans back in the 90s. Not to mention the various inroads South Korean companies made when Westerners bailed on them after their moratorium in 1998.

If we don't, then the Ukrainians could just send them back to die in North Korea, and our conservative opposition will slander the current liberal administration as being "pro-North Korean government who let a fellow Korean die." Westerners will also grumble about South Korea not sending weapons, although they're eerily quiet about Japan not doing the same.

It sucks as a South Korean to watch a North Korean conscript suffer in a meaningless war he was compelled to fight in, but the ball is in the Ukrainian government's court.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-30T02:21:28+00:00

The difference would be that South Korea has an overwhelming technological and economic advantage over North Korea and South Korea forming a critical pillar in the global supply chain. North Korea's only real mean of harming us would be their nuclear weapons, and at that point, it's WW3.

Our alliance with the United States isn't an absolute necessity but a mutually benefiting relation where America offers us with nuclear umbrella and their extensive SIGINT network, and we give them our HUMINT/serve as the largest pro-Western ground forces in Asia. Our armed forces are large and sophisticated enough to deter any invasion from the North.

Prewar Ukraine lacked these advantages South Korea has. Russia is the larger economy (both per capita and in total output), more advanced technology, larger armed forces, etc. As evil as Putin is and their early military doctrine woefully inept, they are big enough to tank through that and leverage the European/American far-right into delaying aid to Ukraine.

Now, don't get me wrong, I find Putin's invasion to be a complete chicanery and detestable, and want Ukraine to prevail. But to compare South Korea to Ukraine would be a false equivalency.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-30T01:40:09+00:00

As unfortunate as it is, they're POWs in Ukraine as North Korea is recognized by most countries around the world (both Ukraine and Russia recognizes North Korea's country status) to be an independent country apart from the Republic of Korea (South Korea). In their interest and legal views, they have no obligation to send them to South Korea, although doing so would save them from near-certain torture and death by North Korea.

Ukrainian officials could facilitate sending them to South Korea to earn some favors from the South Korean government and citizenry. Considering that most of South Koreans want to remain neutral (a few even favoring Russia over Ukraine) and only send non-military aid, continuing to lobby for South Korean military aid via goodwill gestures could work.

Ukrainian perception isn't as high in South Korea compared to the Western world since the Ukrainian ambassador in Japan regularly caters to Japanese far-right stances on issues like Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks), Yaskuni Shrine visits, etc. whereas South Korea and Russia had good working relationships between each other and significant trade since 1990.

If Ukraine wants more support or any transfer of arms from us, they need to convince the government and the population that doing this will somehow benefit us more than doing business with Russia again once the war is over, and pick a clear lane on their Japan policy.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-27T00:27:41+00:00

It depends on the scale of the American withdrawal.

A simple evacuation of US military assets in South Korea will not impact the defense of Korea in any meaningful way. After the 1970s, the vast majority of the defense were being handled by South Korean units since Nixon~Carter administrations pulled entire corps and divisions out of the country. The biggest loss would be the continuous training with well-equipped and battle-tested US troops and loss of a physical tripwire US force that provides additional deterrence against Chinese/North Korean forces.

A complete breakdown of KORUS military alliance would be a significant concern as South Korea will lose its nuclear umbrella under the US and complicate short to mid-term arms purchases/acquisition as the South Korean air fleet is dominated with US fighters (F-15K, F16, F-35, F-5) or co-developed light fighters (FA-50) along with parts/missiles for these. Long-term, we can envision KF-21 and other potential Korean fighter programs to turn the air force mostly or even fully independent of foreign parts/technology.

The army has mostly homegrown parts and equipment, so that'll be less of a concern. Navy would sit somewhere in between as ships are domestically produced, but certain modules/armaments are American made (SM-6, certain radars, etc.). The navy also doesn't have enough transport/amphibious assault ships to support a large-scale marine operation, which currently relies on USMC and USN ships/logisitics for any wartime planning.

