Comments by "" (@yellowtunes2756) on "The winter war in Ukraine" video.

What logistics performance? Russia fires 60k shells per day, compared to 30k shells Ukraine receives in a month. Logistics can't become better than this. And no, Canada doesn't even have 500k winter clothing sets itself, they count all winter related gear to sound more significant
5
@abrahamdozer6273 "500 components" - do they count laces and buttons? Not really, Russia gives soldiers every piece of basic gear they need. They had problems at the start of mobilization, but it's rarely the case now. Of course, soldiers can buy themselves gear, it's the case for many armies, including USA. For example in 2004 cbsnews were reporting that quarter of soldiers in iraq had no ceramic armour and soldiers were buying their own uniform a lot. When you're operating a lot of troops - you will inevitably have logistics problems at the start It was in spring. When you're pushing 100 kilometers deep in enemy territory in a day - you will have a lot of problems. Is your only example of bad logistics is from 8 months ago?
4
@alexiskiri9693 im quoting cbs and richest army in the world. If they can't do everything perfect from the start - Russia can't do it too. But it doesn't mean that Russia doesn't have equipment
2
@alexiskiri9693 Ukraine gets only around 500 precise shells per month, so only 1.5% of their shots are accurate . And Russia also uses precise ammo
2
@jpmanning5480 you're just spreading Ukranian propaganda According to interview of Washington post with Ukranian soldiers from Kherson offensive - Ukraine lost 5 people for every Russian. And since it came from a Ukrainian soldiers - ratio is probably even worse for Ukraine. And it's a lot worse on daily basis when no-one is attacking, but Russia has outnumbered Ukraine in artillery 15 to 1 according to Ukrainian officials, while 80% of casualties in any war are caused by artillery. So on average day Ukraine looses around 10-15 times more than Russia and 5+ times more than Russia during offensives. So if Ukrainian numbers about Russian casualties are true - Ukraine lost at least 350k dead. Seems wrong, don't you think? It's always like this with propaganda numbers if you put them into perspective I mean, you has to know that those numbers are part Ukrainian propaganda, so why are you repeating them?
2
@andrii.romaniuk what bullshit? Quote me There's no way of proving that destroyed tank (for example) is Russian or Ukrainian. Same goes for majority of equipment, cos both sides mostly use the same equipment Amount of destroyed vehicles has little to do with casualties. Majority of Russian army (before mobilization) was mechanised, while majority of Ukrainian army was sitting in trenches It's not me who's telling about Ukrainian losses, it's Ukrainian soldiers who gave interview to Washington post. And pure logic suggest that on average day with no offense from Ukraine - ratio between Russia and Ukraine is a lot worse for Ukraine, since they are drastically outgunned "One mobilization extended few times" - fancy words for multiple mobilization waves According to many mercs who left Ukraine - Ukrainian territorial defense troops had up to 3 days of training. Of course it's not the case for people who train in EU, but they are minority of Ukrainian army
2
@bluemarlin8138 according to Washington post and their interview with Ukrainian soldiers - Ukraine looses 5 soldiers for every Russian. And in average day (when noone is attacking) this ratio should be even worse for Ukraine, since Russia outnumberes Ukraine in artillery 15 to 1 according to Ukrainian officials
2
@davidr3382 it's the thing for every army when government sending a lot of soldiers somewhere. For example there's a news article from cbsnews from 2004 about American soldiers having to buy their own armour. So of course Russia will have some problems at the beginning of mobilization, it's not easy to transport 300k equipment everywhere it's necessary
2
Soviet c300 is better than any air defence NATO has btw. And everything else Ukraine received is either worse than Russian analogues or just as good at best. For example pzh2000 got the same range and accuracy like koalitsya, but koalitsya operated by less people. Himars has the same range and accuracy as tornado s and smerch, bur far worse range than iskander, kalibr and kinzjal Russia uses to hit targets far away. What advantage does Ukraine has again? Not sure how can Ukrainians push if their equipment hiding in forests will he visible to Russian artillery. Will they hide in cities again?
