Comments by "" (@yellowtunes2756) on "Channel 4 News" channel.

@Chris Viking of course Russia will have soldiers guarding that territory, it's a dangerous object and no-one should be able to sabotage it But if you consider any soldier around a legitimate reason to bomb NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, then you should also consider any civilian building in Ukraine a legitimate target if there are at least one dude with a gun around Btw, it's literally against Geneva convention to bomb powerplants, even if there are soldiers around
5
@EricK-tb2dn they have 4 times less soldiers than Ukraine. And in Kharkov they had 8 times less soldiers in highly forested area - Russian technology (artillery, airforce and amount of tanks) advantage is useless in such area. Same strategy haven't worked out for Ukraine in Kherson, because it's full of open fields They captured a lot of land in first few weeks and mostly bombed Ukranians in past 6 months. Better loose ammo than soldiers in suicide attacks like Ukraine did in Kherson Stinger is better than verba, but Russia relies on proper air defence system like c400 which is better than NASAMS. Even c300 Ukraine had at the start is better than NASAMS Kornet shoots at better distance and got better damage than javelin. Also kornet got far better range than nlaw, not sure about damage, but since they all cab destroy tank - it doesn't really matter. Tho kornet is stationary thing, so it got it's own disadvantages, but I'm not sure how did you conclude that it's worse than nlaw and javelin
2
@CH-bn7qb Russia's economy is fine. We lost some positions in McDonald's menu tho and it got different name now. And i also can't buy Total war Warhammer 3. That's about it. It's actually been worse when we took crimea cos our economy wasn't ready for such a thing. Now it is
2
@sammyseegaar "Ukraine is getting stronger" - according to deputy of minister of defence of Ukraine - Ukraine lost 50% of their heavy equipment and all NATO supplies only covered 15% of those losses. Not sure how exactly they are getting stronger "Unable to match" - which one?
2
@182Nutty what are you measuring to say they are outclassed?
2
@karstenschuhmann8334 not sure how sending untrained soldiers to sit in trenches without proper weapons while being under artillery fire 24/7 is saving lifes, but ok
1
So Ukraine lost that war 4 times already? Since they had 4 mobilization waves in 2022. And another 6 against people of Donbas since 2014
1
@EricK-tb2dn Abrams was made in 80s, t72 was made in 1972. Not a big difference, is it? Not every artillery supposed to be accurate, some was designed to spam enemy trenches. And yes, Russia has precise artillery with same range as himars (smerch and tornado s), has analogue of German phz 2000 named koalitsya, which has same range, but operated by 2 less people. Should i mention missiles like Kinzjal that cannot be intercepted by any western air defence system?
1
@craig2185 can you name a single weapon or air defence system in Ukraine that doesn't have better Russian analogue?
1
@gotohyoshihisa3971 according to Ukranian deputy of minister of defence from 4 months ago - Ukraine lost 50% of their heavy equipment, while all NATO supplies only covered 15% of their losses, now it's a lot worse for them. If at the start of the war Russia captured 20% of their territory against far better equipped army (compared go today's Ukraine) - i see no reason why can't they do the same now, but slower to save soldiers And before you said that Russia made a surprise attack - Arestovich (one of the top officials in Ukraine) admitted that they knew about attack and Biden was saying that Russia will attack for a month. So the only one who wasn't aware of Russian attack - were Russian soldiers. So why do you think that Russia won't gain more territories?
1
@henrytep8884 I'm anti Ukranian, not pro Russian, because i don't like wars in general What's so embarrassing? Ukraine had more tanks and artillery than any other EU country (according to armedforceseu), they had biggest and best trained (due to 8yo war experience) army, they had people willing to fight and a lot of modern NATO equipment and training by NATO soldiers since 2014. Do you think defeating them should be as easy as some goat farmers USA have been fighting in last 20 years? USA also lost in Vietnam, when USA didn't had huge technical advantage. In Iran NATO won because Iranian soldiers didn't wanted to fight, just like Saddam generals and because Iran had no answer to NATO artillery and planes. It wasn't the full scale war against decent opponent In Syria Russia also destroyed goat farmers with ez, just like USA did in other middle east countries. Russia showed that with 1 to 4 times disadvantage in manpower against high tech equipment they are struggling and need extra soldiers to capture biggest country in EU (with unlimited money from NATO to back them up). Doesn't look like embarrassment to me
1
@gotohyoshihisa3971 you can't objectively talk about moral. Ukraine also uses conscripts, they are defending their land, but they are massively outgunned, they received few days of training (according to interview with mercs who fled from Ukraine) and everywhere where Ukraine doesn't attack - they have to sit in trenches under constant Russian bombardment. Many Russian soldiers also don't want to fight, but they haven't escaped Russia, so they don't mind fighting, they are better equipped and will receive more training than average Ukranian soldier. So you can't objectively say who's morale is higher Russia fires 75k shell per day according to pentagon, compare it to 35k shells NATO supplies to Ukraine per month. If that's bad logistics for you, then what would you call good logistics? Or you think that giving crew of 5 soldiers food and water is somehow harder than giving them few hundred shells to fire?
