Comments by "Nicholas Conder" (@nicholasconder4703) on "CaspianReport" channel.

I imagine that India will be happy to see this development. They have been getting rather edgy with China's growth over the last few years, and have been looking at ways to counter China.
51
@ultimusromanorum The Russians have been pushed back a short distance at Bakhmut, and suffered horrendous losses near Avdivka. You should watch the videos of Russian tanks and AFVs going up like candles. One video shows a column of 5 Russian tanks getting taken out in a very short space of time.
12
@liammarshall-butler3384 The problem is, what will they equip their troops with? They are already pulling out equipment from the 1950s to arm units. It's getting to the point where Russia may be able to supply their troops with rifles and little else. Plus, they ignore the financial aspects for Russia. From what I have seen, Russia spent around 80% of its budget for 2023 in January and February. With oil and gas prices down, they are losing foreign income (especially since India and China are buying petroleum products at bargain basement prices from Russia). Recruiting more people for the army also means cutting back on the work force you need to manufacture and repair stuff. The picture is a lot more complicated than this presentation makes it out to be.
9
@chris4190 You may be overlooking the fact that both of Ukraine's major offensives thus far have been open field maneuver warfare, not city fights. And those T-54s and D20s are going to be completely outranged and outgunned against the modern western counterparts. Ukraine has only conducted city fighting on the defensive, on the attack they have tended to avoid it if at all possible, preferring to go around settlements, surrounding them and forcing the Russians to retreat through kill zones (like at Lyman). That old equipment won't help as much in those situations. I have seen images of Ukrainian JDAMs hitting targets (the impact of a 2000lb bomb and its shockwave are pretty distinctive), and I have seen numerous videos of Ukrainian SU-24s and helicopters unloading munitions on the Russians. So it is happening. Just not as much, because Ukraine has fewer aircraft assets and has been unable to replace them until now. They cannot do more than support the frontline units because of Russian AA missile systems. However, the same is true for Russia. As far as financials go, at least half of Russia's foreign reserves have been seized, so they are now relying on their own national reserves. One of the oligarchs who hasn't taken flying lessons said that at the present rate Russia will use up its national reserves by the end of this year. They have been artificially propping up the ruble by buying their own currency on the international market. It is also interesting that Putin and Xi in the visit last week agreed that China could buy Russian goods in yuan, not rubles. This suggests major issues, because until now Russia insisted on purchases being made in rubles. The figures that Russia has been releasing (and the figures that the IMF used) are likely the result of "cooking the books", and don't reflect reality. All other estimates of Russian GDP indicate drops of at least 5-10%, possibly more. Meanwhile, China is rubbing its proverbial hands as they get all those Russian resources at below market prices. The discount on Russian oil is pegged at around $10-20 a barrel, so with the current prices for Russian Urals around $52 a barrel right now, Russia might actually be losing money on the deal. As far as natural gas goes, apart from one pipeline, the rest of the transit routes lead to the EU. Russia lacks the liquification plants, so gas sales are down a lot as well.
8
@starscream007 Don't forget that the USSR contained Ukraine, Belarus, the countries in the Caucuses and all the -stan countries. They can no longer draw on these manpower reserves for a war. So Russia has only 3/4 the population the USSR did at the start of 1941, and only 16% of that are men of prime fighting age, if I read the age pyramid correctly (18-40). This is much lower percentage than what the Soviet Union would have been able to draw on in 1941. These men are not motivated to fight a war for national survival, they are invading a country in what is an increasingly unpopular war. And the demographics for Russia will just get worse. So it is not as rosy a picture for Russia as it first appears.
6
The thing that gets me is that Russia is concerned about being attacked by a defensive alliance that came into existence to protect themselves from Russia's aggression. NATO's charter specifically says that it is a defensive alliance. In effect, Russia is projecting their own aggressive expansionism on their neighbours, none of whom are interested in invading. It is also important to note that the European plain expands as it enters Russia, which results in extended fronts and an inability to concentrate force. This is what lead to the Wehrmacht's defeat in WW2.
