Comments by "" (@Princip666) on "After Kherson: What's next in the war?" video.

It's because he is a dishonest person.
3
@3s0t3r1c That does not make him objective, use the mush in your head a bit.
2
@janvisagie231 Thanks for the advice, I won't argue with you any more.
2
@davidpnewton So last year there was no winter in Ukraine? I wonder where did all those reports of Russians dying of frostbite come from. Care to explain?
2
@st-ex8506 1. They of course evacuated most of their equipment as well, so far I have seen only two broken BMPs left behind, so you are completely wrong here. 2. That is your oppinion, you can have it, I won't touch it, because it smells bad.😅 3. Those numbers are completely bogus, are you insane?
2
It is hardly objective, as Puck is very clearly biased as hell, don't be ridiculous.
1
@janvisagie231 The brain power is weak in this one.
1
@janvisagie231 I don't see you challenging those "senseless comments" with any reasonable arguments, so there is obviously no point communicating with you any further.
1
@gandalfstormcrow8439 What does a map have to do with the subject of Puck's clear bias?
1
@kyleramsey5189 I wrote a comment about the "analysis", in this thread I'm reacting to a comment, which talks about the authors alleged objective view. Didn't you notice? And Puck is clearly biased in favor of Ukraine, didn't you notice that too?
1
Sure, because Russians never fought in winter and they have no idea it's coming, right?😅
1
@KasumiRINA Ok, I did look it up. "The officially released figures on the Russian losses were 1,376 killed in action and 408 missing in action" Now tell me, dear dishonest person, how is that half of their army?
1
@stream2watch "doesn't read the whole tread and thinks I'm citing losses in the current war, thus making a complete and utter fool of himself" 😅
1
@skymaster4121 They aren't? Because you say so? Understandable, shuffle along.
1
I would love to see them "rake" Melitopol.🤣
1
@st-ex8506 Actually, the number itself might be even higher, as Russians expected Ukraine to lose up to 50k troops if they decided to attack before the withdrawal, but in connection with the "well-trained troops, fully equipped and super motivated" it's completely bogus. I couldn't find any source exceps some hard core Ukrofan channels like this one that would use such expression. And the mere fact, that Ukrainian troops were not able to break the Russian defences around Kherson for such a long time confirms there were no such troops in those numbers. I doubt any AFU soldier is motivated to be used as cannon fodder for Russian artillery by anything else than the guns of Natsbats aimed at his back.
1
@st-ex8506 Would you be so kind and point out exactly what defeat you mean? Was there some big battle, in which a large part of Russian army was destroyed? Maybe I missed something, please dare tell, I'm all ears.
1
@st-ex8506 Ukraine is constantly losing 8-10 times more soldiers than Russia. so if Russia is being bled dry, Ukraine is bleeding like crazy. Comparing the level of corruption in those countries also does not bode well for Ukraine. In February, some 150-200k Russians went against 250k regular AFU plus Nationalistic battalions plus Territorial defence forces. After mobilization in Ukraine, Russians faced more than half a million men, closer to 750k. You are simply wrong in all your assumptions. And it looks like there was no "resounding defeat", so the projection thing you were mentioning is more fitting for you than me. The war is far from over, but Ukraine army is almost spent, while Russian army is getting considerably stronger. Get real.
1
@st-ex8506 The number of dead should correlate with the number of captured, right? So if Russia holds over 10k POWs, where are the 40k+ Russian POWs?
1
@cloudpoint0 So, as you say the war is essentially over, Ukraine has suffered a defeat, because they have failed to achieve their goal of "liberating" all the territories? How did 1,2 million Ukrainians armed by the whole NATO fail to beat mere half a million Russians? Can a clown like you explain those glaring holes in your narrative?
1
@cloudpoint0 "Ukrainian forces are rolling over the Russian forces wherever they choose to engage them" - So, that's why the Ukrainian "counter offensive" in the north has been stopped completely and there are no further advancements? Oh, it's all so clear now. It must also be the reason for the continued Russian offensive around Bakhmut with UkroNATO forces slowly losing ground, right? Yet you somehow forgot to explain, how the million supermen failed to defeat Russians long time ago with all those superweapons from NATO. You just keep clowning around with emotional speeches, which would be more fitting for some cocaine addict like Zelensky. Btw what massive defeat in Kherson are you talking about? It's the same delusional claim the clown before you made. Just to remind you the definition of defeat: "Defeat is the experience of being beaten in a battle". So you should be able to point out the battle, in which Russia experienced defeat, right?
1
@cloudpoint0 No point lying, I remember quite distinctly Ukrainian officials boasting about going all the way to Luhansk in one swoop. And even now, desperate Superukrops are trying to attack, but they get squashed like bugs every time. And again, Russia didn't suffer a defeat in any major battle, like Ukraine did for example in Mariupol, where several thousands of Superukrops got utterly defeated. And as Russia never set any goals concerning territorial gains, a mere withdrawal from a territory can hardly be called a defeat, just a minor setback. On the other hand, Ukraine has its goals set to "liberation" of all the territories and they are far from completing those goals. And as you said, "the war is essentially over", so it means Ukraine is experiencing a defeat, as they clearly failed to achieve their goals.
1
At the start I thought maybe this time it won't be as terrible, as Mr. Nielsen made a few correct points, but by the end I was again laughing at his clownish incompetence. First off, half of Kherson is on the other side of the river and still under Russian control. Somehow Mr. "Thick as a Puck" Nielsen forgot to mention that fact. Also, the river stopped being a problem for Russia and is now a problem for Ukraine. What about that, Puck? Russia is still attacking on several fronts and Ukraine is not able to stop them. On the other hand, when Ukraine tries to attack anywhere, they are squashed every time. So what will happen now? Russia will continue with denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine by continuously destroying the rest of Ukaine's military, while Ukraine will not be able to advance anywhere, as the Kiev regime and its western sponsors are no longer able to replenish the losses, which are now over 100k dead and a few hundred thousands wounded. Mobilization potential is almost depleted and the weapons supplies are not big enough, also their power infrastructure is on the verge of collapse, as is their morale. The prospect of Ukraine actually winning the war is laughable and people like Puck are simply peddlers of false hope for their gullible audience.
1
@janvisagie231 Come back when Ukraine takes Crimea. Until then, Crimea river.
1
@hanneslerm8311 Yet you can not produce any reasonable arguments to counter it. Very poor.
1
@hanneslerm8311 He sure did much better than you, adressing at least one point of many.
1
@janvisagie231 "You mean the side of Kherson where the the Regional State Administration building is located or the side of the Oleshky sands" That seems more like confirmation, how does that refute anything?
1
@hanneslerm8311 I see you still have no reasonable arguments. What a pity.
1