2
@mhlangamlungisi5108 not exactly true. Weapons indeed haven't done much, since USSR had huge production. But wagons and trains were a great help
2
@abrahamdozer6273 "you're likely Chinese" - if you can't hold basic argument, it does mean that im "lieutenant" or working for China. Everyone who disagrees with you is working for China? Can you see them in your room right now?
1
@jonson856 Russia claimed to destroy dozen of himars. But it's hard to destroy mobile artillery in general "They aren't as accurate" - depends on missiles Russia uses. It can be a carpet bombing or precise strike. Since Ukraine gets 500 guided shells and 30k dumb shells - they have 1.6% of precise artillery strikes. Do you think Russia has less? Doubt that
1
@tommcallister7647 "getting their butt kicked" - is this why Ukraine looses 10 times more people than Ukraine? According to Washington post and their interview with Ukrainian soldiers from kherson offensive - Ukraine lost 5 people for every Russian. And since usually no-one is attacking, while Russia has 15 to 1 artillery advantage (according to Ukrainian officials), daily this 5 to 1 ratio is a lot worse Well, since Ukrainians have a lot more soldiers and they had 7 mobilization waves already - of course Russia wants more soldiers to hold the line
1
@adamndirtyape where exactly have i lied or said something stupid? Quote me
1
@TheInfamousMrFox if you google "how many shells Russia fires per day" - you will see that answer is 60k in later August, almost 2 months after Ukraine got himars. Your assumption is based on nothing other than 1-2 explosion of Russian ammo per week, while Russia destroys dozen of ammo depots and Ukrainian military bases/ command centers daily
1
@TheInfamousMrFox "untrained" - every Russian men went through at least one year of training. And many of those people who were sent to Ukraine during mobilization chose military as their career, many of them also went through Ukraine "Totally decimated" - in your wet dreams. In reality Russia lost 5-10 times less than Ukraine "Rusty rifles, tanks from 1950s and no socks" - every country will have troubles with giving equipment to big amount of soldiers during mobilization. For example according to cbsnews in 2004 - 25% of American soldiers in iraq war had to buy their own armour. But problems are being discussed and fixed, it's just almost impossible to give 300k soldiers everything they need from the start, since Russia is 9000km wide and it takes time to deliver equipment. When it comes to tanks - oldest tanks Russia uses are t62, which are used by DNR and LNR forces because they are used to them, those tanks are also good at holding positions or when used as moving gun, tank is a tank, especially upgraded one. And oldest thing Ukraine received is t55 from Slovenia, so what's your point again?
1
@Connidk what quote of mine is Kremlin propaganda? I was referring to cbsnews, pentagon and Wikipedia. Copy paste my false sentence and we will discuss it
1
@pashakdescilly7517 Ukraine is still loosing 5 times more soldiers than Russia, according to Washington post and their interview with Ukrainian soldiers from Kherson offensive. Loosing ground isn't that important than loosing an army. Especially since Ukraine was outnumbering Russia greatly
1
@vyli1 news websites are pre writing articles sometimes to be the very first to announce stuff. Same happens with sports a lot. And firstly this info about 3 days came from USA, not a single Russian official ever said that Russia was expecting to negotiate with Ukraine after capturing huge chunks of land, which they did. But western puppeteers convinced Ukraine to keep fighting. Noone can expect to capture entire Ukraine in 3 days, it's physically impossible You can't trust any propaganda during war. It's easy to spread some nonsense about fake plans and celebrate when they weren't accomplished But yeah, northern attack was a failure. Russia indeed haven't expected Ukraine to fight until the last Ukrainian, so it will take some time
1
@agffans5725 Canada isn't sending 500k uniforms, they're sending 500k winter related stuff. Considering that Canadian army is 80k men, i doubt that they even have 500k uniforms in total
1
@pashakdescilly7517 so Washington post is spreading Russian propaganda? Or Ukrainian soldier saying that they lost a lot more soldiers than Russia for fun? Or Ukrainian officials are imagining amount of Russian artillery on the battlefield? What exactly is bs?