6
@marcusaetius9309 As a Canadian, I will tell you that your third point is a bunch of BS! Indeed, Canada is diversifying its trade and moving away from connections with the US as much as possible. We could hardly have tariffed the US under Trump into submission otherwise. Same with our defense and foreign policy. We do a LOT on those fronts the US hates us doing.
4
That depends on whether or not the Chinese economy suffers any setbacks due to over-extending their reach and over-spending. I have watched some videos that suggest the Chinese economy is not as solid as it initially appears, and may crash badly in the near future because of the real estate bubble they created.
4
@Patagonian Paint Russia can make tanks, that have 40-year-old optics. They can make jets, but need to mount cell phones in the cockpit for navigation. Western sanctions have crippled Russia's ability to make advanced tanks and aircraft. And while Russia is an exporter, who is currently buying? India just cancelled several contracts with Russia over quality issues and Russia confiscating products they built for India for their war in Ukraine. Many countries are ceasing their purchases of Russia oil, gas, other natural resources and weapons. This is cutting into their economy big time. Russia has already spent its annual budget, and is going into the hole at an incredible rate. Indeed, at the rate they are going, they will have spent 4x their annual budget. The Ruble is slowly crashing and burning, so they have to make purchases in Yuan. Indian banks are refusing to deal with Russia. China and India are buying Russian goods at bargain basement prices, so low that in some cases Russia may be losing money on the deals. Sorry, you may want to watch a few videos on how badly the Russian economy is really doing, rather than listening to Kremlin propaganda.
3
@gwopgetta2091 That depends on the attrition rate. If Ukraine can cause attrition at a rate of 5 Russians:1 Ukrainian lost or more, they can defeat Russia in a war of attrition. I think the average current rate is 3:1, and rising. Two other factors play into this. First, Russia is running low on modern equipment (devolving), while Ukraine is getting more modern equipment (evolving). Second, Ukrainian troops are better trained and motivated, which means they will fight better than their Russian counterpart.
3
@kerriwilson7732 I prefer to think of it as doing our own thing. Which still ticks off the Americans, especially when we succeed in ways that make them look foolish.
2
@Alusnovalotus If you have a leader who is on the verge of losing power, and has to have Russian FSB agents and soldiers stationed in the country to remain president, what choice does he have? Lukashenko is stuck in a trap of his own making, lured into it by his own desire to stay in charge of Belarus. Rather like the old story of how you catch a monkey - put something shiny in a pot with a narrow neck. If the monkey grabs the object, the fist he creates prevents him from withdrawing his hand. The only way to escape the trap is to release the shiny object.
2
@Real_OSHA_Unsafety_Engineer What do you think a "sphere of influence" is BUT imperialism? And what has Russia done since 1917 BUT try to topple regimes and install puppet states? Stop making excuses for Russia by pointing fingers at who they see as they primary opponent. I know the US has done the same in the past, but Russia has been far, far worse. Or are you one of those communist holdovers who still dream of the world revolution?
2
@Roland_of_Brittany Russia just frittered away almost 5,000 troops in failed offensives over the last 2 weeks. They have wasted their newly acquired combat assets. Their soldiers also lack proper winter clothing. I think that it will be Ukraine, not Russia, launching a winter offensive.
2
@roxysponge3447 Not surprising. If a neighboring country invaded and took several regions/provinces/states and then said they wanted to negotiate, what would you say? Especially if the invaders have indicated they want to keep the territory they occupy. Then, if you start turning the tables on your opponent, would you be willing to negotiate, particularly if you know the invaders are liars and thieves?
2
Your video also shows that Russia needs to fear China, not NATO. In fact, by coming to an agreement with NATO, they could focus on their eastern and southern borders. Indeed, I think that at one point NATO even suggested that Russian could join the alliance. This would have given Russia the defensive shield it wants in the west. This makes Putin's latest move all the more absurd.
2
@happydays5218 Yes, the treaty that was signed to divide Poland between the USSR and Germany was another in the long list of treaties that Hitler broke.
2
@thelordofcringe Just remember the old saying, "Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it."
1
@Patagonian Paint How bold of you to assume that Russia will still be around, considering they are heading towards bankruptcy and the ruble is crashing.
