Comments by "" (@yellowtunes2756) on "The Enforcer" channel.

Just like people of Donbas have every right to ask Russia for help and Russia has every right to use their military as they wish
2
@1ndragunawan listen carefully. I know it's a turtle tank under that rubble. But we don't know if it's destroyed or not because we can't see much damage on it. And most likely this shack was damaged by the fpv drone since it doesn't look like the tank has burned
2
So NATO declared war on everyone who relied on biggest exporter of grain in the world (Russia)?
2
Huh? Except that it's Ukraine that's getting stream rolled in the Donbas, not the other way around Just curious, have you said the same nonsense the last 5 times Ukraine sent suicide squads to attack Russia? How did it work out?
1
That's a lie. Some North Koreans are allowed to leave the country to trade with China and Russia, then come back with trade deals. I assume the same goes for soldiers as well
1
Do you realize that Ukraine lost tens of thousands to move a few km against normal trenches? Why the hell do you think that dragon teeth and tank ditches won't make it 10 times harder? In theory any obstacle is easy to overcome, but Ukrainians don't have enough training, equipment, artillery and aviation. Any obstacle doesn't meant to stop enemies, they meant to slow them down. Imagine how many Ukrainians will get slaughtered while trying to move past dragon teeth. And imagine what happens if Russians mine bridgehead with their Agriculture
1
@mikedittsche no-one died in Crimea, locals look pretty happy to me. So no, it's not about survival for Ukraine, it's about enslaving regions that don't want to be part of Ukraine anyway. "Vast majority motivated" - if that was the case, Zelensky wouldn't ban male population from leaving Ukraine and people wouldn't be kidnapped from streets to be forced in military My point is that Ukraine can't win this war militarily because their only successes were caused by lack of Russian troops, which is not the case after mobilization. Sending thousands of die to capture a tiny village in greyzone after 3 months without even touching any out of 5 layers of Russian defenses (dropping BMP in anti tank ditch doesn't count) - isn't a winning strategy
1
@mikedittsche "Ukraine liberated 5 times.mkre territory than Russia" - you mean empty fields in greyzone and like 5 villages with 10 shacks inside them? Russia never had some huge red arrow winter offensive, they just encircled Bahmut. While Ukrainian commanders promised to be in Crimea by now, tho they barely reached first line of Russian defenses. And did you really compared big city and logistics hub with few villages in the middle of nowhere? "It's not Zelensky banning male population from leaving, it's a normal practice" - so he did banned male population, but you consider it's an ok thing. So why would you say "it's not" and disagreed with me? Zelensky banning males from leaving directly contradicts your phrase about vast majority of Ukranians willing to join an army. If that was true - no ban would be needed and no mobilization waves would be necessary. So it's safe to say that vast majority of Ukrainians don't want to fight. I guess they're supporting the war, but small percentage of them has any motivation to actually serve in military
1
@mikedittsche according to Mediazona that used data from cementeries and social media - Russia lost 30k dead in total. So in entire war they lost around 100k soldiers dead and wounded. This "rubble" has roads, basements to hide, windows to shoot and spot enemies from. It's 100 times more important than any village You don't need to imagine my argument because I already have one. You don't need laws to stop people from fleeing the war if everyone wants to fight that war But if you want to play in retarded analogies - sure. Murder is forbidden by law to protect normal people from freaks who can hurt them. Who's getting protected by banning male population from leaving Ukraine? Those people are just getting forced to die. And if you want to say "well, those mobiks will protect civilians behind them, that's why this law is needed" - that law wouldn't be necessary if there were many males who wanted to be soldiers to "protect civilians behind them" Ukrainian intel chief Budanov told Washington post that Crimea will return to Ukraine by summer. So how exactly Ukraine can be "liberated" if after 3 months of offensive Ukraine only captured a handful of villages in greyzone without touching even first line of Russian defenses?
