Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "Why was RUSSIA so USELESS in World War One???" video.

@geofflepper3207 The thinking was that Russia would have been unbeatable by 1918-1920 if they hadn't been destroyed by war from 1914-1918. The industrial improvements that would've been needed to modernize Russia didn't happen, because all the men who would've been working on such things instead got conscripted to fight in the war. And what industrial capacity Russia had was all being focused on producing war materiel right now rather than on improvements that would only bear fruit 5+ years later. A nation at peace can focus more on long-term planning, while a nation at war (with enemy troops occupying large swaths of their country) can only focus on immediate survival.
6
@yasvirid 11000 are the civilian dead who have been individually identified. Neither Ukraine nor anyone else outside of Russia has data on the civilian deaths in the areas still occupied by Russia.
3
@gryaznygreeb There are effectively 3 tiers of citizen in Russia, as seen by how likely they are to get mobilized. Bottom tier are the ethnic minorities. Middle tier is ethnic Russians in the country as a whole. Top tier is ethnic Russians from Moscow. (I suppose you could also place ethnic Russians from other major cities like Saint Petersburg as an upper-middle tier.)
2
@yasvirid Yes, let's please look at what Russia did to Mariupol. Russia essentially razed the city to the ground. Erecting new buildings to replace the ones that were bombed out (along with bringing in Russian colonizers to replace the massacred or displaced Ukrainian population) does not make it "better than before the war." And there were not "one million dead in a month" in Iraq. More like one million dead in ten years, and that includes all of the civilians who were killed by insurgents, al-Qaeda, and ISIS.
2
In retrospect, Germany's huge mistake was in trying to knock out France at the start of the war before shifting focus to Russia. They should have done the opposite, striking out at Russia first and fighting a defensive war in the west. Which would've had the added advantage that since they wouldn't be violating Belgian neutrality, there wouldn't have been a valid pretext for Britain to enter the war on France and Russia's side. And without British involvement, the U-boat campaign and the Zimmerman telegram never would've happened to draw America into the war. Against just France, the Germans probably could've held the line in the west until Russia was knocked out. Granted, the British still would've tried to find some other pretext to join the war, just to keep Germany from getting too powerful. But they'd need to find something that would actually be acceptable to the public. Germany brutalizing Belgium fit the bill. But the British people would generally not have the same sympathy for Russia.
1
It's Russia. Nothing ever really changes.
1
@mistermax3034 You mean in the war where Russia has been trying and failing for a decade to conquer a nation a fifth their size?
1