Comments by "Chef Chaudard" (@chefchaudard3580) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. I suspect nobody thought that Russia would go full war for what is basically a « police operation ». Any sane government would have stop attacking when it was obvious that it would cost a fortune in terms of money and human lives. Nobody predicted that Putin would insist and the Russian people would follow him. Most thought that, showing the enormous support to Ukraine would deter Russia. And Putin would be replaced.
    13
  2.  @AntishaDowban it seems you don’t understand what a « war economy » is. 😮 Having a non convertible currency, spending billions to pay for military hardware and soldiers, having a part of the population enrolled,.. Add to that the sanctions.
    12
  3.  @Princip666 …says the troll. Who cares what you say?
    9
  4. What is more surprising is that this attack was succesful, as the USVs are very crude design. Modern warships are supposed to be able to deal with more sophisticated threats. This kind of USV would be turned to shred by onboard high rate of fire cannons from 1000m.
    9
  5. It is not about knowing, it is about understanding. 😊
    8
  6. I think Trump himself has no opinion on the matter.😊 He just wants to win the election.
    8
  7. It’s a pity we have so much Russian trolls in the comments, though…
    8
  8. It maybe the case, but Russia would have to concentrate strong forces to take back the bridgehead. Like the Ukrainians did to take back Kherson. Can they do that while also attacking around Adiivka? Or even without weakening some parts of the front?
    8
  9.  @AntishaDowban  none of these countries accepts to be paid with rubles. The ruble is worth nothing outside of Russia.
    6
  10. ⁠ @Princip666 does being paid in rubles help your career as a troll?😂
    5
  11.  @NikolayBychkovRus no. Supplying Ukraine with millions of rounds would cost almost nothing, as it will be split among tenth of rich countries. And these are new jobs, mostly where unemployment is high. And it will be partly paid by exports, as many countries are rearming. For CAESAR systems, for example, they ramped up production, which will allow new contracts that would otherwise have been lost, because of a tight schedule. Finally, Weapons are expensive, but we don’t talk of F35s and Leopard 2 A8, but things that were stored in warehouses or were being phased out. The cost is, in fact, insignificant.
    5
  12.  @Princip666  Watch something else, if you find his analysis flawed. Or say why it is flawed. You can’t. That’s why you assert and give no evidence. Like all Russian trolls.
    4
  13.  @toto-yf8tc  OK, you did not understand, and you are a liar. That’s what I suspected. About Russia collapsing in 6 months : citation needed So, he was right. At the time, Ukrainian offensive hadn’t culminated. Since then, it was stuck. And Russia is trying to retake the initiative. (Edit : And you are strawmaning what I said… wow!) You are not so good at trolling. Your Wagner training was too short?
    4
  14. Is Russia using North Korean missiles in Ukraine dragging it in the war? France supplied missiles to Ukraine, that were used in Russia. Did Russia declare war to France?
    4
  15. Sûre! He works for the Kremlin!
    4
  16.  @genxunclekey  because most European nations relied on the US for their safety, and it is hard to change a mindset. We are slowly understanding that the US will not always help us unconditionally and that they have their own goals. It will take years to sink in, but it has started.
    4
  17. Do we have any reason to believe you? Present your credentials.
    4
  18. No evidence? Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
    4
  19. Do you still believe they are not that stupid, after all the stupid mistakes they have made so far?
    4
  20. No evidence? « Quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur »
    3
  21. Which « experts » are you talking of? Not APN evidently. And what source do you need to be convinced? Russian propaganda? Perun here on YouTube has made two videos about Russian and Ukrainian economies, with plenty of sources, including the Russian ones. You should have a look.
    3
  22. Nobody knows. He is unpredictable.
    3
  23.  @letMeSayThatInIrish  i can’t say for other countries, but France ramps up production of shells and CAESAR (these are the ones we know of). And France was the second larger military exporter on last year. Germany improved its tank production. The EU made several agreements to finance the war and military production. So, I don’t know the extent of what’s behind the curtain, but we have signs that European countries understand where the danger is. Late, maybe, but then…
    3
  24.  @Jeroen_Maes  these countries can buy it from elsewhere at a fair price, as prices are global. In fact 1/3 of exports are going to Europe, 2/3 elsewhere. It is likeley, also, that some "old grain" was not stocked properly and is not good for humans food. This is the reason why the first shipment was refused by Lebanon. It is good enough, though, for animals and fuel, so good enough for Europe.
    3
  25. No evidence? « Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur »
    3
  26.  @Tom_Quixote source?
    3
  27. Do you have any clue what « strategy » means? Or what a « source » is?
    3
  28. In fact, many military in the west HAD to overestimate the Russians.. If you want money from your government, it is better to paint your potential enemy as very strong. Otherwise, your government will just turn you down. (Russian propaganda, with its supposedly invincible hypersonic missiles, tanks and stealth aircraft’s certainly helped…) The meager investments of many European governments in NATO were because their military pretended that the Russian army was an actual threat. Otherwise, they would have received even less.