1
@Alusnovalotus Sadly, if you look throughout history, dictators seldom, if ever, resign and leave voluntarily. They are so used to power that they need to be pried loose with a political or military prybar. And they will often try to make a comeback. Look at Napoleon, Ferdinand Marcos and others.
1
@rob6927 The whole "Maidan" thing started because Russia was manipulating policy making in Ukraine, like they are in Belarus. The people protested the rigged elections and policies of Yanokovytch, and the authorities used excessive force to try to put down the protests. Eventually hundreds of thousands of people flooded the streets and forced Yanokovytch to flee. Interestingly enough, Yanokovytch fled to Russia, not Belarus or Turkey of some other country. In the turmoil that followed, as Girkin said, Russia invaded Crimea, then the Donbas. Those are facts. Putin has been trying to re-establish the Russian Empire since 2008, when Russians invaded Georgia (Russian troops moved into South Ossetia and Abkhazia over a day before the war started in Georgia, facts reported by RUSSIAN journals and newspapers, but never reported on in the West). The only way this could have been prevented would have been if Putin and his cronies didn't hold imperialistic ambitions, and had instead focused on improving their country's infrastructure and economy. You might want to read up on "Russkiy Mir" and Dugin's "Foundations of Geopolitics" to see what Russia's goals are.
1
Regarding taking Chinese investments, I believe the old saying, "he who sups with the devil should have a long spoon" applies. If past history of what Russia and China have done in the past, I would be taking a microscope to any agreement I sign with them for monetary assistance. Same thing with the US, by the way (they have often hidden clauses in agreements that come back to bite the recipient). One always needs to look at the fine print. Plus keeping watch for any pro-Chinese groups with mysterious sources of income suddenly springing up.
1
@Real_OSHA_Unsafety_Engineer You might want to look up "Russian Imperialism" on the internet. You might be shocked at how many countries Russia has over-run, occupied and subjugated over the years. Ask anyone from Poland, the Baltic States or the other former Warsaw Pact countries how "wonderful" it was to be under the iron heel of the USSR. And if you think American sponsored dictators are bad, you should check out the former communist ones. Oh, and look up the death toll racked up by Communist regimes on their own people too. Then you might start to understand why NATO exists. It's better to get together in a mutual protection society when there is a thug in the area who is looking at mugging all his neighbors (like he is doing to Ukraine right now). The biggest problem with the US is that they are a prime example of "The way to hell is paved with good intentions", at least in recent years. I won't sugar coat things, the US has made plenty of mistakes and has acted in an imperialist fashion in the past (as recently as the 1980s). Some of their more recent excursions have been to try and help countries, which have been fumbled badly because they don't consider what should be done to repair the damage they did when entering the country. It ends up being more, "We've protected/freed you from ______. Well, got to go, bye". And practically every recent action has had UN approval with Russia and China usually abstaining from voting. It's all very nice to point fingers at the US, but Russia is a much bigger threat. The US hasn't been attacking Mexico and Canada, or carving off chunks of their territory (at least in the last 150+ years), but Russia is. Putin's attitude is very much like a cartoon that appeared in WW2, where Hitler is hugging a large globe and shouting, "Germany will never be surrounded". That, in a nutshell, is Putin's take on things as well. He will only feel secure when he has subjugated everyone around him. So no, NATO is not meant to isolate Russia. In fact, at one point, the idea of having Russia join NATO was broached to Russia. They would act as a very good counter to the US, and it would mean they wouldn't need to worry about their western border. Unfortunately, their gangster attitude and paranoia is preventing them from seeing this as a viable possibility.
1
@Real_OSHA_Unsafety_Engineer Oh, so you mean the current invasion of Ukraine, attempts to funnel Ukrainians into Russia, bombing of hospitals, schools and residential areas are just peaceful ways of trying to resolve ethnic issues. Sorry, but my sarcasm is showing. And I assume you never heard the term Russification. The Ukrainians told me all about it when I visited the country in the mid-1990s. Yeah, Russia doesn't want ethnic conflict, which is why they suppress everyone else's culture, literature and language. I also know some people who fled Hungary after the 1957 uprising, and they said the same thing. Russia was deliberately trying to suppress their culture, literature and language. Guess what, they are imperialists who suppress anything non-Russian. Sorry, the real reason that Russia does not have a strong economy is because of Putin and the oligarchs siphoning off half the country's wealth into their own pockets instead of financing the country's growth. You see pictures of their yachts? How about Putin's mansion? That's where Russia's wealth has gone. Stop trying to sugar coat a violent, repressive dictatorship just because you don't like the US. I'm not fond of the US either, as they are a bunch of braggarts and egotistical, but they are a much better option than Russia has ever been.
