Comments by "Elias Ziad" (@eliasziad7864) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. Maybe it was a Leopard 2 turret that crashed into the moon, and not the Luna-25?
    50
  2. Yeah but tbh, Russia barely even used their air force in Ukraine.
    41
  3. Delete this video.
    30
  4. You do realize that Russia also has military industrial complexes... So this is no problem for Russia either.
    14
  5.  @rick7424  Perun is a Ukrainian propagandist.
    13
  6.  Spacey👺  Russia has a huge military industry, I am pretty sure they are fine...
    12
  7. Russia is not the Soviet Union, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union, so Ukraine is also explicit in helping the Vietcong.
    10
  8. Bro what about Belarus, russia can invade from Belarus and bypass the dniper...
    10
  9. A country wins a war when they complete their objectives.
    10
  10.  @Frank_Ammerlaan  Yet, Russia can do the same thing, on a much bigger scale. A-10 is a flying coffin against Russia when they will blow those things out of the sky.
    9
  11. So Russia is demilitarizing NATO?
    9
  12. NATO = North Atlantic Terrorist Organization
    8
  13.  @Putnamsmif  That's not true... Most of Ukraine's artillery are from the Soviet Union and thus, they use the same shells as Russia. And American arty she's aren't very accurate either, it depends on how you position the artillery gun...
    8
  14. Is that even a question?
    8
  15. Lol, this is the most delusional comment yet.
    7
  16. Everything you said is completely false. It's crazy how people overestimate the importance of air support. Here is the truth, Air Forces are just becoming more and more useless expensive waste, you can shoot down a helicopter or a fighter jet worth tens of millions of dollars with just a MANPAD worth less than 100k. There is absolutely no need for air support when you have artillery and MLRS and can deliver the same, or even more powerful attack with 100x less price and risk. That's why air support was so useful in ww2 because they didn't have such ground technology back then as we do now. Strategic bombing can be carried out by precision missiles. Carpet bombing is absolutely not needed unless you are trying to attack civilians. And no, Russian equipment is not obsolete at all, it is good enough to stand up against any enemy whilst being very easy and cheap to produce. It's how the equipment is being used regardless of what type of equipment you have. It is some ridiculous propaganda to say Russian equipment is obsolete or inferior to Western weapons, because you people might just believe your own propaganda, but when you do face them, you will be shaking and shivering while begging for their mercy.
    7
  17. Same for Russian conscripts, and Plus Russia bombs training centers killing hundreds.
    6
  18. There is so many things wrong with this comment. I'll go over a few, starting with your double standards, first, I love how you, an Amer9can, talk about sovereignty, since when did the US respect anyone's sovereignty? Didn't the US sanction turkey because they wanted to buy S-400 from Russia? And just right now, the US is threatening the Philippines with sanctions about them buying helicopters from Russia... Americans are the last people on earth to talk about sovereignty. Second the US suffered 300,000 casualties in Vietnam, 60k of them dead. Third, leaked reports suggest that Ukraine has suffered almost 190k total casualties...
    6
  19.  @matisek7923  No.
    6
  20. Ukraine has mobilized hundreds of thousands.
    6
  21. Man, Russian air defenses would shoot down most of Ukrainian rocket fire towards critical infrastructure. Short range air defenses such as Pantsirs have a 90% success rate in shooting down HIMARS rockets, its why Ukraine has given up in trying to shoot towards strategic targets far behind the frontlines and are now using HIMARS as battlefield weapons which are ineffective.
    5
  22. Ukrainians did that too, so did Ukrainian mercenaries when a British dude recorded his base and then 180 mercenaries were killed.
    5
  23. Man, Russian air defenses would shoot down most of Ukrainian rocket fire towards critical infrastructure. Short range air defenses such as Pantsirs have a 90% success rate in shooting down HIMARS rockets, its why Ukraine has given up in trying to shoot towards strategic targets far behind the frontlines and are now using HIMARS as battlefield weapons which are ineffective.
    5
  24.  @akbeal  1970s? This is from the 2000s technology, I think you are an indian troll
    5
  25. 🤡
    5
  26. Ukraine is running out of fuel and ammunition, and not enough guns. Plus Russia is bombing the hell out of Ukrainian supply lines and convoys.
    5
  27. They are already a world power.
    5
  28. Cus Russia occupies it.
    5
  29. I support Russia but Russian commanders have been wildly incompetent... Like the French, who in 1940 had superior technology, tanks, airplanes, training, and numbers on their side, yet they lost miserably to the Germans simply because the French had incompetent leadership while the Germans had superior tactics and doctrine whilst having coordination which really changed the battlefield.
    4
  30. Explain? Most of Russias equipment in Ukraine were old Soviet stuff. The S-400 is considered the best SAM system in the world, second, an S400 system in Kursk shot down a Ukrainian jet flying around Kiev that's more than 150 miles away...
    4
  31. Lol, ok buddy.
    4
  32. It's because he doesn't want a country on its borders to join NATO, invading Ukraine and installing a pro russian government will prevent NATO expansion.
    4
  33. That depot probably had a few days of Russian expenditures.
    4
  34. This is completely false, not single S400 was destroyed since it was produced. S400 shot down a Ukrainian Mig 29 flying around Kiev from Russian territory, more than a hundred miles away. Plus, the Crimea base was not attacked from the air it was a sabotage from the ground... Cope harder.
    4
  35.  @foilhat1138  Man, Russian air defenses would shoot down most of Ukrainian rocket fire towards critical infrastructure. Short range air defenses such as Pantsirs have a 90% success rate in shooting down HIMARS rockets, its why Ukraine has given up in trying to shoot towards strategic targets far behind the frontlines and are now using HIMARS as battlefield weapons which are ineffective.
    4
  36.  @kestutisvaiciunas8663  That's false, Armenia didnt lose 90% of its tanks. And tanks has always been a victim of air power, literally durng ww2, germany destroyed an entire Soviet tank division using airplanes only... Tanks can win you the entire war if you have air defenses that can shoot down drones and planes.
    4
  37. Then why doesn’t Russia rapidly advance with all those advantages they have?
    4
  38. Russia can just open another front.
    3
  39.  @stepbruv8780  Russia did not lose tens of thousands of men lol.
    3
  40. Isn't that what Hitler said after the winter war?
    3
  41. Ukraine ran out of them.
    3
  42.  @DeadJDona  They also ran out of them and captured by Russia...
    3
  43.  @DeadJDona  Yes, keep wasting your own equipment which will leave you guys with none left, I also wonder how Ukraine will pay all of that "aid" back, poorest and most corrupt country in Europe.
    3
  44. Yet, Ukraine is getting smaller
    3
  45.  @thebrazillianguytm2186  No, Because Soviet suffered heavier casualties against finland, meanwhile, Ukraine is suffering heavier casualties. Ukraine has 30k casualties, half of them are KIA.
    3
  46. USSR was the one who defeated nazi germany.
    3
  47. That’s ridiculous. Advancing slowly causes higher losses than advancing faster and breaking the enemy.
    3
  48. Lol, what an idiot.
    3
  49. HIMARS did not affect the Russian advance whatsoever, what slowed down the Russian advance were their operational pause which lost their momentum. Russia has already broken through the most fortified Ukrainian line at Pisky.
    3
  50. Yes because their tanks and artillery would just wipe everyone off the map.
    3