Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Sebastian Sas" channel.

Europe's been subservient to the USA since 1945. Until recently, this was very beneficial to Europe, in my opinion. But as the USA goes mad, so goes Europe, only faster and more completely, because as dysfunctional as American culture is, however corrupt its government becomes, the USA still has the tattered remnant of a constitution that constrains its government far more than the constitutions of the EU countries.
112
Red line or not, the Russians just keep hitting harder and harder, and building up bigger and bigger.
50
They were living in peace, as far as I know, until the Maidan Coup.
19
It's not an EU solo act. The national governments across virtually all of Europe are the same as Brussels, or they would have stood up to Brussels, long ago. The EU, as I see it, consists of two parts: Bigger, stronger countries who are net contributors, and smaller, weaker countries who are net recipients. The big gets the small to bend the knee, threatening to cut off all the free money.
11
Late '40s and early '50s... Imagine the euphoria, and sense of godly power. Nothing seriously checking the USA. Nothing seriously checking the CIA with the CIA working hand in glove with the State Department to target and overthrow governments they didn't like, or who weren't giving their buddies resource-extraction concessions, or entry into other markets, or who weren't excluding the Soviets from their markets. We basically tried to play The Great Game like Europe had been doing for 5 centuries. We are supposed to be DIFFERENT. Before World War II, starting a war was a lot harder. Now, they have the legacy networks oiled-up and ready to beat the drums of hate against any country, any leader, and manufacture the people's consent by only giving them a part of the facts or even outright false facts. As I used to say about Russians during the Cold War. "It's not the people. The people are great. It's their leadership and their system of government." Now, I say the same thing about the USA.
9
All undeclared wars, far from our shores, and not in our or the world's best interests.
8
I disagree. You should vote for the politician that does what's best for the people as a whole, not for you, specifically. That's what got us into this mess. The death of democracy is inevitable once the people learn they can vote themselves a living, and shift the burden of self-responsibility onto the government. The people will never vote their way out of their problems, unless they vote for LESS government, not more government. But everybody wants the program that helps THEM.
7
"The issue must be raised publicly and decided internally." "But you don't let anyone raise the issue, publicly. You censor this idea, and arrest people who dare evade censors." "Next question."
6
"But we're the good guys!" I totally get it.
4
Even artillery isn't end-all, be-all. Drones introduce a new component to attack and defense. To your point, however, drones can greatly improve indirect-fire capabilities of artillery pieces. But you're still up against the fact that a drone that can disable an artillery piece is much cheaper than the artillery piece, itself. Maybe by the end of this war, everyone will be mounting artillery pieces on much lighter vehicles in much greater numbers, relying on mobility rather than expensive armor. Be harder to hit rather than worrying about surviving a hit. What good is a tank if you can mount a tank-killer on a Toyota Hi-Lux platform?
4
He comes across a deeply insecure.
4
@fitzroy6970 Yes. It helps if you have the chronology right. American sanctions pre-date Russian sanctions. NATO expansion and color revolution on Russia's doorstep came before annexation of Crimea.
3
@russellsteventon8069 It will help him greatly if he wishes to govern the captured territories. Hearts and minds.
2
Populism has been bad, overall. Populism is what turned the USA into an authoritarian regime, by the people voting to be taken care of, rather than be left alone. I'm not against helping the poor. I AM against the help being concentrated in the hands of a small number of people in Washington, DC. Here's how it works in the USA: You can't get the local governments to operate a nanny government, because they have to live within their means, and they know they will be thrown out of office if they impose taxes high enough to pay for everything, and they can't run budget deficits. So "populists" got the federal government to step in, which it's only too happy to do, and it doesn't mind running budget deficits every year. Just kick the can down the road, but hey. The people are getting their free stuff, so they're happy, even though they complain about the economy and social fabric tearing apart. Instead of "Govern us less," the populists say "Govern us harder, Daddy!" and expect that budgets will magically balance themselves, taxes will be low, and everyone will be happy. Now we're reaching a tipping point, where the majority are saying "Get off our backs" and now, suddenly, Democrats hate populism that has served them so well for re-election. "I'm the guy with the Free Stuff."
2
@naas699 Making weapons systems is not good for the economy. It's good for a few companies. But all they're producing is death, not food, services or consumer products.
1
@mirkotmusic7739 With any luck, all of BlackRock's properties in Ukraine fall under Russian control.
