Comments by "John Vannisselroy" (@johnvannisselroy6197) on "RFU News — Reporting from Ukraine" channel.

  1. ​ @Bigliever Not a patch on the ruSSians.
    1
  2.  @AleksandarMacedonian222  More defeats for ruSSia coming to dash your hopes.
    1
  3.  @111076tom  And you purposely spread misinformation Tom. It sucks to be a Russian troll Tom.
    1
  4.  @robkit007  He didn't say you were Russian. He said you are a Russian troll. You don't need to be Russian to be a Russian troll. You just have to push Russian propaganda and BS like @111076tom does, to qualify as a Russian troll.
    1
  5.  @MrThatpersonthatguy  So you are supporting 2eo-2az1's in ruSSia? I do think so. Take your fake narratives elsewhere.
    1
  6.  @amc3463  Um you mean 10 years for us watch since little green men entered Crimea.
    1
  7.  @MrThatpersonthatguy  "let Europe handle its own problems". Spoken like a true vatnik.
    1
  8.  @РостиславРоманов-р9ж  Can you not find a forum in your own language? I certainly can't be bothered translating what you type - and going by the replies you're getting, what you write isn't worth translating.
    1
  9.  @РостиславРоманов-р9ж  Daughter, why would I even bother? It is obvious from others replies to you that all you are doing is pushing Russian disinformation. Go find a forum in your own language and stop being a waste of space here.
    1
  10.  @etcetera--nine  Fair comment.
    1
  11.  @NimChimpsky69  "...He knows it wasn't a good idea said he wouldn't do any more Israel reports..." Thanks for that information. I might check out his channel again.
    1
  12. "Fake news..." is what the ruSsian MoD publish every day.
    1
  13.  @Kerguelen.Mapping  If they don't control all the land and it's not internationally recognised, then it's NOT annexed. There's a legal process for annexation that includes free and fair ballots. That never happened - so they are not annexed. I could steal your car and pretend it's mine - but it's not.
    1
  14.  @Kerguelen.Mapping  If they don't control all the land and it's not internationally recognised, then it's NOT annexed. There's a legal process for annexation that includes free and fair ballots. That never happened - so they are not annexed. I could take your car and pretend it's mine - but it's not.
    1
  15.  @kevinsmarts9953  No, you mean russia annexing Poland. You're not very Smart Kevin, as you seem to be unaware that Germany and russia annexed Poland in the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact. Yes, russia was in an alliance with Adolf.
    1
  16.  @Kerguelen.Mapping  "ik but the original comment has the rfu saying that there are a lot of updates so yea". And that's your argument to prove that russia "annexed" parts of Ukraine (which it hasn't). It seems you are trying to change the subject.
    1
  17. ​@kevinsmarts9953 Whatever Kevinnotsmart. Your point is invalid because Germany does not include Poland. I.e. it's "annexation" was unsuccessful, just as russia's "annexations" in Ukraine will ultimately be unsuccessful (and are already partially unsuccessful).
    1
  18. ​ @kevinsmarts9953 It’s also invalid because since the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, the USSR signed the UN Charter in which it agreed to not attempt to change land borders by war. The pre-UN Charter rules don't apply anymore.
    1
  19. ​ @kevinsmarts9953 It’s also invalid because russian law does not allow territory to be ceded.
    1
  20.  @kevinsmarts9953  I could be both, and waiting in the bushes for you to come out. I don't know why you butted into my discussion with Mr Mapping - especially as you had no valid points to make.
    1
  21.  @jasongarfitt1147  They only need to get within easy artillery range of that railway line, which runs just south of Tokmak - it's the only rail link between the Donbas and Crimea. That will also enable them to disrupt every highway through the land bridge except the M-14.
    1
  22.  @moiseshuerta3984  What's the hurry?
    1
  23. Unfortunately Russian jamming is a problem.
    1
  24.  @hansrajmatharu7590  You're a bit behind the times, dear Russian troll.
