Comments by "Sababugs112" (@sababugs1125) on "Georgia: Russia’s Unsuspected Allied?" video.

  1.  @mithridatesii6925  bro , we are as far away from being Iranian as Estonians are from being Bantu
    35
  2.  @ernestkhalimov1007  except they also confirmed Russia shelled Georgian villages way before the assault on tskhinvali Georgia was the first go beyond shelling but Russia still attacked
    12
  3.  @bhaashatepe5234  Georgian population of South Ossetia was ethnically cleansed in the 90s by separatists . And then subsequently the ones living Georgian controlled parts of South Ossetia before the war weren't warned and were also ethnically cleansed by Russia
    9
  4. Still is
    6
  5. Problem : they attacked us
    5
  6. Where is ossetia exactly and who does it belong to ?
    5
  7. They've been asking for tanks since the beginning of the war . Ukrainians need tanks not as replacements but as additional forces , they went through a massive mobilisation and would like equipment to reduce casualties Majority of the pre war Ukrainian tank force is still there 1 to 5 advantage only at select parts of the front and only on the worst occasions. By that logic Russia is lossing 100 vehicles a day because of the bilohorivka crossing disaster
    4
  8. Georgia was a net producer in the USSR
    4
  9.  @georgekaradov1274  tskhinvali is such an ungeorgian name .
    2
  10. Say whatever you want but American troops never slit the throats of Georgians
    2
  11.  @samsungtv4u  their state is illegitimate, it's not recognised by the UN . It wasn't created through legal means or made just . Therefore Georgia has the right to protect its borders . Countries have a right to territorial integrity
    2
  12. Hard to talk about betrayal
    1
  13.  @MyNameIsJ3ffrey  as per oryx 450 tanks lost and considering they include damaged tanks which can be repaired , more of them are active than not 2)well we've got confirmed low base 1700 tanks for Russia lost too . Yes some of them here are also listed as damaged but considering the fact Ukraine started the war with 1000 tanks have gotten 300ish more , they cannot be losing the vehicles at a higher rate . Also Ukraine is mostly on the defensive, this gives them several advantages 3)we have mostly accurate data. Just because it's not pro russian data , doesn't mean it's inaccurate the data we have correctly lines up with the events which have happened. Toll on Ukrainian has been heavy but not as heavy as some make it . William oam, interviewed on guy who we only know as soldier X , his story wasn't the most bulletproof, even if real , this is circumstancial and anecdotal evidence. Interviews with others like Civ Div paint a different picture , the weight of evidence here isn't strong . I think what's happening here is oversimplification. People like to watch a 2 minute news segment instead of 5 hour analysis of the subject. Russia isn't going to run out of all the missiles , but it hasn't switched to shahed drones and s-300 ground mode strikes for no reason. In the same sence Russia isn't going to run out of artillery shells but it didn't reduce its fire rate from 60k to 15k for no reason . If you look at the data 1 to 5 is a stretch, this is artificially only selecting the worst occasions such as severodonetsk and then applying the thing to the whole front . I can do the same thing with bilohorivka and Russia should be at 30k vehicles lost by now . Artillery is the biggest killer is a broad claim it could be responsible for 11% of all kills and everything else could be 9.8% . An advantage in fire rate doesn't mean more targets hit . Look at mariinka, avdiivka , Bakhmut, etc . The pictures don't scream precision strike. A makiivka style strike will kill far more than a hundred indiscriminate artillery barrages like the ones at vuhledar . All that artillery and the attacking force still got torn apart . Also Russians are the attacking force , Ukrainians aren't sitting in an open field , they have trenches , dugouts , foxholes , camouflaged positions , it's the Russians who have to in the end go forward to take this places . You can flatten an entire city but unless you manage to hit basically directly in the trench doesn't really matter that much War is complex , it's factors don't live in a vacuum and you cannot reason about them in a vacuum either
    1
  14. Interesting fact . Russia committed ethnic cleansing and drove out everyone in abkhazia and south Ossetia who was pro Georgia
    1
  15.  @georgekaradov1274  actually there were 300k , Combined population of both of the region's of abkhazia and south ossetia now is 280k
    1
  16.  @georgekaradov1274  out of the 300k it was majority Georgian , those people still live in Georgia as refugees Granted a percentage of them were also ethnic abkhaz or Greek or Armenian but those people also fled those regions because of they were going to be killed for their pro-georgian attitude As per the 1989 sensus of the USSR, Georgians made up 46% of the population of abkhazia, abkhaz made up 17% , the rest was made up of Armenians, Russians and Greeks
    1
  17.  @arsenarzumanyan2651  ossetians and abkhazians speak a lot of Russian too , it's official in both , there were even fears in abkhazia of Russification
    1