    3
  29. You still there, Putin troll? I thought you retired?
    3
  30. No evidence? Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
    3
  31.  @Princip666  sources are in the vidéo.
    3
  32. How much rubles do you earn for this comment?
    3
  33.  @algor8541  « easily »? For almost three years, Putin did nothing when new « red lines » were crossed. He did nothing following Kursk offensive, not even try to retake territory. Why would he react tomorrow? Russia has its hands full with Ukraine, adding more enemies is probably not the wisest thing to do.
    3
  34.  @algor8541  true, but it means also that they are not willing to react. Added to the fact they have very little options…
    3
  35. Sûre! Cope…
    3
  36. Putin cannot loose. But as he is not fighting on the frontline, it makes no difference. His soldiers will loose for him.
    3
  37.  @thisnewnow  delusional for asking for his credentials? What do you mean?
    3
  38. If Ukraine can take Tokmak, they cut the supply route to the armies on the Kherson front and Crimea, leaving only the Kerch bridge for that. Coupled with a few SCALP on Kertch bridge, these positions would be untenable. Nobody knows if they can do it, but it is a major threat for the Russians and would be a strategic success.
    3
  39. Blind faith can be misleading
    3
  40. That’s right. Add to that Russia relies more and more on obsolete Soviet equipment.
    3
  41. Ruling the world? Maybe you missed the part where Russia attacked Ukraine, threatening Europe with an invasion and a nuclear war?
    2
  42. Tell me… you did not watch it? Or you did not understand it?
    2
  43. There are two things about that: - Tokmak, as mentioned, is only 20km from the frontline and the defensive lines to protect the city already exist. Taking Tokmak would cut the supply line from Russia to Kherson district and Crimea. A defensive line is several km deep, with the mined no man’s land, The « dragon teeth » and trenches, and the space required behind for the following line. There is only a certain number of lines they can build on this deep, and there are already in place. - a defensive line need to be defended. If the Russian army is short of manpower, having exhausted its decisions defending existing lines, they will not be able to man whatever number of new lines behind.
    2
  44. Radovan Karadzic and several other convicts beg to differ…
    2
  45. Kyiv in three days 😂
    2
  46. Well… It seems that it is the Russians who disregard Ukrainian air defense system…
    2
  47.  @Jole30 source?
    2
  48.  @Jole30  i know a few about the subject and can tell you your number is BS. Actual number depends of the SAM system in question (the layers of the different systems, in fact) the targets, their location, when and where they are identified… A 100% rate is possible in certain circonstances on some targets.
    2
  49.  @XL0G  you’ll not find the answer : your premises are false.
    2
  50. What a primitive analysis. No source, not even an argument. Russian bot?
    2
  51. We are now on year 3 of the 3 days operation. Everything goes as planned.😂
    2
  52.  @algor8541  do you realize that destabilizing African countries to put friendly dictatorships in place is against these countries sovereignty? That’s what Russia did.
    2
  53.  @algor8541  no, i call that countries where some military generals took over a the power by force. Is it a normal way to seize power where you live? Do you call that a »democratic country »? And France pays for what it is buying. Doing business is not a bad thing.
    2
  54.  @evgeniya7853  maybe, and? What is your point? That we should not react when they bully others?
    2
  55.  @algor8541  French forces were never in Nigeria. Military junta ask French government to leave Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali. So we did, unlike the Russians in Ukraine. And, no, prices for French companies are the same than for other countries, this is normal trade.
    2
  56.  @algor8541  we did not invade Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso. We were there because they called us. We leave these countries when their government asked us. we did not invade Ukraine. This is just whataboutism.
    2
  57. No.
    2
  58. Bot…
    2
  59. Putin? Sure!
    2
  60. Unlikely. During WWI France mobilized 8 millions people and lost 1,400,000 for a comparable population. Ukraine is far, far from these numbers.
    2
  61. Arm these conscripts with what? Sticks and stones? And if they could use their aviation, they would. But they can't, for various reasons.
    2
  62. Putin himself disagree with you : he was upset, promised to « free » that part of Russia. And he did nothing of the sort so far.
    2
  63. 05:38 i would split phase 1 in 2 parts: Phase 1 ends when it becomes clear that the 3 days offensive cannot be achieved because of ukrainian opposition. In Phase 2, the russians tend to push forward without reconfiguring their military arrangement, despite losses and the fact they are stuck in many places, in hope that ukrainian opposition will collapse.
    2
  64.  @ignacemorel641  he worked for nato, whose potential adversary was (still is) Russia. He may have some knowledge about Hamas or Israeli strategies and tactics, but it is probably not his strong suit.
    2
  65. Year 3 of the 3 days operation. Everything goes as planned…😂
    2
  66. Hey, we are talking of Russia, here. Maybe the seventh army in the world, an economy the size of Spain! Not some superpower the world must listen to! USSR died decades ago!