    1
  25. Thank you for adding your view, and your delusional opinion.
    1
  26.  @GusOfTheDorks  That's easy Gus. Firstly, RFU does not have a "hard bias towards the Ukraine", he has a focus on specific events with a bias towards Ukrainian successes. RFU does occasionally report Ukrainian losses. A "hard bias" is what you find in videos with titles such as "5 Minutes Ago, Ukraine Drives Russians All The Way Back to Moscow" - which I don't bother with. "how would you know if Russia had any victories?" I have no doubt that ruSSia has little victories from time to time, if you consider the demolition of a handful of Ukrainian armoured vehicles to be a victory. But I watch the 'Deep State' map to see where occupations and liberations are occurring. The ruSSian army has achieved ZERO land occupations in the last twelve months, while the Ukrainian army has liberated well over 18,000sq km of Ukrainian territory. That indicates to me that ruSSia has had no significant victories. Then I check 'Oryx' to see what vehicle losses there are. In recent months ruSSian vehicle losses have averaged twice the number of Ukrainian vehicle losses. That again indicates to me that ruSSia has had no significant victories. Both those sources are more reliable than Ukrainian official figures, and hugely more reliable than ruSSia's MoD fantasy figures. Knowing that, I can sit back and comfortably watch Ukrainian victories her on RFU..
    1
  27. @user-zh2cu2jk9j No, YOU are going to be very, very disappointed.
    1
  28.  @robkit007  Russian troll alert.
    1
  29.  @AlessandroGenTLe  I struggle with the Transnistria situation. In the Donbas the situation is quite straightforward. The Donbas was always part of Ukraine and when the USSR collapsed in 1991 it remained part of the newly independent Ukraine. Transnistria, on the other hand, declared independence from Moldova about the same time as Moldova declared independence from the Soviet Union. As such, I don't see that it has any less right to be separately independent - not as a part of Moldova. Its location along the border of Ukraine is unfortunate, and the Russian troops are a potential problem to both Moldova and Ukraine. But is not Transnistrian independence just as justifiable as Moldovan and Ukrainian independence?
    1
  30.  @fosphor8920  Indeed, I would rather fight for my country than private rich people. Which is why I don't understand why people like you root for Russia. I don't understand why you are all about supporting the rich people - the oligarchs and khuilo Pootin - who have stolen so much money from Russia and from Russians.
    1
  31. Which really makes me wonder why the ruZZians persist with their "propaganda that lies".
    1
  32.  @glenolsen7888  "I look at the map on this site and yes the ruSSians are moving forward like a few kilometers a day". What, just a few kilometeres !!! Is that the best you can do? Ukrainian troops have been moving 7km a day in Kursk... But seriously: some days ruSSians achieve a kilometre, some days half a field, most days nothing. But each day they lose hundreds and hundreds of soldiers to artillery, mines, drones, etc. And the ruSSian advances are only local, not "up and down the WHOLE line of contact" as you mistakenly write. Putin wanted all of Ukraine in a couple of weeks (fail); Then he wanted all of Donbas by October, 2022 (fail); Then he wanted all of Donbas by the end of 2022 (fail); Then he wanted all of Donbas by end of March, 2023 (fail); Then he wanted just Bakhmut by May 8th, 2023 (fail). The ruSSian military isn't very good is it.
    1
  33.  @Andalus_EU  "you forgot about Donbass". No I didn't forget about Donbas (it is spelt with one "s"), I was referring to significant advances. And what is the cost to russia of the insignificant advances being made in Donbas?
    1
  34.  @Andalus_EU  No he hasn't been drinking. Drinking is more of a russian thing.
    1
  35.  @primum_parare  "My YouTube doesn’t translate from pig-dog (((" Yeah we know, we have to translate from your p-d.
    1
  36. ​ @shaneb315 In your opinion...
    1
  37. ​@shaneb315 My opinion is that you are having problems coping.
    1
  38.  @ThomMorrison  I agree. They are as near to accurate as it is possible to be in the fog of war. But it is @shaneb315 who is having problems coping with your figures - claiming that they are too high - not me.
    1
  39. Putin ordered the capture of all of Donbas by October, 2022. Then he ordered the capture of Donbas by the end of 2022. Then he ordered the capture of Bakhmut by the end of March, 2023. Bakhmut was finally taken in May, 2023. They still haven't taken all of Donbas. Yup, ruzzia has dropped it's expectation by quite a long way.
    1
  40. ​@ronwhitehouse23 Ron, you are the one living in a world of make believe. If Zelenski was going to run, he would have done so when offered a ride in the first days. If Putin was going to stay and fight he wouldn't have run to St Petersburg. I wonder which country has a brave man for its leader, and which country has a coward?
