Comments by "harmless" (@harmless6813) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. They took the ground so the offensive was successful.
    3
  2. If Russia is responsible for the Kerch bridge attack, that one went terribly wrong. But then, Russia ...
    3
  3. No. You can't just say "regardless of the definition". Otherwise, I could argue that you should be in jail "regardless of the definition" of laws. Listen to the video again; maybe you'll understand this time.
    3
  4. Who are you trying to convince with your russian propaganda?
    3
  5. The fact is, Russia didn't have enough troops to hold that immense front line. But Putin, of course, wouldn't allow his military to give up any of it. This is the result.
    3
  6. Izium is cut off at this point. No way east for the Russians there. Also, Ukraine has taken a lot more ground between the path to Kupiansk and Izium.
    3
  7. Whereas Russians get their 'expert' commentary from the Kremlin itself. 🤷‍♂
    3
  8. Reading the comments here it is apparent that russia still has enough money to pay a troll army.
    3
  9. They have been pushing for a year now. If they could push any harder, they would. But they can't.
    3
  10. Russia has some really hard decades ahead of it.
    3
  11.  @abhilashyadav2274  They will do great as a part of the EU.
    3
  12. A comment that contradicts itself. I find that rather funny.
    3
  13. Well ... there have been several ... incidents inside Russia during this war. 🤷‍♂
    3
  14. Nonsense. Even Belarus had to shoot down russian drones. (they don't seem to worry about the 'information space')
    3
  15. For individual units it's somewhere between 10% and 30%, depending on unit type. The Russians are constantly refreshing and rebuilding units. The question is what is the training level of newly deployed Russian soldiers? From what I can gather, it's abysmal.
    3
  16.  @chriscoyne8034 Your lack of arguments does not convince me either.
    3
  17. Yes, it is a stalemate. But it won't be one forever with the numbers you stated. At one point, one side will run out of resources to hold their line. Or they will smarten up and look for a diplomatic solution instead.
    3
  18.  @jamesedwards6173  A very simple reason: He is being paid to do so.
    3
  19. Well, not in any direct and obvious way.
    3
  20. Gaza is a patch of land, not a group of people. Yes, that is a sufficient distinction.
    3
  21.  @bill_and_amanda I disagree that moving people elsewhere is the same as destroying them.
    3
  22.  @anderspuck  Hardly anybody will first watch another video. A few sentences would have been good. Even when you know what it is, it is valuable to hear what the person talking thinks it is. But great video anyway. Thanks so much!
    3
  23. It depends on what kind of attack it was. If they targeted it with easy to track missiles it would probably elicit some kind of counterattack. Might be a nice excuse to e.g. sink another Russian ship in the Black Sea. Shouldn't be particularly hard for the US. If it was more of a clandestine attack, like a planted explosive device with no clear evidence to who was responsible, it would probably get swept under the rug. There are more weapons that can be sent; losing (part of) a single shipment wouldn't be much of a loss.
    3
  24. Hiding behind Crimea.
    3
  25. We will keep supporting Ukraine. If there is any beef with the US, we can take that up after Ukraine has won.
    3
  26. "What air force doing?!"
    3
  27. That's funny. The casualty ratio is atrocious for the Russians. Though I don't know what they 'perceive' ...
    3
  28. It's hard to find the right path. But while the destruction and sacrifice by the Ukrainians is hard to watch, a significant escalation might lead to even more lives being lost and more cities destroyed. No easy answers. Let's try to do our best. Slava Ukraini!
    3
  29. ruzzia need to give back everything and pay reparations.
    3
  30.  @martstam2016  No it's not. The 200.000 published is killed only. There's a website where they give an estimate of wounded by multiplying by three.
    3
  31. They still waste an absurd amount of hardware in those attacks.
    2
  32.  @larsrons7937 That seems to be an overly broad definition of "a people". Are Hamas "a people" too?
    2
  33.  @larsrons7937 I still think your definition is too broad.
    2
  34. He didn't say anything like that. He said that Putin can still be tried for genocide even if he didn't kill anyone himself.
    2
  35.  @highdefinist9697  It's all about division, diversion and money. It doesn't matter to the Kremlin what Russia's enemies do - as long as it means they are not helping Ukraine.
    2
  36.  @larsrons7937 "There would probably be retaliations in form of massive bombings of Ukranian civilians, and hybrid warfare attacks against the West." Sounds like nothing would actually change.
    2
  37.  @Jeroen_Maes  Um. There was lots of fighting in the Kherson offensive. That Russia gave up at the end and ran, doesn't change that. But nice try. Directly from the trolling handbook.
    2
  38. You misspelled Russia.
    2
  39. The only thing along those lines I could think of is GLSDB. Those have been promised and are expected to arrive any day now. We haven't seen them in action yet. I don't know if they would make enough of a difference here though.
    2
  40. What does this even mean?
    2
  41. Gazprom would have been liable for contract violations if the situation had continued (aka Russia not delivering gas as contractually obliged). But then the pipeline was conveniently blown up. 🤷‍♂
    2
  42. Gazprom would have been liable for contract violations if the situation had continued (aka Russia not delivering gas as contractually obliged). But then the pipeline was conveniently blown up. 🤷‍♂
    2
  43.  @wendten2  Well, the contract not meaning anything now is the point. I think you try quite hard to not understand that.
    2
  44. Gazprom would have been liable for contract violations if the situation had continued (aka Russia not delivering gas as contractually obliged). But then the pipeline was conveniently blown up. 🤷‍♂
    2
  45. Russia has nothing left to escalate - except nukes maybe, but that would lead to the West doubling down and directly interfering in the fighting.
    2
  46. Because they would lose NATO protection and I guess they are not that eager to get into a war with Moscow.
    2
  47. I don't think so. The attack in Zaporizhzhia was (and is) serious. It's just that it was slow because of all the fortifications and mine fields and now they have to deal with russia's fervent attacks on Avdiivka.
    2
  48. He's a fellow autocrat.
    2
  49. Nah. As long as people keep calm about it, all is well. And those people who would panic over it are not going to watch these kinds of videos. Major news media will not pick up on it either because it's not flashy enough and doesn't make for good headlines.
    2
  50.  @maurorossi8708  When the front line contracts, Ukraine can also concentrate more forces in one spot. So, no, Russia will not be able to hold anything.
    2