    2
  67. Watch Anders' video about the subject, and come back.
    2
  68. « Perfect solution fallacy » It is not because something is not perfect it is useless. These warrants are an hindrance for Putin. It shows he is not above the laws, it restricts the number of countries he can visit, and put Russia in a bad light.
    2
  69.  @sergeipetrov_rzn  « frivolous « … tell that to the victims.
    2
  70. F-16s…😊
    2
  71. Because he knows what he is talking about, unlike you.
    2
  72.  @markopodganjek845  I doubt that. China is helping Russia, because it pisses off the US. But they can’t do do that openly. And if Russian economy collapses, they will never pour the billions required to sustain it. Because this money will be used to sustain the way of life of people in St Petersburg or Moscow, not the war. What will most likely happen is that Russia will go deeper in a war economy, with fixed salaries, fixed prices to stop inflation… and nothing to buy in the shops and no investments in the non military sectors. All money going to the war effort.
    1
  73. « Breakthroughs » of 1 or 2km 😂😂 « flea bites on the bear » that forced Russia to a war economy, after the loss of tens of thousand armored véhicules, hundreds of thousand dead and injured… Yeah… no!
    1
  74.  @RandallBurt-u1w  it is a war of attrition. Ukraine has more ressources, thanks to the allies, and manpower, as they don’t have to care about other borders or their industry, unlike the Russians. Morale of the troops is good enough that they hold their position and even counterattacked. And that for two years and a half. USA was defeated in Vietnam and Afghanistan, despite being a nuclear power. France leaved Mali when this country asked for it. These are facts. Selling an alternate reality is what Russian trolls are paid for.
    1
  75.  @jful  he’s a troll. He spams the same sh*t under every video where Russia is mentioned . I bet you’ll have no answer.
    1
  76. This clown in the comments shows he is stupid!
    1
  77.  @toto-yf8tc  ok, we’ll see for the 6 months. Future will tell. For the rest, I stand by what I said. You’re not a very good troll.
    1
  78.  @olafsigursons  according to Wikipedia, russia has 35 Mi-26. One heli can carry only half the load of a standard lorry. And probably only a part of them are available (maybe 10, 15) I don't think it will be a game changer. But it shows, as you said, that they have not enough troups in the region.
    1
  79. That’s not what he said. Watch the video before commenting.
    1
  80. NATO is stronger than ever… thanks Putin!
    1
  81. Nuclear threat is a bluff.
    1
  82.  @praveendreamer  well… the « bluff » has far, far more tanks, aircraft’s, soldiers, warships than Russia. It is also much more wealthy. So I would not call the big guy a « bluff » when I am half his size and weight.
    1
  83. Do you believe Ukrainian propaganda?
    1
  84. Are not the Russians supposed to be the invaders, not the opposite? Kyiv in three days?
    1
  85. Russia winning the war? They have already lost. No credibility on the international scene, it’s professional army gone, most of its tanks and IFVs destroyed, NATO close to its borders, the economy in shambles,…
    1
  86.  @tomk3732 you are not pro Russian? You? lol!😂
    1
  87. This kind of warfare, apart from the nuclear bombs, has proven to be inefficient.
    1
  88.  @andrewallen9993  what are you talking about? Bombing a factory a power plant is not the same as targeting civilians, to break their will to fight, in accordance with Giulio Douhet theory. Which eventually never worked.
    1
  89.  @RandallBurt-u1w  why do you answer me? You know the guy I was answering to? He is a grown up and can reply himself, without your help.
    1
  90. 500 miles? That’s called a missile, not a bomb. No bomb has such a range.
    1
  91.  @enriquelaroche5370  an AASM has a range of about 70km. Compare that to 800km (500miles) Pretending that a glide bomb has such a range is just…well…
    1
  92.  @enriquelaroche5370  ten times…. Ten times the range of a standard glide bomb… sure, bro… It is not a « range extender », it is an actual missile propulsion system.
    1
  93. Being neutral when it has been proven your adversary does not care about your neutrality is suicidal.
    1
  94. Do you remember the Vietnam war? At some stage, the north Vietnamese army did not have the means to take the south. The US were much, much stronger. And who won in the end?
    1
  95.  @Markusctfldl  it may be « wishful thinking », but the fact is that the war is raging for almost 3 years, that the invader is now invaded. And, even if Ukraine cannot recapture Donbas, they will not be a satellite state of the Russian empire. And this is quite an achievement. Compared to Vietnam, the USA were not economically or militarily broke. There were stronger than ever. On the contrary, Russian economy is struggling, drawing on its « health fund » to finance its war and spending all its money to buy military gear that will be destroyed in Ukraine. The old Soviet stock is almost empty, and the professional army was replaced by hastily trained volunteers.
    1
  96.  @Markusctfldl  Ukraine does not want to take parts of russia, while Russia wants parts of Ukraine, if not the whole country. so, comparing the two is moot
    1
  97. And, what difference does it make on the strategic level? Did Russia take Kyiv? Threaten Kherson and Odessa? Ukrainian supply routes from Poland?