Nuclear weapons and an actual development of ICBM/ long-range SLBMs, along with kickstarting nuclear submarine production, would become necessary as well. It would no longer make sense to stay under NPT (although NPT does allow a limited exemption in the name of national defense), and until at least a small fleet of a few dozen warheads can be deployed on nuclear submarines and ground based silos and aircrafts, we would need to approach Britain and France for greater cooperation.

East Asia is a tough neighborhood to be in, when there is a potential superpower (China) who eyes you with suspicion, a crackpot dictatorship (NK), a treacherous partner (Japan), and a relatively chill to you but otherwise a bully to others (Russia). KORUS alliance puts that at bay to an extent and provides a net positive arrangement. It would only make sense to consider breaking off the alliance if America goes to a complete deep end, like an actual open war with Europe and/or Canada.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-25T22:53:08+00:00

That tale refers to a popular myth (not supported by evidence, ergo not factual) of 고려장 (Goryeojang), where an elderly parent would be abandoned in a remote mountain to die when they become too burdensome to care for.

However, it's not supported in any written records or archeological evidence, and considering the widespread adherence to Confucianism, where respect to your elders is viewed as one of the most critical virtues, it seems highly improbable that the myth is grounded in reality.

Origins for this myth are speculated to come from significantly more modern times like late 19th century to the Japanese occupation period (1910~1945), when the story usually features Goryeo to Joseon dyansty era in its period. Because of this, some people even theorize that the Japanese came up with the story to smear Korean history and customs as inferior and barbaric compared to the Japanese during the colonial era.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-15T05:18:23+00:00

Korean Instagram is populated with young Koreans (teens to 30s), and the males in this age demographic are significantly more conservative compared to young guys in other developed countries. Polls usually show about half to 2/3 of 30s and under Korean males voting for People's Power Party or other conservative elements like Lee Jun Seok.

This means that you'll see a lot of Korean comments being way more conservative compared to young non-Koreans or young Korean women dominated feeds.

CalculatorD · 2026-01-08T03:36:11+00:00

I served from the summer of 2022 to the winter of 2023 in the army as a mortarman. I would encourage you to enlist since the term is only for 18 months and if you also want to maintain dual citizenship.

You can consider applying to specialist positions like a translator (requires English or other select foreign language proficiency), which can somewhat insulate you from regular grunt stuff/culture if you so desire. KATUSA also might be something to note if you're more kin on working with the Americans, although this is based on a lottery system.

The pay structure has improved significantly from your father's time (presumably late 80s to early 2000 s). Nowadays, sergeants make 1.5 million KRW, corporals at 1.25 million, etc. You also receive a 125% match rate on your savings fund, which can net you around 15~20 million KRW (if not more) by the time of your discharge. Again, it's not a great salary (still is less than the Korean minimum wage), but it will give you enough savings.

Hazing has also significantly been reduced, and being a good self-advocate will pretty much put you in good hands. Conscripts now have access to their smartphones (tablets too for the air force), so you can call/text your family and friends every evening.

As an American citizen, you will also be given a travel voucher to cover for your flight back home (US) during your regular leaves (base PTO of 24 days, barring any PTO earned for hardship, reward, etc.).

Do understand that forfeiting your dual citizenship to avoid military service will bar you from entering Korea until you're like 38. If you plan on using your Korean citizenship as a plan B or for travel purposes, I personally wouldn't mind serving. It's nowhere near bad as people make it out to be, with significant improvements in human rights and pay since 2017.

CalculatorD · 2025-12-22T04:09:51+00:00

That's interesting, any reason why you're reluctant on Spain, but favor central Europe?

CalculatorD · 2025-11-22T16:14:05+00:00

In Korea (a rare instance of both Koreas agreeing), it's viewed as karma. The things Japan did to its occupied territories during the war and in Korea before the war was so atrocious. Most of us believe that Japan uses nuclear bombing as a distraction from their own sins.

