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

  1.  @guidobolke5618 Nice try. Numbers say something different.
    1
  2. What do you mean? He posted on his community page 9 hours ago.
    1
  3. The part in question is well beyond the former reservoir. While it was flooded for some time, things should be pretty much back to normal there. You are right, russia doesn't have strong defenses there. The difficulty for Ukraine is simply getting enough equipment across. There's no bridge and any larger crossing operation is bound to get attacked by artillery and aviation.
    1
  4. Personally, I think this constant "Germany may falter" is itself Russian hybrid warfare. The German chancellor said right at the beginning of this war that Germany will be with Ukraine for as long as it takes. There has been not change. Greetings from Germany.
    1
  5.  @Viggo_Frb  Yup, that one was pretty obvious. Also how Ukraine was brought in line. First they insisted very much that it wasn't them and then they apparently got convinced that it wasn't in their/our interest to play it up as a Russian attack on NATO. I agree with Anders: if Russia wants NATO to respond, they will have to get much more direct. But of course Russia doesn't want to really start a war with NATO; they just want something they can point at and claim as NATO aggression.
    1
  6.  @MA-oj8zk  Jeebus, that is dark. I don't expect anyone on Crimea to die from hunger. I mean, why would they instead of just giving up?
    1
  7. He explained why the Ukrainian losses are not particularly important at the moment. Did you miss it? (In short: because Ukraine has constantly been mobilizing new soldiers since the beginning of the invasion.)
    1
  8.  @lockbert99  They have several million. And they fight for their country, their lives and their freedom.
    1
  9.  @lockbert99  They don't have an army of several million right now because they don't have the equipment for so many men. And of course Ukraine will get all their territory back. And we here will keep supplying them until they do. You are welcome.
    1
  10.  @lockbert99  I agree that the West's aim seems to be to weaken Russia. And it's working. I do not agree that Ukraine is running out of men. You should diversify your sources. Or just wait and see.
    1
  11. russians don't seem to be very good at attacking logistics. Just saying.
    1
  12. Are you saying that Latvia tries to erase all Russians? Don't make me laugh. You know, there's a country where millions of Russians live, right across the border.
    1
  13.  @bill_and_amanda I disagree about the parallels part.
    1
  14. It's just like the Russians calling others Nazis while acting like Nazis themselves.
    1
  15.  @theredscourge  I guess our middle name is cynicism?
    1
  16.  @uknwarrior7980  Did you just not watch the video or did you not understand it?
    1
  17. "I think it's wrong to accuse the people using this word of using it to simply describe a mass civilian casualties." Really? I think he's exactly right. That seems to be what most people are doing.
    1
  18.  @Matt_from_Florida  Huh? Where's Russia advancing? The only advances were in Bakhmut.
    1
  19.  @Matt_from_Florida  Right. And you already got the appropriate reply. Look that up too.
    1
  20. Another Russian shill, just trying to be more subtle about it. Won't help Russia. 🤷‍♂
    1
  21. Genocide is not about land.
    1
  22.  @json252 That's not how it works. 'Palestinians' is already wonky as a distinct group, but 'Gazans' is just silly. But that definition 'New Yorkers' would be a distinct national group.
    1
  23.  @ChrisR-xs9wp  I didn't want to disagree with you at all, in case that wasn't clear. But I'm German and I am angry that Scholz is going along with the whole "non-escalation" nonsense.
    1
  24.  @tomk3732  Nice try, Ivan. Total aid to Ukraine by the US has been about $175B total whereas the US aid in WW2 to the Soviet Union alone was about $180 billion (adjusted for inflation). That doesn't include help to other allies or the expenditure for the US forces in WW2.
    1
  25.  @tomk3732  Maybe don't rely on google alone. Google is not a source.
    1
  26.  @tomk3732  From a US government website (I can't even spell out the website - stupid YT; search for the text) "To date, we have provided more than $64.1 billion in military assistance since Russia launched its premeditated, unprovoked, and brutal full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022" The rest is non-military assistance.
    1
  27.  @edhargquest8710 Neither side will run into serious manpower problems any time soon. There are videos about that topic too. Watch them.
    1
  28. You make vast claims but don't present any evidence. I disagree with your assessment of the situation.
    1
  29. Russia stopped exporting processed fuel (gasoline, diesel, etc.) months ago. They already feel the effect of the targeted refineries. And now more and more fuel depots go up in flames. Grab some popcorn.
    1
  30. Provocative?
    1
  31.  @bruh5361  Ah. In that case I agree.
    1
  32. I think the Ukrainians will just stay on the flanks and keep poking the Russians. You may or may not call that a battle for Bakhmut.
    1
  33. The difference is that in one case the claim is that a people doesn't exist where in the other case, the claim is that a state doesn't exist. Trying to take over land is the goal of many wars and that doesn't automatically mean any such war is a genocide. Genocide is specifically defined to be aimed against people, not land.
    1
  34.  @IvarDaigon Bullshit history "arguments". I don't care. And I disagree that there's not much difference. In fact, there are not many parallels besides the fact that there's fighting ongoing.
    1
  35. I want an "armchair general" emoji.
    1
  36.  @panosbozopoulos5212  You are wrong, And posting a wall of text doesn't change that.
    1
  37.  @panosbozopoulos5212  How good is your German? I can recommend the video on this topic from "Militär & Geschichte mit Torsten Heinrich" on this topic. I'll try to post a link in the next comment, but YouTube usually deletes those.
    1
  38.  @panosbozopoulos5212  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jnlknGxyQs
    1
  39. Neither Ukraine nor russia is even talking about a ceasefire right now. Which is actually a win for Ukraine because a ceasefire with russia occupying a rather large part of Ukraine would be a win for russia. But Ukraine taking a part of Kursk made that prospect unappealing for Putin.
    1
  40.  @jonbbbb It all rests on the intent. If you make laws with the specific intent of one group marrying into the general population so that this group will eventually disappear, that will fall under genocide.
    1
  41.  @IconoclastX Sorry to disappoint you, but it's no longer just a raid.
    1
  42. Fortunately, Ukrainian (western) artillery has a wider range than russian artillery, so they simply place their artillery on the other side of the river. We know because the russians keep whining about it all day long.
    1
  43. Because, as we all know, individual soldiers in trenches have the best overview over the strategic situation. Not.
    1
  44.  @guysimpson2080  If you want to count every tree line, then that's up to you. It doesn't make any strategic difference.
    1
  45. As soon as the Kerch bridge is in HIMARS range, it's gone. Note that Ukraine has - or will shortly have - ammo for HIMARS with 150km range.
    1
  46. They are afraid of a hot war with NATO. Because they would lose that one real fast.
    1
  47. I don't think anyone has enough data to attempt an estimate that one could consider both legitimate and useful. I'd say one per vehicle destroyed could be a somewhat plausible lower boundary. But it's really just a wild guess.
    1
  48. The river is quite wide, so it is unlikely to completely freeze. (Depends on the temperature, obviously.) And even if it did, the ice would not be strong enough for heavy equipment.
    1
  49.  @mats66 Misses the point.
    1
  50.  @Axacqk Misses the point. The fact that Israel would accept any kind of Palestinian state shows, that there is no intent of genocide.
    1