    1
  98.  @Princip666  Watch the video. It answers your question.
    1
  99.  @Princip666  it’s worthless because the arrows are too big? Seriously? May I suggest you watch it again?
    1
  100. Stop lying.
    1
  101. Medvedev repeats that. And just because Putin does not say something are we entitled to doubt it? He is not trustworthy, anyway.
    1
  102.  @tjtube65 it’s a bot you are talking to!
    1
  103. Tea leaves? Cristal ball? Chicken entrails? 😂
    1
  104.  @evgeniya7853  thé OP is your friend? He cannot defend himself and need a lapdog to bark for him?
    1
  105. I think that the type of warfare has changed. Rasputitza is still a hindrance, but the fight is more about small quantities of soldiers attacking entrenched soldiers, covered by an anti aircraft bubble and supported by artillery. Not large forces of tanks and IFVs charges or cavalry runs. Moving supplies around is not so critical.
    1
  106. What about watching the video before commenting ? You should try!
    1
  107. It is also why Al Assad fall is a blow to Russia. They don’t really need Syria economically or militarily. What they needed was the symbol : a puppet state far away to show the world they are still a powerful country. Putin invaded Ukraine because he wanted to stop the crumbling of the Russian empire. Events in Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, the war between Azerbaïdjan and Armenia he could not prevent were evidence he could not control this empire. Ukraine independence was the nail in the coffin. Putin so resorted to the only way he knows to settle things : violence. Coercing Ukraine into submission would demonstrate the might of Russia to the world, more than any hypersonic wunderwaffe or Lavrov visit to some junta leaders in Africa. And show puppet countries what was awaiting them if they tried to rebel.
    1
  108. That it is BS. Anybody can type GPS coordinates in a computer.
    1
  109.  @peturadunga  i suppose that the supply of the missiles included training and tools… so what?
    1
  110.  @peturadunga  using a missile is not rocket science… well, it is 😁 but there is nothing that can’t be learned by clever people in a few months. All they have to know is how to prepare the missile, check it, set the coordinates of the target and voila. The missile relies on its inertial system and GPS reception to hit the correct location. There is a video here on YouTube of some blokes learning how to do that, and they are not high end engineers.
    1
  111.  @peturadunga  i worked in there, yes. Not ATACMS but similar domain… but maybe you’ll have an answer from APN?
    1
  112.  @peturadunga  western countries giving information to Ukraine is no secret, nor new. France declared they give free access to French satellites to Ukraine several years ago. NATO also declared they were helping Ukraine with information a few months after Russian invasion. Despite that, Russia never declared war to these countries at the time, judging that it was not important enough for that. So, what is your point?
    1
  113.  @peturadunga  i have answered your question. Twice : there is no need of a more direct involvement of western personnel. As far as we know, there is nothing new for months and no reason to think it is different now. There are probably some « advisers », but not more than one or two years ago. I would say that there are probably less now, as the Ukrainians have learned how to use and maintain most of the weapon systems they have been supplied with.
    1
  114. I checked and… no! It has not.
    1
  115. Russian economy is a war economy: they spend fortunes to sustain the war. And they will run out of Soviet equipment to reactivate, sooner or later.
    1
  116.  @dingbobgasama8224 there are no « open doors » in a war, as long as there are troops to hold their positions. Fortifications can be built in a matter of days. In the Somme region, the terrain is flat, and despite that, the Germans hold their positions in 1916.
    1
  117.  @dingbobgasama8224  until Pokrovsk is taken (if it is even taken), the Ukrainians have plenty of time to fortify their rear. It is not the Kursk front, where the Russians did not expect an attack. It is a location that is disputed for years, where the Russians push for months. In short, achieving surprise gives a big advantage. There will be no surprise on the Pokrovsk front.
    1
  118. Sûre… source « trust me bro! »😂
    1
  119.  @XL0G yes… and?
    1
  120.  @XL0G  why don’t you answer my question ? Too much for you? You know how to call people names, but fail at giving any argument?
    1
  121.  @XL0G  ‘yes’ means you are right. Anders says in the video that The offensive has not yet reached culmination and it is about 2 months since it started. ‘And?’ Is to ask you what conclusion you draw from these facts, that all viewers are aware of . If any.
    1
  122.  @XL0G  let say, for the sake of the argument ‘yes…and?’
    1
  123.  @XL0G  why are you repeating what’s in the video? I’ve watched it… So, your point was to say that the Ukrainian offensive is still stuck at the moment, despite great efforts and losses. OK. Thanks Captain Obvious! Which does not say anything about where and why A P Nielsen is wrong. You just assert it. I’ll answer like I did to the other troll : « quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur ».