1
@gotohyoshihisa3971 i doubt that Russian casualties are high, because they mostly sit in tanks and use artillery, while DNR conscripts and Wagner fight in close range. Russians also protect people in Donbas from Ukranian oppression You have mistaken Kherson offensive (where Ukraine suffered huge losses and did nothing) with Kharkov offensive (where they captured a lot of lend). They haven't made a referendum in this area and I don't think they care about this region at the moment Who's sending Ukraine weapons other than NATO and in what quantities? No, i admitted that Ukraine had a lot of weapons since Soviet Union and that they have lost majority of them, while NATO gives them basically nothing Hitting supply lines makes life harder of course, not for soldiers tho, but for people who deliver them goods, which is also important
1
Ukraine dammed the river to Crimea that supplies 80% of freshwater to the region, deliberately starving 2 million people. Zelensky threatened to build nukes on Munich conference. Ukraine kept bombing Donbas civilians despite Minsk agreement. More than enough reasons to invade them Also you won't see a difference between russians and ukrainians because they share same history, race, mentality, architecture etc. Only brainwashed ape can say that russians are different from ukrainians Also no-one is trying to erase ukrainians from the earth. Even in USSR every nation was allowed to keep their culture, traditions, learn native language in schools and celebrate holidays. Same with Russia
1
@1966bluemax do you realize that since 2014 opposition in Ukraine was thrown in jail or killed? Do you know that Zelensky banned many parties in his parliament? Do you know that ukrainian men aren't allowed to leave the country? It's not freedom
1
@1966bluemax Ukraine was beautiful and sovereign country before 2014. And since then they were entirely rely on the west. Without west they can't fight and they can't keep their economy alive. How exactly Russia was controling Ukraine? And was it worth it to get rid of such control by destroying your country and becoming a NATO puppet?
1
@CH-bn7qb prices on gas and oil are rising, many countries can't survive without it. Currently many companies are buying gas and oil for rubbles, it's more stable than ever before I'm curious, where are you from? Because if you're part of NATO there's a good chance that your country participated in invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran or Serbia in past 30 years. How many "Hitlers" your government had in your lifetime? I'm against the war, I'm against Putin and i want it to stop. But by founding the loosing side - NATO just prolonging it and causing more deaths. And they don't have moral high ground because of their own wars in middle East or Serbia Btw, USSR, despite being a lot more closed than Russia right now, has second best economy in the world. We do have resources to do everything on our own. And now we have Europe who can't live without our gas and oil and China/India who we can trade with
1
@CH-bn7qb lol, you participated in a war thousands kilometers from your homeland to stop terrorism. Do you know that USA was sponsoring those exact people in Afghanistan to fight against legal Afghanistan government that liked communist ideas? I hope you remember photos of Afghanistan cities that were bombed into oblivion, about carpet bombing civil areas, about literal massacres of civilians, torture of prisoners, suffocation of 2000 prisoners in metal boxes and many other things How is "fighting terrorists" better than "fighting nazis" who's bombing civilians in Donbas? Every war got an excuse, a very shitty excuse for thousands of dead people. I'm curious, what would you say if Russia nuked Kiev "to save lifes" just like USA did with Japan I don't remember Russia fighting for the last soldiers and letting thousands of their troops to get encircled and captured. If they decides that it's not worth fighting for - they just drove away. That's exactly what happened to Kharkov, no-one was fighting for it, Russians just left. You can't give soldiers from Donbass modern tanks and expect them to do good. The harder tank to use - the less effective it is in inexperienced hands. So i can understand why they gave them old tanks Again, USSR had second biggest economy in the world, right after USA. Despite being in total isolation. We know how to supply ourselves pretty well. And if Europe ever decides to stop buying our oil and gas - we have 4 billion asians who will buy it with discount for sure
1
@ጥንታዊቀይሰው they were doing it in Donbas for 8 years. And this nuclear plant was in Russia's hands for 5 months, it provides Russia's territories with electricity, it's guarded by Russian soldiers, why would Russia bomb it?