    1
  41. ​ @ronwhitehouse23  He ran away to St Petersburg because he is a coward.
    1
  42. ​ @Temislaw Try to seek information from neutral sources, not obviously ruzzian propaganda sites. And do some fact checking.
    1
  43. ​ @stinkypete891  I've let that sink in. It seems to suggest that ruzzians were mass killers back then too.
    1
  44. ​ @hatchxable Oh yes ruzzia did!
    1
  45.  @hatchxable  Of course ruzzia said it was to be a 3 day operation to take Kyiv. The fact that you are useless at research is not our fault (although it is typical of ruzzians to blame everyone else). It is obvious however that you are getting all your information from ruzzian sources. Take this quote of yours for example "Russia never said anything about a 3 days military operation. The original source of those claims was the US general Mark Milei who predicted the fall of kiev" You're spelling of both Milley and Kyiv is the ruzzian spelling, revealing your sources. ruzzia restricts what you are allowed to see to ensure you only get their version of events. "it was Boris Johnson who went to Kiev and told Zelenesky not negotiate, fight! You can beat the Russians". Why are you telling us old news? Of course Boris advised Zelenski to fight. And it was good advice too. At the time Ukraine was on the back foot with ~27% of Ukraine occupied by an a-hole invader. But Boris advised that with western support Ukraine could do better. He was right, the a-hole invaders now only hold ~17% of Ukraine. So tell me, what do you think fascist ruzzia's conditions would have been for peace back then? It would, without doubt, have required Ukraine to agree to fascist ruzzia's occupation of Kharkiv, Lyhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts - minimum. Most likely Mykolaiv and Odesa oblasts would have been included in fascist ruzzia's demands too - along with Ukraine agreeing to the international recognition of Crimea as ruzzian. So you can clearly see that Boris' advice was good advice. And it was a poke in the eye for the fascist invader - which is why all you ruzzian trolls are bitter about it. I guess it sucks to be a ruzzian troll.
    1
  46.  @mitchyoung93  Of course you remember it. You were old 400 years old back then.
    1
  47. ​ @freak94able  "who died again in the millions on the eastern front?". Now you are really showing your ignorance !! How were US soldiers supposed to die on the eastern front. The USSR wouldn't even let sailors onto the wharves when they delivered US supplies to Murmansk. There wasn't the slightest gratitude to those who risked both German U-boats and atrocious conditions to deliver supplies (some ships were lost due to ice build up during the winter sailings - but USSR would not let the sailors off the ships for a little R&R). "Surely US soldiers who didn't even entered ww2 before Pearl". ruZZia didn't enter the war until 1941 either. Before that they were an ally of Germany. But it is convenient for you to forget the Molotov- von Ribbentrop Pact between USSR and Germany. At least Britain and Europe were fighting Nazi Germany from the beginning, while US was neutral - unlike USSR which was kissing Adolf's butt cheeks from 1939-41, and would have still been kissing in 1945 had Adolf not declared war on them. You really are a gullible ruzzian troll.
    1
  48.  @hatchxable  "Hitler was already defeated". I think your brain has been defeated. Adolf killed himself on 30 May, 1945 - and Germany surrendered on 8 May, 1945. If Britain and US had declared a ceasefire until after Japan's surrender, the USSR would not have received US food and munitions and USSR would certainly have been defeated. As it was Stalin had to send millions of his troops to die in meat waves to beat the Nazi$. Sometimes the ignorance of you ruzzian trolls still astounds me.
    1
  49.  @hatchxable  We can all see that your view of history is distorted by the ruzzian disinformation you have been fed (and believed - silly you). But your statement here "The Germans took 80% of their casualties against the Soviets with 85% of their army deployed in the USSR" suggests that the USSR wasn't pulling it's weight. If 85% of Germans were on the eastern front, but only 80% of German casualties were on the eastern front - then the US, UK and western allies caused a higher casualty rate of German troops than the USSR did.
    1
  50.  @gordonbriggs2345  Oh dear Gordon, another foolish ruSSian troll advocating the use of nuclear weapons. Wake up buddy, if they try that it's goodbye Russia as well.
    1