Comments by "DonXardas" (@DonXardas) on "HistoryLegends" channel.

  1. 75
  2. 40
  3. 20
  4. 18
  5. 17
  6. 8
  7. 8
  8. 7
  9. 6
  10. 5
  11. 4
  12. 4
  13. 3
  14. 3
  15. 2
  16. 2
  17. 2
  18. 2
  19. 2
  20. 2
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. ​ @toddforbes2079 1. Dont know where you got the 200 square km number. It is more like 160 square km. But ok lets say it is 200. 2. You do understand that the frontline is not a few km wide. It is thousand + km wide. Obviously Ukraine is not pushing everywhere on the frontline, but when you look at the areas they are pushing, those 200 square km mean nothing. It is just not significant enough. Depending on the exact position it means they managed to earn somewhere from a few hundred meters to a few km on. 3. Comparing land gain of two armies with different goals and strategies is just dumb. Russia does not need to take the land that fast. They can easily fortify their position and destroy the incoming forces, kinda like they do. 4. Yes they did not use their full force. But they already lost quite a number of trained soldiers (especially those wgo knew how to use western tanks) and quite a number of western tanks/equipment. Ukrainian ministery of defense said that they lost up to 20%, but as well know neither ukrainian nor russian official statement can never be trusted, the real number lies somehwere around 30% or 35%. 5. You see, there is a problem with people not understanding warfare just thinking that they can send their main forces on a mission that will change everything. Lets say if Ukraine uses it main forces to brach all the russian fortifocation and reach the sea. What do you imagine will happen? If they use all the forces or even just the vast majority, Russia can collapse ukrainian defences on the other parts of frontline. So Ukraine cant just use all their forces for that mission. So they need to send in, less units. Which would mean that breqching of russian defence lines would take longer if possible at all. Russian troops have more time for reinforcement. So you see it is not so easy. 6. What I agree with is that they are trying to cripple supply and command chain and are somewhat succesfull.
    1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. ​ @johanstinson no hamas is solely responsible for all the death. The history of the whole conflict can explain their reasons/motivation, but it in no way excuses them for what they did. And ok lets talk about the history of the conflict. Who started the first Israel-Arab war in 1947/1948? Was it Israel? No. The arabs did it. Did arabs ever suggested a peqce treaty? Nope. Did Israel and/or western countries offer a peqce deal? Yes, on multiple occasions. Did the arabs accept it? No. So yeah while Israel is not a saint (no country is) pretty much the whole situation is the fault of the arabs. And the most sad thing is, their hate (and their religion) is far more important to them in comparison to their children and their future. Just think about it for a second. The germans killed 6M jews. After nearly 80 years there are estimated to be only up to 12M in the whole world. So the germans killed probably more then the half of all jews in the world. The jews did not start a slaughter of germans. They did not killed german women or children. Today they live in peace with them. They did not let hate dictate their future. The whole Israel-arab conflict is only few years younger. And what do we see here? The arabs hate the jews so much, that they are willingly using their children as human shields and celebrate the death of jewish children and women. They could have build a great country with all the aid from EU, USA and other countries, but they turned themselfs into a terror state. There is no humanity in those savages. Only hate.
    1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1