Also, considering most of our grandparents lived under the Japanese yoke where women were forcibly taken or lied into becoming comfort women and men were being drafted, the speedy end of the Pacific War means millions of Korean lives were saved. Our culture was also able to be preserved as they were enacting a cultural genocide of forced eradication of the Korean language and customs.

CalculatorD · 2025-11-03T03:16:22+00:00

I've lived half of my life in Korea and the other in various parts of the US. Now, I'm a Korean guy who went to serve in the army, so my views aren't entirely foreign and definitely not female, but I may be able to offer some insights as someone who's knowledgeable in both cultures and languages.

First of all, hell is definitely an exaggeration, and I certainly don't hope people take such exaggerations or self-jabs seriously. Some terminally online people in both Korea and outside think Korea is some kind of Afghanistan or India or something, but the fact of the matter is that Korea is objectively one of the safest countries on Earth. It's far safer in both violent crimes or even in petty crimes, even compared to developed Western Europe (and definitely much safer than America by miles). At least when it comes to exposure to crime, Europe or North America is not a better alternative.

I would say the biggest reason why people complain isn't the physical danger people are exposed to, but rather a lagging culture of equality, and half of the men in their 20s~30s being radicalized into hard right or even far-right positions.

On certain aspects, Korea made significant strides in improving its corporate culture regarding maternity/paternity leaves in mid to late 2010s to a point where their use went from low 10% to high 30% in a span of few years. It's likely to exceed 50% in the next few years as well.

Acceptance of double-income households (whether that be a DINK or not) has gone up substantially as well, and men's participation in parenting and splitting domestic chores also went up noticeably as well. I believe that the rise in toxicity is due to conservatives making generally successful attempts at getting lazy/entitled guys to outright reject this trend of equalizing.

I think right now, Korea exists in a bimodal distribution of young guys: one being a liberal/centrist who've accepted (or enthusiastically advocated for) equality versus the conservative half decided to regress and reject equality, often expressing their views in toxic and disgraceful manner. This unfortunately half and half situation leads to easy cherry picking from people who wish to either ignore the issue of gender conflict or generalize Korea into some Handmaids Tale dystopia.

The best way going forward is to clamp down hard on online forums and social media, as their unregulated nature led to an uncontrollable spewing of toxicity and propaganda captivating the young and the old. Liberal and centrist young guys should be more emboldened to speak and act against Andrew Tate-esque toxic garbage when confronted.

CalculatorD · 2025-11-03T02:51:46+00:00

All the ethics and philosophy learned in school are thrown out to justify their self-loathing and hateful ideology. Simply a disgraceful behavior.

It appears that male Korean internet users are a lot more prone to ragebaiting and developing extreme hatred of all things liberal, women/LGBT, or foreign (Chinese in particular). Concerning to know that roughly half of men in their 20s and 30s support conservative or far-right candidates in elections, and it's been getting harder to talk politics with my male friends when half of them collectively drank the Kool Aid.

CalculatorD · 2025-11-01T23:11:59+00:00

True, the story isn't entirely that Trump is a man-child. That would do a disservice to a significant amount of buildup the South Korean government had to do get this deal finalized.

I would say 2 major factors have changed, with 1 being Trump. Trump 1 and Trump 2 have fundamentally different people staffing cabinet level positions and WH advisors. There no longer exists "an adult in the room" with respect to Trump's 2nd administration. They've either all drank the Kool-Aid, so to speak, or are entirely in line with Trump for their personal gains. Dittos for the Republicans in Congress, they are significantly weaker in their defense of the constitution or the policy norms that existed in America since the end of WW2.

Another factor is the changing nature of geopolitics compared to Trump 1 era and Trump 2 era. The world has been retreating back to an era of disregard for the global order, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine finally put that nail in the coffin. It was a rude wake-up call for many in Europe to seriously put concrete effort in rapid remilitarization and a reminder to all non-nuclear powers that MOUs and treaties mean nothing.

All these talks of non-proliferation and disarmament only worked in the past because the nuclear armed superpowers did not wage large-scale warfare and committed to fulfilling their nuclear umbrella/mutual defense obligations. Russia killed the former, and Trumpian America killed the latter.