    1
  124. Probably some cover to a reconnaissance mission.
    1
  125. Why winter? You still believe in Santa Claus?
    1
  126.  @Princip666  do you mean you need a source for things that are common knowledge? Did you live under a rock? You happen to know that Russia is currently invading Ukraine? That they launched several offensive, some still ongoing? That these had very limited success? Come on!
    1
  127. OK vatnik…
    1
  128. Says who?
    1
  129. And you believe Ukrainian propaganda?
    1
  130.  @petronixoonable  Russian propaganda assure they can defend their oil facilities! All the hundreds of drones were shot down and only minor damages were caused, due to debris!😁 So it is not a good example. Ukraine is asking for more weapons and ammunitions. Better show why.
    1
  131.  @petronixoonable  yeah, you start to understand. Not all the information coming from both sides can be taken as face value. It must be analyzed. asserting things like if it was some undeniable truth, because it fits your preconceived ideas, like you do, is stupid. The fact is that the Ukrainians can be short of men and ammunitions on the Pokrovsk front… or they want the Russians to believe it. We don’t know. Some experts, for example, have said that there are some Ukrainians elite brigades that are not on the Prokrovsk or Kursk fronts. We don’t know where there are. Could the Ukrainians have some hidden reserves?
    1
  132.  @rphb5870  « sabotage » is from Russian point of view. Ukrainians beg to differ 😁
    1
  133. 😂😂🤡
    1
  134. The losses in the Kursk region cannot be compared to the losses in the Pokrovsk region. It was achieved in a few days, against an enemy that was both surprised and inferior.
    1
  135.  @funyt7364  number of days, I said it. There is so much you can loose per day.
    1
  136. The fact is that the war is raging for almost 3 years… boring?
    1
  137.  @Jinke888  the war has no value?
    1
  138. No.
    1
  139. Win what? Did you watch the video? It is unlikely Russia will ever reach its goals.
    1
  140.  @algor8541  no, it is not an assumption. What Russia did to France in Africa demonstrates that this country is toxic. The « hybrid war » it leads in Europe demonstrates that. The attack of a free and indépendant country, despite the numerous treaties Russia signed demonstrates that. We have plenty of good reasons to think that Russia is a threat.
    1
  141.  @evgeniya7853  no argument? You are down to ad personam and insults? OK, troll…🤡
    1
  142.  @algor8541  Niger is totally free to switch to another customer. They are actually doing that the moment. France never threatened to invade the country for that. So, I don’t know where your « neocolonial » situation is…
    1
  143. Russia already lost.
    1
  144. Yeah.. and you talk to US pilots training the Ukrainians daily… Sure, bro…
    1
  145.  @nikolajk5330  « gen5 systems »… which system are you talking of? The invisible Su 57?😁 And F-16 is considered as 4gen. So, it will do.
    1
  146.  @nikolajk5330  i don’t think the F-16 will be a game changer. No more than Anders. Tanks and IFVs were a game changer : the Russians were stopped, retreated and are now stalling. « Massive attacks » by Russia are not so massive : they are unable to achieve any strategic goal, apparently. A runway is a runway. There are no special runways for F-16. And there are plenty of them in Ukraine, leftover of the USSR. Even a highway can do : the Swiss demonstrated recently that F-18 can use them. Can you ever have a valid point, or just garbage?
    1
  147. Kursk is not in Russia anymore? The Ukrainian are « retreating » in Russia proper?
    1
  148. « Us »? You are already at war, vatnik!
    1
  149. They are not winning.
    1
  150. Only one country had nuclear weapons, at the time… Times change, you know? Basing your understanding of today on 1945 geopolitics will lead you to bad conclusions.
    1
  151.  @Михайло-д2п  i told you what changed! Read again. And I agree that Putin was stupid to start a war that can lead to a nuclear war.
    1
  152.  @orenalbertmeisel3127  what is a Q or blueanon? I know what a Russian troll is. But I don’t know these.
    1
  153. Yeah. Russian trolls are all over the comments.
    1
  154. A short comment that doesn't say anything. 🤡
    1
  155. What did you expect? Classified reports from the Kremlin, Kyiv and the US?
    1
  156. No, they don’t.
    1
  157. Bot…
    1
  158. If you have a case, present it to the ICC… unless you live in a country that is not part of the agreement, or the persons you refer to are not covered by the ICC, it will be investigated.
    1
  159. For both sides, yes…
    1
  160.  @NewOrleansSeptember  Kursk…
    1
  161. Good bye!
    1
  162. No. It is not accurate enough.
    1
  163.  @enriquelaroche5370  Even if it is true that the « target was demolished », which remains to be seen, an aircraft carrier is not a fixed site, but a moving target. There is no confirmation that these missiles were something other than standard IRBM or ICBM.
    1
  164.  @enriquelaroche5370  launching an ICBM would be considered as a nuclear attack… and booom! MAD!
    1
  165.  @enriquelaroche5370  which AC port do you think China or Russia can strike with an IRBM? The only ones are in France or the UK . And there are nuclear powers. Any launch may be considered as a nuclear threat. And don’t tell me that playing with long range missiles is a silly game. Tell that to Poutine.
