Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "Russia's Air Force Has Finally Given Up" video.

@TheBiggreenpig : Indeed, what most westerners think Navalny stood for is probably at least partly wrong. He was not against the invasion of Ukraine or the growth of the Russian empire by force, in principle. He was against corruption and against the Ukraine war in the end because it was wasteful and destined to be lost. Judging by the chants at his funeral, it seems many of his Russian supporters didn’t really know what Navalny was really about. Alexander Litvinenko was another misunderstood figure like that. Murdered with polonium in London, people assumed he was a dissident because he was against what Putin stood for. But he was actually KGB through and through, and just hadn’t encountered such abject corruption as he saw in Putin. He was shocked at how he would kill his own people as easily as the enemy’s in vast numbers, just to make money. And he could prove it. But, we in the west would not have liked either of these people if they had become leaders of Russia. In that sense, they have done the west a greater service by martyring themselves as honest fools. A harsh epitaph, perhaps. But an honest one.
5
Always good to see you, and I’m always grateful. Thank you, Jake.
4
I always thought the pale parts on that USSR map from 1950 were meant to signify either places that were allied with the Soviets or that the Soviets were planning to take next. In that regard, as a simplified illustrative map for the people of that time, it’s quite accurate, isn’t it?
3
@nomcognom2414 : Yeah . . . Most of their airforce seems to be moving to the ground at very high velocities. I think they call it, “doing a Proghozin,” in Russia.
3
@hokroeger : Why do trolls always say, “lol,” when they’re crying? No one said any of that, except perhaps in Ruzzia.
3
@urlauburlaub2222 : The Warsaw Pact was a response to the forming of NATO. That is neither socialist nor a particular reading. Just a fact, son.
3
@hokroeger : Oh, you’re an AI. Your gags are straight from ChatGBT.
1
@urlauburlaub2222 : I never said anything about, “implementation.” NATO took years to evolve, but the fact remains that it was on the way and the Warsaw pact was a response to that. Fact, son. That’s your first sentence dispensed with. The rest, TLDR.
1
@urlauburlaub2222 : You don’t need an, “argument,” to state a fact, ChatBot. Opinions require arguments. Wake up, Putin. This is why you’re losing the war. You can’t tell fact from fiction. Or, in your case, fact from faction.
1
@johncarlaw8633 : So, you would agree then? That as an illustration for the largest possible audience of lay readers, that map was a helpful guide? Certainly not especially misleading? I know most of the expressions you described, though I must admit that the baggage that comes with the term, “Finlandisation,” is something I only really learned about in recent years. While I can understand Finns being somewhat twitchy on the topic, I would argue that they need to put the illustration in context. This is not a NATO memo. It’s an illustration from a popular magazine, attempting to convey a complex set of ideas in a single picture, whilst underlining the main idea; namely that Russia poses a threat to the democracies of the world, is ambitious and is ruthlessly expanding its borders by any means that work. Anyone living at that time, with WWII still a fresh memory for all adults, from a nurse to a garage mechanic, could pick up a copy of the magazine and grasp its themes by looking at that map, before even reading the article. In that regard it’s an excellent piece of work. And I understand why Jake admires it so much. So much information is conveyed in one simple picture, saying a thousand words.
1
@johncarlaw8633 : There are plenty of Finns who take the term, “Finlandisation,” as a pejorative. I certainly wouldn’t bandy it about in Finland. As to the map itself, context is everything. Jake explained what he likes about it the first time he showed it, and several times since. People who know his channel will understand. It certainly illustrates the fact that, the more things change in Russian international politics, the more they stay the same.
1