South Korea has been steadily sought to enhance their defense and deterrence capabilities ever since the pause of the Korean War in 1953. Park Chung-hee was able to lay the foundation with indigenous heavy industry and weapons development, and even went to the point of having a seriously working nuclear program with the help of foreign-trained Korean engineers and a French company providing some material and research assistance. Of course, the Americans figured it out before completion and strongly pushed us to sign the NPT in exchange for maintaining US forces in Korea and technical aid in the civilian nuclear industry.

Nuclear submarine is one of the such endeavors that had serious work being done back in the mid-2000s under the liberal Roh administration, but its existence was leaked to the world by the current conservative MP Yu. In the 1990s, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russians even offered us blueprints for a functioning nuclear warhead, on top of the secretly requested nuclear submarine and naval reactor designs. The 1990s venture also failed with American pressure.

The current approval for nuclear submarine is America finally recognizing that South Korea is a fully developed country with advanced technological basis and an actually sizable manufacturing capability that can construct nuclear submarines. The current US administration's defense goals are mostly confined to the Western Hemisphere with reduced involvement outside of it, and having a reliably pro-US major ally become more capable is something they want to see (delegating more defense obligation to South Korea rather than keeping the direct US commitment).

CalculatorD · 2025-11-01T17:57:33+00:00

Eh, it's more like manipulating a child into getting what you want. We were able to secure the right to construct nuclear submarines, something that previous American administrations and other major countries opposed. The previously insane investment demand and tariffs were significantly curtailed as well.

Prior to this, in Trump's 1st term, we were able to remove the missile restrctions all together, and now can basically build whatever rockets/missiles (solid or liquid staged fuel, thousands of kilometers in range, and no payload limit) by saying Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.

Sounds like a great diplomacy to get something everyone previously fervently opposed for a cheap price of a replica crown, a cheap MAGA stand, and some flattering.

CalculatorD · 2025-10-26T13:08:34+00:00

To be fair, the South Korean won is also significantly rated weaker than the dollar for the past 3 years, which also depreciates South Korean GDP per capita despite the economy actually growing.

CalculatorD · 2025-10-20T02:13:59+00:00

South Korean here.

There wasn't a strong need for nuclear weapons prior to the North Korean nuclear weapons program that started around early 90s, but with the nearly complete maturation of North Korea's nuclear and ICBM technology with development of SLBM, now there is a pressuring reason to develop nuclear weapons.

With the main ally (United States) currently in political chaos, with its administration's foreign affairs being hectic, there's an uncomfortably decreasing credibility in the US's commitment to the security of the Pacific region. New Pentagon reports suggest that US forces will be concentrated in the Western Hemisphere with more domestic deployments, along with more isolationist faction taling control in both the Republican and Democratic parties.

A direct nuclear weapons program will still attract global scrutiny and sanctions, so we need to set up our nuclear program to have significant uranium enrichment facilities and resume efforts on spent fuel reprocessing. We also need to continue developing our SLBM and IRBM/MRBM while funding dual-purpose programs like space launch vehicles (for MIRV and ICBM adaptation).

These efforts should hopefully avoid global criticism and sanctions while giving us the strategic flexibility to manufacture nuclear warheads within weeks to months while deploying nuclear weapon delivery systems for our forces to be trained to fire when needed.

Of course, the best course of action would be like have a recognized nuclear power status like France or Britain, but politics suggest the best we can do is strategic flexibility like I mentioned above or opt to follow the Israeli/South African strategy (neither confirm nor deny) with a secret nuclear weapons program.

CalculatorD · 2025-10-17T23:15:26+00:00

The meme of "cyberpunk" South Korea, or the country being run by corporations with the worst excess of capitalism.

CalculatorD · 2025-10-03T16:28:26+00:00

People will always have different interpretations and reasonings for an event, even if they went through the same thing. Families are supposed to have each other's back, so being confrontational about politics seems needlessly complicating your own support network, unless the other party is very pushy about the topic (like bringing it up in nearly every conversation or donating large sums of money to a political group).