    1
  166.  @enriquelaroche5370  surrender what? They invaded a country, it failed, they go home. Like many others, including the USSR, did in Indochine and Afghanistan, that simply left and never had to surrender.
    1
  167.  @enriquelaroche5370  a nuclear exchange would turn France, uk and Russia into rubbles. So what? What do you think would prevent that? Give Putin all he wants? He will ask for more and more, and never stop.
    1
  168. Kyiv in three days… 😂
    1
  169.  @mangodzeri6613  ALL military experts agree that it was the plan… Land in Hostomel, go to Kyiv, replace the government while invading the country before the Ukrainian army could react. Do you live in an alternate reality, where dictators plan years long war that broke their economy, weaken their international position and reduce their army down to conscripts armed with sticks and stones, after hundreds of of thousands young men lost their lives?
    1
  170.  @obligatoryusername7239  yes, and? We are talking of an army of about 1 million men. Almost four times less than what France mobilized in 1914.
    1
  171. For good measure : Russia has planned to extend its army up to 2,2 millions. That includes conscripts, that are not supposed to fight in Ukraine, and military used on other theaters (navy, Air Force, Chinese and European borders). Meaning that, even if that goal is reached, Russian army will outnumber the Ukrainian army only by a small margin. The issue is not the number of men, both countries can certainly do more, but it is limited by equipment availability and training. The losses have been huge on both sides, skilled soldiers and modern equipment are in short supply. From what I can infer from OSINT data is that, at the moment, both sides are unable to equip and train new units, just refit existing ones.
    1
  172.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  34 millions in Ukraine according to statista. And it makes no difference. See my response above.
    1
  173.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  you did not read what I wrote. - whatever the losses are, we are far, far under what France suffered in WWI. So it is unlikely Ukraine will be short of men in the short or medium term. - replacing the losses, as creating new units, requires more men. No wonder Ukraine is mobilizing more men. Which does not mean they can’t find them now and in the future, only that a larger part of the population will be mobilized. Again, tUkraine mobilization numbers are far from what other countries involved in a war did. For example, UK mobilized 6 millions people during WWII. Which comparatively less than many countries. For a population of 47 millions. Corresponding to 4.5 millions for Ukraine. Far more than what Ukraine mobilized so far.
    1
  174. The difference is that the Ukrainian fight for their future. Not the Russians. Even if Russia looses, their country will still be there. There will be no Ukraine if they loose.
    1
  175.  @carltonbauheimer anybody can use GPS.
    1
  176.  @carltonbauheimer  - the ATACMS are from the USA, not NATO. - GPS receiver being a passive system, no one is « actively involved » - if you meant that the USA provided the missiles, yes, we know, captain Obvious. They provided also the training and the tools to use them. I suppose tha North Korea did the same with the missiles given to Russia. So what?
    1
  177.  @carltonbauheimer  NATO is an alliance. Some things are done by the alliance, some things are done by its membres independently. You being part of a golf club does not mean that all you do is in the name of the golf club! See?
    1
  178.  @carltonbauheimer  caring about « semantic » is the way to write comments that are on the point, comprehensible and, in the end, accurate and sound. Your comment is inaccurate and its soundness is so questionable.
    1
  179. @ which « real point »? That the missiles were supplied by the US, France and the UK? Yes, we know… so what? That these countries are « directly involved »? In what ? The supply of weapons? Sure. The war? No. According to international laws, there is no state of war between Russia and these countries. Poutine did not declare war, as far as I know, and he is the one who should do it if he thought that these countries were « directly involved ».
    1
  180.  @carltonbauheimer  France granted Ukraine access to its military satellites a year or two ago. NATO declared that they were giving information to Ukraine, at the same time. Nothing has changed. Of course western countries are helping Ukraine with intel, this is no secret nor new. It was not considered as a « direct involvement » by Poutine, otherwise he would have declared war at the time. So what? Why include it in todays video as its ongoing for months?
    1
  181.  @carltonbauheimer  yes… sûre… it is the other way around : you failed to convince us of your point…
    1
  182. Source?
    1
  183.  @peterinns5136  troll answer, as usual : «  do your own research ». OK, troll…
    1
  184. No, the most optimistic experts see Russian army and economy broke.
    1
  185. He is an expert of Russia, not the Middle East.
    1
  186. If the Russians are so kind, why don’t they go back home and wait for another 100 or 200 years for Ukraine return? They are not welcome in Ukraine… evidently.
    1
  187. It was two years ago, man… 😛
    1
  188. Why is the war ongoing for more than 2 years, if it is the case?
    1
  189.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  20km. Is it « close » or « far », I don’t know. Nor do you.