1
@luigigaming2717 I agree with your comment. All I was saying is that the geopolitical argument is a ridiculous one. It is based on projecting your own expansionistic ideology on you neighbours. Let's face it, Russia is concerned about being invaded because it has been attacked from the direction of Europe 5 or 6 times in the last 200 years. If that's the case, how often was Italy invaded, or France, or Germany, or Austria, during that same time frame? In reality you are right - this war is about the oil and gas reserves (and other mineral resources) that Ukraine is sitting on top of, and the fact that Putin was on the verge of losing the Crimea due to lack of water. Based on my rough calculations, Crimea would have been out of water by mid-summer this year, so Putin had to unstopper the canal that feeds the cities of Simferopol and Sevastopol now, before they would have to be evacuated for lack of water. Of course, Putin is using the standard paranoid Soviet defense of being surrounded by enemies. He just doesn't tell anyone that he has created those enemies.
1
That may change if the Ukrainians get enough C-RAMs. 20mm ammo is cheaper than a drone or cruise missile.
1
@HeliosLegion Yes, and no. Yes, you cannot cover everything. However, you can cover the high priority targets with enough AA missiles and gun systems to make hitting them almost impossible. And, Russia is running out of missiles.
1
@juice9528 Check out Joe Blogs youtube to see the effect that the sanctions and EU halting oil and gas purchases are having on the Russian economy. Not to mention that Russia has lost huge amounts of equipment they cannot replace for years. They don't have the upper hand, and the Kremlin leadership knows it. But, like Hitler's inner circle in 1945, they refuse to face facts.
1
@tyresesummers5829 Your response overlooks one important point. Russia may have withdrawn around 20,000 troops from Kherson, but this frees up 40,000+ Ukrainian troops to send elsewhere on the front. Also, the Russians likely left a fair bit of equipment behind, so these units will need time to re-equip and reform. Ukraine doesn't have as big a problem on this score. It actually provides Ukraine with a small window of opportunity to strike.
1
@juice9528 Ukraine doesn't want Russian territory, they want to recover their lost territory and restore their pre-2014 borders. Ukraine has the ability to push Russia out of Ukraine, has western military and economic support. Russia is standing alone, with an economy that is teetering on the verge of collapse. They want peace talks now because they know they are losing badly. But, the only thing they have to bargain with is returning the territory they have stolen from Ukraine. And that is political suicide. But so is losing the war. So, Russia is trapped in a snare of their own making. And Ukraine knows it.
1
@l0necroc Not really. It frees up around 40,000 Ukrainian troops to fight elsewhere on the front. It was a Russian failure.
1
@reinereine1896 Nope. Canada has sent around 500,000 winter warfare outfits to Ukraine, as have other NATO countries. They will be nice and warm in those outfits. You are either a Russian troll or haven't bothered to watch the countless videos of the garbage that Russia is giving their troops being trained or deployed to Ukraine. Nor have you hear the reports of the cases of frostbite already showing up in Russian ranks. And the snow hasn't really started falling yet. Perhaps that's why the Kremlin is so desperate to negotiate - they know their losses due to cold are going to skyrocket, and their logistics are so bad they cannot fix it.
1
@reinereine1896 You obviously haven't been paying attention to the factory closures, doubling of grocery prices and fact that Russia is having to buy stuff from North Korea. Might want to check out both Jake Broe and Joe Blogs on how bad things are going for Russia. I don't know what your sources are, but I bet it is something like RT.
1
@reinereine1896 Wrong. Finland was invaded by Russia and fought them to a standstill, twice.
