Comments by "" (@Princip666) on "Grain deal stand-off shows Russia's maritime weakness" video.

That's a nice collection of delusions you got there. Poor you.
4
@krakhedd So, if Ukraine has those, why don't they use them? The Russian fleet is operating freely in the Black sea. Talk about fantasies.🤣
2
You somehow know what Russia thought? Clear the corridor from what? Are you on drugs?
2
Another show of utter incompetence. Mr. Nielsen somehow forgot to mention, that Ukraine used a humanitarian corridor for the attack and the ships attacked were involved in maintaining that corridor. Also, Mr. Nielsen clearly lies about how "Russia decided to withdraw from the grain deal", as that never happened. Russia simply put it on pause and demanded investigation and security assurances, that it will not happen again. They reportedly recieved those assurances and simply continued with the deal. Then this guy tries to spin the purpose of the grain deal, saying that the export was supposed to lower prices on a global market, but everyone who has a working memory remembers, that the main argument for the corridor was very clearly export to the third world countries. Then he repeats the lie about Russia withdrawing from the deal, which never happened. And as usual he then starts babbling incoherently about Russia not being able to control the situation and some non existent Turkish warships, when the fact is, that Russia effectively blocked Ukrainian ports before the deal and could easily do it again. And to top it off, he pulls out a completely false information about Russia recieving "some written promises" from Ukraine, when everyone knows NOBODY discusses ANYTHING with Ukraine, all the deals are discussed betweeen Russia and USA/UK with Turkey as a middle man. This shows two things: 1. This man is either utterly incompetent and doesn't know what he's talking about, or 2. He deliberately lies and pushes a false narrative. Either way, it's terrible.
2
@krakhedd Sure, sure, so if Russia decides to block the ports, Turkey will rush in and deblocade them, right?🤣
1
@wai828 Ah, that's why the west had to persuade Russia to let the grain be exported from those ports, right? Because Russia was unable to block those ports, right? 😅
1
@krakhedd Maybe instead of developing your paranoid theories, you might react to my question, what you say? Counter some disinformation with your zero tolerance, boy.
1
@jaysonkmendoza That is a very strange definition of a blockade, because as I understand it, to block a port, you need to simply have the ability to sink any ship leaving the port, which Russians certainly have. Care to explain, why they would have to move and sit before the port? Also, are you saying, that the Russian fleet operates exclusively out of range of those fabled missiles? Any evidence for that? Because Neptun can basically reach almost to Sevastopol. If Ukraine even has any, that is.
1
@jaysonkmendoza First off, Moskva was definitely NOT designated anti-missile and air defence cruiser, what are you talking about? It was a missile cruiser, it carried guided missiles. Second, why would they need ships at all, when they have perfectly functional aircrafts with missiles more than able to hit any ship from a safe distance? What exactly would prevent them to destroy any ship leaving the port? And where is the evidence of Russian fleet operating only close to Crimea? You did not provide any, even after I explicitly asked for it.
1
@jaysonkmendoza So, you were wrong about Moskva, but you are too dishonest to admit it. You also have no answer to how would anyone prevent Russia from destroying any ship leaving the port by launching missiles from the air hundreds of miles away from any counter measures, so you started babbling about Turkey, NATO and a "great cost" as ambiguously as you are able. And you ignored my repeated request for evidence to your claim, so that is enough for me, I have no reason to continue conversation with such a dishonest person.
1
@wai828 Did I say ships can teleport? And you did not answer my question. Why Russia had to take an active part in the grain deal, if they, as you claim, couldn't do anything about it anyway? Their fleet is hiding behind Crimea based on what evidence? And can you specify the "last time they tried to be aggressive in the Black Sea they lost their flag ship, the Moskva" part? As a matter of fact, Russians regularly lauched their rockets from ships in the Black sea and still are. And Moskva sunk after a fire exploded some stored ammunition.
1
They got everything from NATO, Ukraine didn't build anything, don't be ridiculous.
1
@Checobeep Eh, what? Do you have anything relevant to say?