1
Minsk I. Minsk II. Istanbul. It's hard to imagine what kind of "negotiated settlement" there will be or even can be. I think Zelensky and his American/EU masters burned too many bridges. They're proven to be untrustworthy. I feel so bad for Ukraine. The end of the Cold War should have brought peace and prosperity to a nation that has suffered much in the last 80 years. From Nazis to Soviets (back to Nazis?) to hope, and the West just can't let people be. Where they went wrong was in not being able to govern sensibly, which would have left Ukraine as an economic dynamo, with much to offer the rest of the world, and much to gain by trade with the rest of the world. I kind of feel like they never had a chance, because the exit of the Soviets didn't change things. The same oligarchic structure remained. A few of the names changed, maybe, but the same corrupt oligarchic system. There was no interest in helping Ukraine realize her potential. Near as I can tell, just a bunch of Western oligarchs (carpet-baggers, if you will), who profited enormously by making sweetheart deals with some of the most corrupt people in the country. That's why they went after Trump for supposed "quid-pro-quo." They were quid-pro-quo-ing all over the place, and he got impeached because he wanted to help Ukraine fight corruption. Trump was over the target, which made him a target, and brought us the destruction of Ukraine as a nation.
1
When the rate of inflation exceeds the almost nonexistent interest rates on savings, you're a fool to build up a savings account. Either spend it or invest it in something that actually gives you a return.
1
@ynnad7778 Neocons in the West think that it's now time to send troops to Ukraine and go toe-to-toe with the Russians. This would fail. It would also lead to revolt in the West. The people are fed up with voting for one thing and getting another thing.
1
While the Meduza article is pretty messed-up, I'm not sure I characterize things quite the way you do. I don't think they're in any way putting Kursk on a back burner. I think they're going to fight the incursion in the most favorable way possible, with forces already allocated to homeland defense, but as yet unused and probably mostly untested. It probably won't look pretty at first, because they'll be using conscripts, but I think we all know the script and how it ends in tragedy for Ukraine.
1
Security guarantees - or rather their lack - was what started the conflict. There's no "get this thing settled" without security guarantees. Russia's waiting for security guarantees before it will cease guaranteeing its security by force of arms. It's very simple for both sides. The West/Ukraine need to guarantee Ukrainian neutrality and no expansion of NATO. That's how they can make it stop. That's been Russia's position for years, and it USED to be the position of the USA and NATO, until they changed their mind, because they were so sure that Russia couldn't do anything about it. So Russia's been doing something about it. Maybe now NATO/USA will finally start listening.
1
American foreign policy has been a disaster for Ukraine.
1
@FunnyBunny-pd5xx Pretty much. Meanwhile the collective West has systematically destroyed its economic base and saddled the people with debt their great-grandchildren can't hope to pay and everyone in Washington just wants it to keep rolling until we're ALL in ruins. Except for them.
1
@Sebastian_Sas Probably the latter. What worries me is some egghead in a think tank coming up with a false flag that will make it seem as though WE are under nuclear threat, so they can unleash cataclysm. I'm convinced that the political elites in Washington, DC would rather see the world burn, than lose power.
1
EU is in no position to take on the Russians. Their guarantees are a fart in the wind.
1
So far. But when/if Republicans win in November, they will cut him off, like a lazy son of rich parents.
1
Who are we to green-light ANY military action in Ukraine? This is tantamount to a declaration of war, which our cowardly Congress will cheer on, without ever voting to declare war. How is it that our government can wage war without declaring it? If it's not war, what are we doing? If it is war, why are we afraid to say 'war?'
1
Yes. The American establishment is full of incompetent hypocrites and bad actors.
1
Given my nation's behavior, I'm not unsympathetic towards Russia; however, let's not play word games. It's a war. So far, it's a limited war, but it's war.
1
Your arguments are a bit disingenuous given ongoing shelling and missile attacks from Israel's neighbors against Israel, which is a nation under siege. It's bootless to just go back to the most recent atrocity to justify the next planned atrocity. That's a cycle of violence. I'm sympathetic to your "side" for more fundamental fundamental reasons having to do with the reckless use of force abroad by my country, and European countries before that. We could go back further in history and include Asian empires in the discussion. All of that is in the past. The trick is to try to figure out how to make the present and future a little bit better.
1
Who knows what Russia's willing to give up, territorially, if its security concerns are met, by verifiable and enforceable treaty. The issue is going to be the verification and enforcement. After Minsk Agreement was violated, it would take a lot for them to stand down, again.
1
@unsalbulent Of the 20-some million Ukrainians who've left or perished Ukraine, the ones you see on social media living the high life are a very small percentage. Most of the displaced millions are suffering loss of their homes or worse.
1