1
You can say the same about Ukraine to a much larger extent
1
 @DeltaElites I wonder why pro Ukrainian NPCs believe the dumbest propaganda imaginable
1
They support Russia because Russia is biggest grain exporter which was giving grain for free to many countries for decades, while NATO decided to ban Russian grain everywhere. Do you know that only like 4% of Ukranian grain actually went to poor countries? Why shouldn't Africa and Asia support Russia if NATO is clearly evil
1
@1ndragunawan no burning was seen and the fallen roof can't destroy a tank. But anyway, Ukraine looked at this tank while it attacked, did its job, came back safely and parked, while Ukraine couldn't destroy it while it moved. So yeah, this tank did its job well
1
@1ndragunawan he showed turtle tank under some wooden rubble. We don't know what hit it and now significant is damage, but it hasn't burned. So there's a big chance that the building was just hit with a fpv drone and tank is perfectly fine
1
Losers can't give ultimatums
1
Only 4% of Ukranian grain was being sent to poor countries. While Russia was even sending their grain in some countries for free for decades. And it's NATO that decided to ban biggest grain exporter on Earth. So who's evil again?
1
@Lilyschild123 so it's ok for NATO to invade anyone in middle east because they aren't "neighbouring countries"? So Ukraine waging war against like 5 million "innocent civilians" in Donbas and Lugansk regions is ok? What international law stops countries from helping rebellions? Can you name that law? I would love to read about it, learn something new and ask the difference between NATO helping rebels in Syria bad Russia helping rebels in Ukraine. Or point out that you're lying if such law doesn't exist
1
I mean, Ukraine did the same suicidal PR stunt like 5 times before and they achieved nothing
1
@troythomason8032 I don't remember anyone sanctioning NATO for invading half of middle east. Russia just helped Ukranian rebels who were bombarded by Ukraine for almost a decade. That's a shit reason to make it harder for them to feed poor countries for free
1
@GroovlyDo Russia isn't supporting famine and was supplying grain in poor countries for free. While only 4% of Ukranian grain actually went to poor countries
1
@Nerko5482 never happened
1
No, Ukraine was the one that killed those 2 Polish farmers and they blamed Russia immediately. Now they blame Russia again for no reason at all. They desperately want ww3
1
Russia is biggest exporter of grain. Do you think those "neutral" countries were happy with NATO sanctioning Russia? Oh and btw, Russia was sending grain for free in many countries for decades, but NATO decided to stop it
1
@jonson856 yes, for free. Every year and in huge quantities. For example in 2020 Russia sent 200000t of grain to Syria for free So according to you Russia was willing to give away Ukrainian grain for free. So Russia fed poor countries, haven't gained anything and prevented Ukraine from getting extra cash to prolong war? Amazing. What's the issue?
1
@hape3862 directly - no indeed. But if companies can't make transactions, ships can't find insurance and sanctioned businessman can't sign contracts - it makes it incredibly difficult. It's like banning gasoline in a big city, then acting surprised when car owners feel oppressed and say "well, we haven't banned cars, what seems to be the issue?"
1
@hape3862 maybe NATO countries shouldn't sanction countries and then whine about consequences later? Sending grain for free in poor countries became more complicated after NATO sanctions. If NATO actually cared about poor people starving - they would lift all sanctions that affect grain trade in any way shape or form
1
Russia is willing to give grain for free like they have been doing for decades already as soon as sanctions on grain are lifted. Do you think countries that stopped recieving ships from biggest exporter of grain should also be mad at NATO for sanctioning them?
1
Russia can feed china instead. It's not that complicated. And yeah, Ukraine wasn't even close be biggest exporter of grain to China before 2022. Not even in top 30. So no, it won't affect China in any way shape or form. But they see how NATO prevents Russia from sending grain to actually poor countries
1
@hedydd2 so who's implementing and enforcing sanctions if it not NATO countries? Who started sanctioning Russia and everyone who buys their oil above price cap? NATO is the one directly affecting international trading. It doesn't matter if NATO ships aren't directly blockading Russian ships, NATO is still responsible for damaging grain trade and many other resources
1
@hedydd2 they signed them in fear of NATO, so NATO is responsible for problems with world grain supplies
1
@bookbandit "facts" from ukrainian war propaganda. Only a retard would believe claims about estimations of enemy casualties during war According to BBC sponsored Mediazona which uses data from cementeries and social media, unlike random estimations, Russia lost 30k dead in total
1