Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "William Spaniel" channel.

  1. 3.4 billion people, what's their purchasing power like?
    2
  2. Not enough pipelines to shift to asia.
    2
  3.  @mikeincalifornia  NATO didn't invade Iraq.
    2
  4. The ATACMS uses the same pod as the 6 GMLRS used in HIMARS. Since when does it need a modification?
    2
  5. ​ @robbrown4621 Severodonetsk was captured last year... it was right before Lysychansk.
    2
  6. ​ @LaGrandeBayou  that's a post-hoc rationalization.
    2
  7.  @rh_BOSS  thanks for doing the research, I love 90s mall ninja LARPer magazines
    2
  8. THAAD is a defensive system. Finland will be NATO too, why would nukes in Finland be okay but not in Ukraine?
    2
  9. "And you also act if europe is the only one who needs gas" - The pipelines lead to Europe. They can't pick up the tubes and connect them somewhere else.
    2
  10. Plenty of African countries with a ton of resources.
    2
  11.  @migo2444  You deserve a medal for serving the Russian Armed Forces on the online battlespace.
    2
  12. The US and Russia need the EU. It's a large collection of potential client states with high GDP per capita.
    2
  13. Assault rifle is descriptive. Intermediate cartridge, magazine fed, select fire. You're confusing it with assault weapon.
    2
  14. lmao surrender when they're winning, change the script you bot
    2
  15. ​ @chucksingh9339  This stuff got me seeing Prighozin screaming for Shoigu. Smoking on that Shwartzkopf, rolling down the Highway of Death. Get Putin on the phone, I fronted him money for a brick! Plug called, said he had a line of lightly used Russian uniforms from Bakhmut.
    2
  16. Not true.
    2
  17. They have PMCs. Since the late 2000s I believe.
    2
  18.  @VikramRaaj9999  I'm the puppet for not buying Z telegram copium?
    2
  19.  @markomicovic5308  What corruption? What nationalism? They literally protested against their corrupt leader, and Russia invaded. It wasn't about nationalism.
    2
  20. Expansion of money supply is precisely what the inflation in inflation refers to. You don't want more money and the same goods. You want same money, more goods.
    2
  21. They were assault rifles.
    2
  22. We're paying the bill for two years of restricted economy and massive govt spending. The scale isn't even comparable.
    2
  23. And most geopolitical analysis channels also say that there's a limit on capacity. They can't afford to sacrifice European revenue, they'll need to complete the Power of Siberia 2 and use gas tankers.
    2
  24. ​ @Robespierre-II  Yeah there's analysts constantly looking at everything. For example some amateurs on twitter posted satellite pictures of scuff marks in Israeli airfields. A few hours later other analysts posted updated sat pics showing the supposed craters were clouds passing over the area. Hilarious. Obviously all countries have analysts doing this, but not for public consumption.
    2
  25. They can be arrested. Countries can break the treaty, they're just expected to suffer retaliation against their own diplomats.
    2
  26. ​ @bigdopamine9343  The difference is mostly academic. If a hypersonic can get smacked down on a straight line, a "maneuvering" hypersonic (with a turn radius the size of Belgium) can also get smacked.
    2
  27. ​ @MasterBlasterSr  the Teixeira leak showed 17k Ukrainian KIA vs 43k Russian KIA.
    2
  28. Western Europe isn't Siberia.
    2
  29. ​ @festekj  Air superiority isn't a cheat code. Air assets just get a better view of you getting bogged down in the mine fields and pre-sighted artillery kill zones.
    2
  30. ​ @emilsinclair4190  Trenches are easy to cross. Mines and artillery prevent you from getting close to cross them.
    2
  31. ​ @gingernutpreacher  Mine flails expedite the process but getting close enough to a minefield without ATGM teams, artillery and Vikhr missiles launched from 10km away taking pot shots at you is nearly impossible.
    2
  32. And it's not a betrayal from the American point of view?
    2
  33. ​ @askeladd60  Pushing up wages means that operating costs increase and thus products will become more expensive. During WW2 the US had such an issue, due to manpower sent overseas and wartime demand, wages started climbing too fast which forced the US govt. to impose a ceiling in wages.
    2
  34.  @askeladd60  No, lower unemployment can mean you're not able to produce goods and services because you lack workers. Everyone working for military factories is on a government handout. Their job only exists because of the government burning cash in a war.
    2
  35.  @askeladd60  Producing stuff isn't a goal by itself. Russia is being forced to produce stuff that will burn in Ukraine, rather than develop Russia. A lot of Russian production is meant to be wasted and thus will bring no economic return down the line.
    2
  36.  @askeladd60  No, it isn't. Overproduction will collapse the value of the goods. Leading producers to bankrupcy does not lower the cost of living. I didn't say lowering unemployment is negative by itself. I said that using such a metric with blinders on and ignoring everything else is ridiculous. Low unemployment can actually mean your labor force is insufficient. More territory. Okay. Does Russia get money from that territory? Is the real world Monopoly? Control of the Black Sea? The Black Sea fleet is getting dunked on. NATO isn't expanding. Ukraine will ask for NATO ascension after the war. And Finland asked too. Next stop, Georgia perhaps.
    2
  37. The remaining question is, how does this affect LeBron's legacy?
    2
  38. Why would they attack civilians, when they claim to be an alternative to Putin? Why would they need the border clashes, after all they are Russian citizens so they could have done the attacks at any time.
    2
  39. Not only would that lead to aircraft being shot down, a bridge can support and entire convoy of trucks. An aircraft can transport the equivalent of a big truck or a couple trucks depending on the aircraft. There's a limit to the tonnage. There's a reason we rely on shipping lanes and trucks/trains and reserve aircraft for priority cargo.
    2
  40. Of course not. The US if anything is doing "enemy of my enemy" with the Taliban as they fight ISIS K.
    2
  41. ​ @DementiaJoeGottaGo  So places within a walking distance of 2014 lines are better than taking over supply lines inside Russia?
    2
  42. ​ @sohamsuryawanshi118  it's THIS video 16:15
    2
  43. That's bad. When exporting, you want a low ruble so that you get paid MORE rubles. When the ruble increases in value, you get paid LESS.
    2
  44.  @lucianmuntean529  You don't understand basic economics. If you get paid 100 Rubles per barrel and now get paid 60 Rubles per barrel, you either pay workers less or you reduce hours/start layoffs.
    2
  45. Germany was winning ground daily in WW2.
    2
  46. Then why was the Nordstream turbine outside of Russian territory?
    2
  47. Why would the terms get worse? Russia gets to demand more severe terms by retaining the power to conquer Ukraine entirely. As time goes on, Russia has lost leverage. They have less tanks, less aircraft, less missiles than when they started. Their ability to threaten a worse fate is dwindling.
    2
  48. ​ @FalconfromRF  Ukraine isn't fighting for the West, 60% of Ukraine didn't like NATO according to polls before the war.
    2
  49. Gerasimov is not seen as a contender for the top spot. You're probably thinking of Patrushev.
    1
  50. I hate to lecture people, but all of those who were afraid of this happening had to stand their ground. Because so many left the country, now those who don't want to go to war are lacking in numbers and feel isolated. If 500,000 men started beating the snot out of Moscow police who'd be able to stop them?
    1