1
@reinereine1896 Since Russian forces were already in South Ossetia and Abkhazia BEFORE the actions started, yes, Russia was to blame for what happened in Georgia. Also, you conveniently forget all the UKRAINIANS who have been murdered in the Donbass. Interesting how you conveniently overlook the torture chambers and improvised prisons the Russians set up in the areas they captured in the spring of this year. Who knows what horrors exist in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas, although we already heard about those about 8 years ago. And what is SPRI? I can find "Single Ply Roofing Industry", "Steadman Philippon Research Institute", "Scott Polar Research Institute", and "SPRI - Basque Government". I doubt any of these apply. TFI is a right wing publication. Many of these organizations are pro-Russian because they like strongmen. The First Post does seen to present balanced news. Here are some sites talking about how "wonderful" the treatment of Ukrainians is under the Russians and their separatist supporters BEFORE 2022. Admittedly some Ukrainians have committed atrocities as well, but this shows that the Russian-backed separatists are far worse: https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/07/05/ukraine-torture-ill-treatment-armed-groups-east https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2021/3/22/some-stay-some-die-the-horror-of-ukraines-war-camps https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/EUR5016832015ENGLISH.pdf (crimes by both sides) https://khpg.org/en/1501455869 https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/abductions-and-torture-eastern-ukraine https://premierchristian.news/en/news/article/priest-torture-claims-in-eastern-ukraine https://www.dw.com/en/amnesty-abduction-and-torture-grip-eastern-ukraine/a-17776820
1
@shibbershabber I read a ton of history. I don't think the war is won by any means, but it is now more for Ukraine to lose than Russia to win. The retreat from Kherson is huge, because it now exposes the entre region north of the Crimean peninsula to Ukrainian artillery fire. The terrain is also lower than on the north/west bank of the Dnipro, and is more sparsely vegetated, which means fewer places to hide for the Russian troops. Taking Kherson also frees up a lot of veteran Ukrainian troops for other theatres of operation. This is not equivalent to the US defeat in the Philippines, more like the Japanese loss at Guadalcanal. But, as I said, nothing is decided yet. As far as negotiations go, the last week has been the first time that Russia has tabled something that is at least palatable to Ukraine. Previously, in case you didn't notice, Russia was demanding that it be able to hold onto all the territory they stole over the last 8 years. Now they are changing their tune, and the only reason for this is because even the Kremlin now realizes they are losing. Russia has lost almost all the military cards that it had, and is now finally trying to use territory. However, given the past history of the USSR and Russia for abiding by their agreements, if I was Ukraine I wouldn't accept anything less than for talks to take place AFTER Russian forces have left all the occupied territory, including Donbass and Crimea.
1
@reinereine1896 Wrong again. From Wikipedia: "According to Georgian intelligence, AND SEVERAL RUSSIAN MEDIA OUTLETS, parts of the REGULAR (non-peacekeeping) RUSSIAN ARMY HAD ALREADY MOVED TO SOUTH OSSENTIAN TERRITORY territory through the Roki Tunnel BEFORE THE GEORGIAN MILITARY OPERATION. Even the state-controlled Russian TV aired Abkhazia's de facto president Sergei Bagapsh on 7 August as saying: "I have spoken to the president of South Ossetia. It has more or less stabilized now. A battalion from the North Caucasus District has entered the area." Georgian authorities did not announce Russian military incursion in public on 7 August since they relied on the Western guidance and did not want to aggravate tensions. The entrance of second batch of Russian military through the Roki Tunnel during the night of 7/8 August pressured Georgian president Saakashvili to respond militarily around 23:00 to check Russian all-out incursion near the Roki Tunnel before the Western response would be late." "Russia falsely accused Georgia of committing "genocide" and "aggression against South Ossetia". It launched a full-scale land, air and sea invasion of Georgia, including its undisputed territory, on 8 August, referring to it as a "peace enforcement" operation." According to Wikileaks: "All the evidence available to the country team supports Saakashvili's statement that this fight was not Georgia's original intention. Key Georgian officials who would have had responsibility for an attack on South Ossetia have been on leave, and the Georgians only began mobilizing August 7 once the attack was well underway. As late as 2230 last night Georgian MOD and MFA officials were still hopeful that the unilateral cease-fire announced by President Saakashvili would hold. Only when the South Ossetians opened up with artillery on Georgian villages, did the offensive to take Tskhinvali begin." You want more proof that this was a Russian invasion? Read the following, and remember these articles were written by a FREE RUSSIAN MEDIA back