    1
  190.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  so… 4 more months, and the Russians are done. I don’t think it is as easy, but why not. 😉
    1
  191. Furthermore, US is the only country that can supply large enough quantities to equip an army.
    1
  192.  @obligatoryusername7239  i don’t see a war between China and Europe as a major threat in the near future. Europe does not have the means to sustain any kind of war overseas. And we are already unable to supply large quantities of military equipment to Ukraine, so a proxy war is out of the question. The threat is Russia, for the moment, and it is already stretching our capabilities.
    1
  193. What about watching the video before commenting ? You should try! 🤡
    1
  194. Sure, troll. For 2 and a half years now.😂
    1
  195. Who’s supporting you, vatnik?
    1
  196. Because Putin rejected it.
    1
  197. His only weapon is economics. Sanctions. Tariffs. The thing is, the only countries that would suffer from that are US allies, who have strong economic ties with the US. Potential ennemies, like Iran, North Korea, Russia, Afghanistan don’t care : they are already under sanctions. So Trump threatens his friends, because he can, not his enemies, because he cannot.
    1
  198. There are several runways in Ukraine, inherited from the ussr times.
    1
  199. Empty account created in august 2022. Bot…
    1
  200. Which territory? Ukraine lost something like 2% of its territory during last months. Russia occupies something like 20,6% of ukraine... consisting for a large part of what it already occupied before the war.
    1
  201. The Russians are destroying their homes, not the Ukrainians. Or do you mean that Ukrainian artillery cannot make the difference between the two ends of their guns?😮
    1
  202. Nothing of importance, so far. And, if Anders is right, there will be nothing until the war is won by Ukraine.
    1
  203. Pour des analyses, je conseille le blog du Col Goya sur WordPress, ou de nombreux intervenants discutent de la situation de cette guerre en temps réel. Vous y apprendrez des choses, je pense. N’hésitez pas à participer, si vous penser avoir quelque chose à apporter.
    1
  204.  @yeti5857 Russians ARE out of missiles. They are down to what they can build and buy from Iran or North Korea. Far from enough to achieve any strategic goal.
    1
  205. Which judiciary system is « democratically elected »? Do you vote for judges, in your country?
    1
  206.  @JELmusic  the ICC juridiction has been designed by the government of several countries which are elected. It is competent only for a limited number of crimes which are already considered as crimes in said countries : war crimes, crime against humanity and genocide. So voted for by legislative powers. Apart from the fact that it is not a single country, it works the same way. In a democracy, the judiciary is independent from the legislature and executive powers. The ICC is independent.
    1
  207.  @JELmusic  you did not elect the MEPs from other parts of your country either. Does it mean you don’t trust your parliament and it has no right to pass on laws? (Your government does not pass on laws, it is the parliament which does that : in a democracy, executive and legislature powers are separated) And Putin (Russia) never signed the agreement. So I can’t see your point.
    1
  208.  @JELmusic  i meant MP, sorry. And yes, in Denmark, like in every democratic country, the parliament is in charge of making laws. And you vote only for your MP, not the other ones. ICC is part of the body in charge of enforcing these danish laws, voted by the danish people, about war crimes, genocide and crime against humanity, along other danish and European bodies. It is YOUR laws that are enforced, not laws of other countries (who happen to have the same ones in which ICC is competent). And you NEVER vote for judicial body, judges and the like, danish or ICC: they are independent. So, your point is moot.
    1
  209. Day 975 of the SMO… 😂
    1
  210. Another troll in the comments that lie.
    1
  211. France is one of the only countries in Europe that meets the agreed budget. 😊
    1
  212.  @verynice9595  i agree that Trump will probably do just that. However, there is a limit : if the US don’t pay for European defense, European countries will have no incentive to « buy US ». And it is the death of NATO (Macron, our president, has already asked European countries to take over their defense, and stop relying on the US). Trump will probably ask for more money from European countries, but he cannot stop investing in European defense, as it is the reason why many NATO countries buy from the US.
    1
  213. OK, bot.
    1
  214. In 3 days… 😂
    1
  215. I remember a few years ago, when Macron was pleading for a European defense. Telling that NATO was an empty shell. Everybody laughed at him. « We have NATO », they said. « And the US! They will never leave us, it is in their interest! » Now, nato is almost dead, the US will do nothing for us. And the sh*t hit the fan.😢
    1
  216.  @timesax666 😂😂 🤡
    1
  217. Assertions, not a single evidence… Next…
    1
  218. How many tanks, howitzers and missiles have russia left? They started the war with 2500 tanks, lost probably 2000. They exhausted their old soviet stock. They have fired something like 3000 guided missiles, from an estimated stock of 2000 modern and 2000 old missiles. And they must keep some on other borders, Kaliningrad, China... Will they arm their soldiers with sticks and stones?