1
@vyli1 someone could have posted prewritten article by mistake. But first info about 3 days came from USA Again, it's impossible to capture such a big territory in 3 days. Russia was hoping to negotiate and pushed too deep and too fast, it's obviously didn't worked out so whole northern attack was a mistake and a failure. But if Ukraine negotiated - it could have saved many lifes. So it was a huge gamble to save both countries from a long war. Unfortunately for many dead people - it didn't worked out
1
@pashakdescilly7517 well, it has interviews with soldiers, they know better than we do. But my logic correlates with this article pretty well I can understand why would Russia loose a lot of people in first week of war, but after Russia left Kiev - war became very comfortable for them, since they have huge advantage in artillery
1
@vyli1 you're confusing Russia and random journalist who wrote this article. There's no point in setting a timer, because you always want to be first to make a news, what if Russia won few hours before timer was off? My guess that it was just a mistake Not sure how could Russia possibly could have capture Kiev with 3 million population. And even if they did - nothing would have stopped Zelensky from moving to Lviv. I'm not saying you're wrong. But if you're right, then Russia must have had truly insane ideas. In my assumption - Russian plan is a lot more reasonable and achievable. Why exactly do you think I'm wrong?
1
@pashakdescilly7517 amnesty international admitted that Ukraine places their troops in schools and hospitals, using towns as artillery positions, etc. It's a war crime to make civilian area a legitimate military target. So blame Ukraine on this one "Hugely restricted their artillery" - why are you saying it if Russia still fires 60k per day still? If you google "how many shells Russia fires a day" - you will find articles from mid August, 1.5 months after himars was delivered. Do you realize that Russia destroys dozen of Ukrainian ammo depots daily? Just because your media show you big explosion and say "omg, himars is destroying Russian ammo" - it doesn't mean that Russia is running low on ammo. Because, wow, destroying enemy ammo is a standard thing "They are so short of artillery" - Russia has tornado s with the same range and accuracy as himars, but in 10 times bigger quantities and drones. If i follow your logic - Ukraine should have 10 times less artillery than Russia. "Because it is accurate" - only 500 shells out of 30k Ukraine receives per month are guided. It's 1.6%. Do you think that amount of precise Russian shells is lower percentage wise? Why?
1
@vyli1 that's not how Russian media work. They are censoring themselves, there's no FSB guy to check if everything correct. Russian government also owns channel TNT with most popular comedy show called Comedy Club. People there often criticize Putin and government, but never "too much". Comics working there were giving interviews and saying that no-one stops them from writing whatever but they kinda feel what they should and shouldn't say. For example Oleg Slepakov made a song where he says many government promises (for example phrase "oil price will rise) and adds "what if it's fucking not", openly criticizing government. But they can't just call Putin a thief or a bitch, that's a restriction they put on themselves. And i can assume that it's the same thing for all government controlled media
1
@jpmanning5480 what weapons are better than Russian? Name them Guy above asked about Russian plane which is better than NATO, when it comes to speed - its su57, because i have no clue how can you compare planes. I never said that Russia has thousands of them, it wasn't the point of discussion
1
@mnxs Russia has 10 times more tornado s than Ukraine has himars. The only difference between them - tornado got more rockets. Every piece of really good equipment Ukraine has - Russia has in far larger quantities. Also you can't say that Russia is running out of rockets, since there are no official numbers about their quantities. And Russia still fires them daily, despite western media claiming that Russia should have run out of them after 2 weeks of war C300 got range of 300km, while patriot only has range of 160km. And Russia has c400 and c500 with range of 600km. Not sure how did you conclude that patriot is better In training conditions javelin hits the target with 19% chance, it doesn't mean that it's always destroying targets either. It is effective, but Russian kornet has 30% bigger range and penetrates almost twice as deep as javelin Russia has different ammo, some is precise, some isn't. Same goes for tornado s, which has rockets guided by glonass (analogue of gps). So it can be as precise as himars That's exactly why i only mentioned speed, because you can't decide what's better without flying them both and comparing. Maybe f16 turns better, maybe su57 is more comfortable etc. But artillery can be compared pretty easily. And Russian artillery is either better or equal to western analogues
1