in 2008-2009: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russo-Georgian_War#Life_Goes_On_(news_article) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russo-Georgian_War#Other_reports_by_Russian_media How Russia is trying to expand its territory in the region: https://www.rferl.org/a/Russian_Troops_Try_To_Shift_South_Ossetia_Border_Markers/1791641.html https://www.cacianalyst.org/publications/analytical-articles/item/13710-south-ossetian-territorial-claims-overlap-with-fear-zones-already-controlled-by-russian-forces.html https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/13/519471110/along-a-shifting-border-georgia-and-russia-maintain-an-uneasy-peace To quote something from the last paper, "For now, the boundary is, effectively, wherever Russia says it is. Russia claims it is following old Soviet military maps defining the border of South Ossetia, which was considered a province of sorts in Soviet times. But maps defining that territory are unpublished." Therefore, this was an invasion of a sovereign country BEFORE any hostilities started, and is an enforced occupation by a known imperialistic expansionistic power. A Peacekeeping force does not arbitrarily place border markers, not move them whenever they feel they can. Sorry, but it was an invasion, not a peacekeeping mission. Please research things before you regurgitate Russian propaganda.
1
@reinereine1896 In response I would say that you have provided NO links, just propaganda and vague statements. Not to mention using the stupid terminology and sneering rhetoric used by people who have nothing to back up their statements. I am quoting multiple facts with references, and receiving nothing but snide comments and name calling in return. This proves beyond a doubt that you have no evidence to back up your statements, and it is basically the standard garbage that people with radical left-wing leanings fall back on when confronted with the truth that contradicts their preconceived notions. By the way, when the USSR collapsed, I had hope that Russia would steer towards a more open society with democratically elected governments. Sadly, Putin and his cronies killed that dream. I had hoped that Russia would provide a counterbalance to both China and the US, but now I think the world might be better off without Russia in its current form.
1
@reinereine1896 I think Russia just proved that NATO still needs to exist. NATO has actually evolved into far more than just a military alliance. They fund research on a variety of topics, which surprised me when I stumbled across one of their publications. NATO has also helped stabilize Europe. Even without the US involved, the European NATO countries have a strong self defense capability. So I don't think it will die or dissolve quite yet. I suspect over time it will probably gradually morph into more of a European defense force.
1
@badger1968 Considering Russia has lost a large chunk of their air force, best soldiers and best equipment, what are they going to use?
1
One problem with all the geopolitical commentary. If Russia was afraid of NATO and only interested in securing its borders to the Carpathians, why have they completely denuded their border with Finland of troops and equipment? Why do they keep talking about occupying Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Czechia, Slovakia, the Balkan and Baltic States? That sounds more like imperial ambitions and conquest rather than self protection to me. I think the folks doing this program should look at "Russkiy Mir" and Dugin's "Foundations of Geopolitics" to see what Russia's real goals are.
1
I doubt it will do more than supplement the Panama Canal. Regardless of what one does, you will have to unload the ships, send the goods across the continent, then load it onto ships once again. Don't get me wrong, I would like to see the South American countries improve their living standards and economies. However, the increased transport costs and need to load and unload cargoes will likely make this a more costly alternative to the Canal. Also, the emphasis on the road rather than railroad means very low quantities of goods being transported for many years, raising questions about the economics of this route.
1
One thing that India may have going for it is that countries are starting to see what happens with you deal with China. If dealing with China leads to being held over a barrel and having everything stolen from you, then other countries may start taking notice and stop dealing with them. That might put India in a better position to gain influence in the region at China's expense.
1
The Power of Siberia II is an interesting project - except as I recall China has not signed the deal. So it is very much up in the air right now. And I doubt that China is really happy with Russia looking at maybe invading Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. This would really upset China's political ambitions in this area.
1
@DaveSCameron You saw an internet icon wandering about Camden Market shopping? Wow, learn something new every day. Didn't think they could do that.
1
I think your last comment is very apt, that "Brazil is the country of the future". The problem for Brazil is that, as the old song once said, "Tomorrow never comes".
1