    1
  219.  @milosmilictrob2046  no. Russia had 2500 tanks IN SERVICE before the war. There is an estimate of 20000 if you include the stock. This stock was never maintained properly, an most tanks are stored outside, for several decades for most of them. Do you think you can pull out a tank from there and just deliver it to the front line? They need major overhaul, more likely a rebuild. And they lost more than 1000 tanks (Oryx site is almost at 1000, and only the ones they have a confirmation are referenced). Probably something like 1500/2000 in total. And many crews were lost (how many survived their turret popping off, do you think ?). 100 missiles a day? Are you sure? They could deliver 160... a year, before the war. Do they employ magicians? Russia cannot replace tanks, missiles, and equipment. Simply because their industry is not capable of that. And sanctions on parts, machinery hit hard. Most use components from the West, most machines come from there too.
    1
  220. Says who?
    1
  221.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  if you are content with your brain, good for you. You’ll never have another one, anyway. I’ll go by real experts, not some random YouTube commenter who thinks he can teach lessons on a subject he obviously knows nothing about.
    1
  222.  @Princip666  why would I have to listen to some random YouTube commenter to know who is an expert and who is not?
    1
  223.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  no expert ever said that pigs are flying. So, your point is moot. Experts don’t always say the truth. But trolls rarely do. even if you said that the sky is blue, I would go outside to make sure it is the case. This is how trustworthy you are…
    1
  224.  @Princip666  it is not an « appeal to authority ». Nowhere do I say experts must be trusted just because they are experts. Experts are qualified and have arguments. YouTube trolls, never.
    1
  225.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  maybe you believe what you say is the truth. Which does not mean it is. But « trust me, bro! » does not work, if you want to convince people. Only trolls assert things with no arguments.
    1
  226.  @Zz_Mike-Hawk_zZ  you demonstrated nothing. You asserted it is obvious that the Ukrainian offensive is a failure and A P Nielsen does not know the situation. « Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur » That’s what troll usually do…
    1
  227.  @Princip666  given that we have have no indication that the offensive has stopped, that, on the contrary, heavy fighting take place according to all OSINT sources, concluding that the offensive is finished and failed is stup… sorry, far fetch… I’ll be polite. Or you foresee the future, reading in chicken entrails? Or you are wise and expert enough to conclude the offensive will NEVER be successful from some secret data, some connection to Russian and Ukrainian MoDs (you cannot share with us because it is classified)? In any case, you need to provide some justification to your assertions, troll (you are a troll. Asserting things with no argument is trolling)
    1
  228. With what? They are already short of tanks and guns and are draining old Soviet stock. If a « real » counteroffensive was to be expected, it was last year or last summer, when they still had weapons and manpower.
    1
  229. Account created one year ago. No content. Bot…
    1
  230. Thank you for helping it by commenting ! It would be helpful if you could also click the like button and join the channel!
    1
  231.  @NDJ1978  downvotes are not taken in account by youtube… comments are, on the other hand!
    1
  232. Ask Putin to withdraw from Ukraine if you so much love peace.
    1
  233.  @trololoev  an old Soviet antitank missile can certainly defeat a western tank… under idéal conditions. An Akeron missile can cause the ‘catastrophic instant disassembling’ of a T-72, whatever it does to avoid it, try to run, hides or retreat. Here is the difference, mate…
    1
  234.  @trololoev  that does not address what I said… Read it again…
    1
  235.  @trololoev  nothing shows that « it can be jammed ». No cage can stop a top attack. Otherwise, all tanks would have such cages all around..
    1
  236.  @trololoev  do you really think that no test have been conducted since WWII to find a way to defeat shaped charges? Do you really think that bolting a few meters of hen mesh fence is enough to defeat such a missile while 60cm of composite cannot? It is utterly stupid. And you prove you know nothing. Akeron, like all other antitank missile, is not guided by GPS, but IR, thermal and daylight imaging. Bonus antitank artillery shells are not GPS guided either.
    1
  237.  @trololoev  no « cage » can protect against shape charges. We know that since WWII. No antitank missile rely on GPS for guidance.
    1
  238.  @trololoev  Akeron, like other antitank missiles, can penetrate the front of a tank. Penetration is generally in excess of 1200mm of steel. There are designed for that purpose. so there is no reason to think it cannot penetrate the paper thin armor on the roof of the tanks, even if some hen mesh is put in front of it 😁 And tandem charges are designed to get rid of ERA before the main penetrator fires… Your propaganda makes no sense whatsoever.
    1
  239.  @NewOrleansSeptember  where did I « insult » you? I was wrong when I say you are not qualified ? Show your credentials, present your arguments…
    1
  240. It is the other way around, according to a certain Russian Z-blogger…
    1
  241. It takes only a few days to build fortifications.
    1
  242.  @petronixoonable  fortifications including trenches, minefields, antitank ditches can be built in a matter of days. Dragon teeth can be put in place if there are prepared in advance. That’s what is in place on many parts of the front and it was enough to stop the Russians, so far.
    1
  243. No, it is not obvious. The Russians are aiming at the city. There is no evidence of any outflanking. That’s just what you think they should do, not what they do.
    1
  244. The war is already won for NATO. Russia is broke, Russian army is down to sticks and stones, while NATO is stronger than ever.
    1