1
@huskytail Nobody mined the corridor after the attack, there was nothing to clear.
1
@reneblom2160 Didn't you see the questions? Shuffle along, child.
1
@huskytail Corridors? There is more of them? Can you tell me where are the other ones? And yes, obviously nobody is talking about the attack, so why do you even point that out?
1
@huskytail Yes, you are obviously not. Kudos for admitting it tho. What about those other corridors?
1
@lasse123123 If you clarify your question, I will maybe answer.
1
@andrzejbarcelonafrlk6416 Sure, but he mentions it as "Russia came up with some weird explanation about how Ukraine had used the grain corridor...". He portrays it as not real, while it is a solid fact, big difference.
1
@andrzejbarcelonafrlk6416 Evidence for what? For the use of the corridor? Isn't it self evident? The only way they could bypass that corridor would be teleporting the drones behind the corridor. Are you even serious?
1
@MarcosElMalo2 What neutral zone? It is a humanitarian corridor, not neutral zone, get your facts straight. Or maybe your head checked. This is ridiculous.
1
You like being lied to?
1
@davidfaraday7963 What did I deny? Care to explain? The guy who made the video is obviously a liar.
1
@davidfaraday7963 For exaple, Russia never withdrew from the grain deal, they just put in on pause. That is one of the obvious lies. Want another example? The written promise from Ukraine never happened, that's another obvious lie. Is that enough for you?
1
@davidfaraday7963 At 6:21 "now that the've gotten some written promises from Ukraine...". Did you even watch the video? And when did Russia threaten to withdraw from the grain deal? Besides, that's not what this guy says, he says they actually withdrew from the deal. Stop being ridiculous, if your brain is not able to process the given information, just say so and move along.
1
@davidfaraday7963 Ok, I will try to explain once more in as simple terms as possible, because you seem to have quite low processing power. Ready? Here we go. This guy says, that Russia withdrew from the grain deal. That is a lie, because Russia never withdrew from the grain deal. This guy also says, that Russia supposedly got a written promise from Ukraine. That is a lie, because Russia never acknowledged getting any such promise from Ukraine. I hope your brain will not explode, while you try to comprehend such basic information, because I can't find any simpler terms to convey it.
1
@davidfaraday7963 It does not work that way. Since the original claim is NOT supported by ANY evidence, I'm not obliged to provide any evidence to the contrary. But since you are so desperate, Russia is still in the grain deal and even Ukrainian officials denied giving Russia any promises. So there you go, deal with it. Suggest all you want, he never supports what he says with any sort of evidence, he's just a lying clown.
1
@gorillaguerillaDK Here's how words work. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of “suspend” is to defer to a later time or to stop temporarily, while the definition of “withdraw” is to take back or away. So clearly it is not the same by far. If someone withdraws from any deal, you have to make a new deal. Try again, or maybe better not. This was terrible enough.
1
@davidfaraday7963 I didn't? Here's a quote from my previous reaction: "Russia is still in the grain deal and even Ukrainian officials denied giving Russia any promises". So it seems I did. And if you had a working brain, you woudn't even ask for it. But you don't, so you did.🤣
1
@gorillaguerillaDK Yes, words have meaning, but it's not the meaning what YOU want it to be. Get lost.
1
@davidfaraday7963 Is Russia still in the grain deal? Yes, it is. Did Ukrainian officials deny giving Russia any such promise? Yes, they did. Did you check on the provided information? No, you didn't. Is it my fault you are completely incompetent and obtuse? Hardly.
1
@davidfaraday7963 They never "pulled out", or "withdrew", they just put it on hold. If you don't see the difference, it's not my problem. They spoke about guarantees given, but not by Ukraine. And again, if you don't see the difference, I can't help you, contact a psychiatrist.
1
@davidfaraday7963 So, you will be of course able to tell me, where can I find Russia saying the are withdrawing from the grain deal, right? And it wasn't Ukraine, who planned and realized the attack, it was NATO, more precisely UK and USA. Nobody deals with Ukraine in such matters, don't be ridiculous. Their word is worth less that a fart in the wind.
1