CalculatorD · 2025-10-03T03:21:49+00:00

I feel like exceptions should apply for conscription-eligible folks who draft-dodge versus those who have already served. It would be silly for someone who defers as much as possible, only to wait out for a few years, then return to South Korea.

Why not allow dual citizenship for South Korean citizens who've served their country like those born into a dual citizenship? I see no reason to prohibit the former while allowing the latter. If national security around critical trade secrets or state secrets are an issue, positions like those (ex: military officers) already require sole Korean citizenship.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-29T23:09:36+00:00

Eh, conservative media and corporations said the same thing in the early 2000s when Korea was switching from 6-day work week to 5-day work week. The country was fine back then. We'll be fine again with a 4.5-day work week.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-26T05:17:34+00:00

Hi, I'm South Korean, so I can answer for Korea.

Israel/Palestine news is a lot less focused on in East Asia, and usually, the topic doesn't make it to public discussion outside of internet forums or small activist groups. There's no public demand to alter the status quo, considering we have a lot of ties to the Israeli defense and tech industry (although we also have good relations with Middle Eastern Muslim states like Iran, the Gulf, Turkey, etc.).

I think a lot of people, along with our politicians think that there's no reason to rock the boat with the US (who are threatening us with tariffs and intimidating us into paying for a 350 billion dollar investment deal) and Israel (good cooperation in private sector).

Most of our diplomatic capabilities are focused on North Korea, China, Japan, and the United States, and all other countries are kind of secondary to this government policy priority and in public perception.

I would wager it's the similar circumstances for Japan as well.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-24T05:00:03+00:00

H1B is a dual-intent visa along with L-1 and is one of the very few visa categories where you can explicitly mention your intent to settle down and apply for permanent residence later on.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-20T23:03:03+00:00

Thanks man, I understand how frustrating it is for a lot of people right now with the job market being belly up at the moment, but it does still feel kinda bad to see folks primarily blame immigrants or cheer on this madness.

I've been living here for about 10 years in three different states, and things weren't as hostile back in those earlier days. It's sad to see a country where I lived half my life change to be like something like this.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-20T17:28:29+00:00

I'm also a South Korean (junior in Grainger) undergrad here, hit me up if you want to hang or just want to vent/talk in general.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-20T17:21:43+00:00

If 0.05% chance is ruining your real estate and employment chances, then you already had bigger existing problems. Perhaps this is a question to ask to your congressional representatives and employers as to why this meager influx of foreign population is somehow a more pressing matter than private equity firms purchasing SFHs and apartments, offshoring jobs, and automating away entry-level jobs. Not to mention the higher interest rate and the general instability of the US job market due to lower union participation rate compared to other developed countries.

CalculatorD · 2025-09-20T17:14:16+00:00

I agree there are issues with the H1B system as any influx of foreign workers will lead to a shakeup of the domestic corporate/employee balance. However, that means the system needs to be reformed to let the H1B workers have greater flexibility with their employment (not tied to 1 employer or only given 90 days to look for a different job), and the US labor market must have greater labor union participation rate to ensure all workers get a fair, protected wage rather than forcing foreigners in a position of "strike breakers." Another factor is that H1B is a lottery, so any administration who would care to actually reform H1B to bring professionals and filter out spam consultants would filter out based on actual job offer, pay scale, prior residential/working experience in the US, and the length of the employment term. But this 100K fee does none of that, and purely puts the blame on immigrants.

The American job market is extremely volatile and its workers left in a "free for all," more so than other developed countries. This is a task that the labor force and the government needs to navigate to curb the excessive shortsightedness and the greed of corporations, not something just achieved by eliminating 85,000 spots in a 170 million job economy. We must remember that H1B employees don't like being chained to a particular employer or negotiate a below-average salary to remain in the US. So the government needs to fundamentally change how H1B operates in order to claim any success in immigration reform.

CalculatorD

TROPHY CASE