Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "Cluster Munitions Will Make Ukraine Safer" video.

@KingUSMCO : I’ve got a feeling that the rapid progress which results from using cluster munitions, launched into Russian trenches and dug in positions, will silence many of the critics. The obvious math will become more obvious by simple demonstration. QED. 👍
4
@antimatters6283 : I haven’t heard one SINGLE argument against giving cluster munitions to Ukraine that holds water, either logically or morally. That there are people willing to try to build a political career out of exploiting Ukraine’s desperate situation is just too SICKENING for words. There are times when I wish we could just go back to doing things like we did in WWII and simply lock traitors like R F Kennedy up!
3
@conniepr : Ukraine has to log all the Intel they can get on Russia’s use of cluster munitions, for the same reasons they log where their mines are planted: so they don’t kill or maim their own personnel in the field. So, though I haven’t looked into it, I’d have to say the answer to your question is a hard, “Yes.”
2
My gut response was for sending cluster munitions to Ukraine and I’ve already been debating this with several people on various channels. There’s nothing worse than the enemies of freedom and democracy having something that sounds, “legit,” to whine about. Yet, all of the arguments against cluster bombs have either been factually wrong, or morally wrong, or both.
1
@RussiasSufferingInUkraine : That makes sense. I didn’t buy the findings of this, “poll,” as it’s simply not what people seem to be saying. Most support the cluster munitions in this case, with only the usual chat-bots and pro-Putin trolls complaining.
1
@andre1493 : Well, you said it yourself. You didn’t watch the whole video, so you’re not qualified to comment on it. Especially since Jake explains from the outset that he is going to outline all the arguments from both sides.
1
@jubeaumont6305 : The simple answer is that not all mines blow tanks, “sky high,” but simply maim the troops approaching under the cover of their tanks, or damage their tracks, making them stationary targets for Russians to pick off with long range missiles. The range of mines is as vast as the range of guns that exist, from pistols to machine guns. Some are not even triggered until something heavy, like a tank, passes over them; while others are set off by people passing near them. Hope that helps?
1
That Lego Prigozhin made me weep with laughter! There are times when you’ve just gotta’ love the internet. 😂
1
@jannmutube : “Naive,” is a very generous interpretation, my friend. I don’t doubt that Kennedy is being ruthlessly exploitative and wouldn’t be at all surprised if Jake was right, and he’s deliberately taking money and, “software support,” from the Kremlin. He probably belongs in jail.
1
@andrabook8758 : That’s already the case. As Jake so carefully illustrated, they can actively reduce the threat by detonating cluster bombs in a minefield, thus detonating all (or most) of the mines in a given strip of land. I think that’s what you missed?
1
@andrabook8758 : You’re repeating yourself. I suggest you rewatch the part of the video in which Jake uses illustrations to make his point. You’re advancing through a mine field. Would you rather simply advance, or would you prefer it if most of the mines in your chosen path have already been detonated by cluster bombs landing on them? Try putting yourself in the place of a Ukrainian soldier and ask yourself how you would proceed?
1
@JohnFenlon : Completely agree. Nothing to add, other than my full support. 👍🇺🇦✌️🇬🇧
1
@jcruzgarciajimenez4584 : Bollox. Putin threatens to raise the ante with every single development, because threats are all he has left. What’s he going to do? Declare war? Hope so! For crying out loud . . . 🤦‍♂️
1
@jcruzgarciajimenez4584 : Utter bollox . . . Chat bot? Or penisless Putinista?
1
@dioghaltasfoirneartach7258 : Great for trench warfare though. And winning in the trenches puts Ukraine close enough to no longer need ATACM’s so urgently. So, welcomed, if not the only thing that helps.
1
@Ronny999x : Then you are a chat-bot, a Russian troll, or just woefully ignorant of the facts. You decide which.
1
@jacqdanieles : State your question as to what is, “questionable,” about it and I’ll show you why you’re misinformed. Keep in mind, cluster bombs are NOT a de-mining tool, but have the additional benefit of reducing the threat in a strip of mined land that your forces MUST cross regardless. Add to that, it would make no difference if they have ZERO utility for de-mining. They are still one of the most effective trench warfare weapons available when used in conjunction with other available weapons and strategies for taking dug in positions. Give me just one logical or moral reason that Ukraine should be denied these weapons and will give you two scientifically measurable proofs of how you are wrong for each argument. A final question for you to meditate on, BEFORE you answer, is: Who do you believe is best qualified to make this decision as to weather cluster munition would benefit Ukrainian troops in the battlefield or not?
1
@jacqdanieles : “Rant”? That’s what I get for being patient with people and offering them every accommodation to explain their reasoning and answer their questions, rather than just assuming they’re acting in bad faith and probably a pro-Putin troll. Don’t say I didn’t give you a chance. And, BTW, your question was fully, “addressed,” both in the video and by me, AND by others in this thread. Let’s just agree that you’ve misread the answers, shall we? Or expressed your question, “questionably,” perhaps? Rather than bringing pejoratives or questions of IQ into the discussion? I said I will answer your questions in good faith. Shoot . . . so to speak. Oh, and Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦✊🇬🇧
1
@dioghaltasfoirneartach7258 : I didn’t know that. It’s an education, sir. Ukraine still has a navy, just no ships to speak of, so yes: I am absolutely in favour of giving them absolutely everything. That includes a fully functioning navy, with long range warhead capabilities as well as subs and anti-sub equipment. People who complain about the cost of these things don’t get the economics of the situation, either in terms of the jobs, taxable income and international sales that take place when we kit out an entire country’s defence capabilities, or in terms of the blood and treasure we can save by taking a fully committed attitude to Ukraine’s victory by being generous in the short term and enabling all the benefits of being first in the cue for what could be one of the biggest economies on the planet, if we got it right. Sorry for waffling, but that’s my impassioned way of saying I agree with you, 100%. Give Ukraine ATACM’s. Today! ✌️
1
@andrabook8758 : 🤦‍♂️
1