1
@thiscommentsdeleted majority of his information is from Ukranian officials or Ukrainian soldiers. What's your point again?
1
@thiscommentsdeleted he wrote tons of text and the only thing you disagree with - him misspelling 20% with 30%? You're so smart, i bet you have tons of bitches
1
@johnkirk1772 according to novayagazeta (pro western source) Russia makes 250 new tanks (assumably t90) and upgrades 500 old tanks per year. Compare it to 20 Abrams in USA per year and 22 leopard 2 + 88 leopards per year in Germany. Sanctions can't stop parallel import into Russia, they can buy anything they want with a little bit increased price T14 is a new thing and Russia tries to make the bottom part of the tank to be used for many other systems (anti air, IFV, artillery etc) to make them all easier to produce. It's indeed a long process, but it has nothing to do with their military industry which works 24/7 now, while they're building more production lines Old soviet c300 is still better than any NATO air defence system, same goes for majority of Russian rockets and some other systems. What exactly are you referring to as "paper weapons"?
1
@E M what evidence do you need? And what are tou measuring to say that Russian tanks are "no match"? They are fundamentally different. Russian tanks are lighter (because Russian/Ukrainian soil is softer than European), they have bigger caliber (to be able to destroy more armoured western tanks), they have less crew members (to have more fire power for the same amount of trained soldiers), they are mostly faster and can drive more kilometres (because Russia is a huge country) and they are almost 1 meter lower than leopard 2 (to be harder to hit, considering that they have weaker armour). How can you compare them? It's like saying that ios is better than android
1
It was s300 rocket that can't fly for a thousand of kilometers to hit Poland if it was fired from Russia. So it was fired from Ukraine And even if it was Russia - no-one would start ww3 because of 2 farmers because such war would end humanity
1
According to western propaganda - yes. But there are less than 10k confirmed (by social media and cementeries) Russian losses. Plus few thousands for Wagner DNR and LNR. Ukraine is loosing far more soldiers than Russia. Do you think they also can afford to loose 1m men? Considering that half of their population left since 2014
1
So you want Russians to NOT guard nuclear power plant, so any random freak could do damage to it?
1
@AbbyGirl11 by sending them weapons - you're prolonging the war. Either you want one side to win or you want the war to end - you have to pick one. When Ukrainians gave up - you can look at Crimea, it's fine, untouched and noone got hurt. And now look at east of Ukraine. Of course Russia shouldn't have invaded. But if you're supporting a loosing side - war will last longer and more people will die
1
@mariawardle1009 not really, war propaganda is always the same "we are good guys and winning, enemies are evil, dumb and loosing". Don't forget that nato countries banned russian news first. Why would they stop you from getting information from different sources?
1
@mariawardle1009 no-one ever stated that war will last 3 days, you're telling lies Well, twitter, Instagram and Facebook banned Russian news first, then Russia answered. I can use vpn if i want to or i can read Telegram. But you still can't find RT on your TV She wasn't brave, she was stupid and haven't achieved anything. I also was protesting the war and got 100 dollars fine, but i since i wasn't on tv - no-one will try to get me in jail Btw, can you say out loud that there are 2 genders or that you hate immigrants? Cos every country has it's free speech limitations
1
@SA-hh9mv s300 can't fly thousands of kilometers to hit Poland. Learn geography Russia never used s300 to attack Ukrainian infrastructure SpongeBob squarepants has teeth that look like twin towers and amount of letters in his full name are 9 and 11. WEIRD COINCIDENCE am i right, i bet this yellow sponge worked with Osama bin Laden
1
@fossils-z9d there's no footage of Russia shelling Ukraine from artillery. Considering amount of drones Ukraine has and entire nato intelligence - it's ridiculous that they haven't gave any evidence of their claim. Therefore Russia never fired from that power plant
1
Ukrainians who shot at people who were moving towards Russian borders should get punished
1
1) It wasn't him who did it first 2) Strike was multiple kilometres away from those coordinates 3) It was s300 rocket and it can't fly for thousands of kilometers to be fired from Russia 4) so it was Ukraine and you should stop finding excuses
1
I'm curious, if some criminal will shoot at me, but i take your wife as a human shield to protect me, will you blame me for your wife's death? Because when you're willingly trying to cause a nuclear explosion and kill thousands of people with radiation, you aren't a "good guy", you're a terrorist
1
@rickygreen8639 heavy tanks in spring trying to not get stuck in ukrainian mud. I'm curious if Russians will be able to destroy any western tanks themselves or Ukrainian soil will do it for them
1