Comments by "Trevor Sutherland" (@trevorsutherland5263) on "VisualPolitik EN" channel.

  1. When Sec Def Austin went to Kyiv last November, they told him they need "$300 to $400 billion dollars, and 7 million artillery shells" to be able to "return borders to 1991 level". That's more 155mm shells than are on the entire earth at the moment. It is also about the time we started hearing rumors Zaluzhny was on the way out. Why? Zaluzhny realized such a "victory" was physically impossible and began leaning more to negotiation. THAT is why Zelensky put Syrsky in....they fight to whatever end....just like Imperial Japan.
    12
  2. Yes, if they had at least 700 of them with as many trained pilots. Russia has 1500 combat aircraft, virtually all much newer than an F-16 and all flown by pilots for whom they are as familiar as their own mothers. However even if someone had that many to give, and Ukraine pilots to fly them, Russian missiles rule the skies over Ukraine and every airfield housing them would be obliterated with Iskander and Kinzhal every day until none were left. Putin has already said if F-16s fly from any other country he will bomb that airbase and even Biden doesn't doubt he will. The F-16 as something that can change the outcome is a dream that cannot be realized.
    3
  3. If you are a man, probably the BEST country. Look at the new Barbie movie in America. $200M so far and filled with hatred of all things masculine.
    2
  4. NATO up to its old tricks: "The Biden administration has quietly given Ukraine permission to strike inside Russia — solely near the area of Kharkiv — using U.S.-provided weapons, three U.S. officials and two other people familiar with the move said Thursday, a major reversal that will help Ukraine to better defend its second-largest city." May 30, 2024 "Ukraine has not violated our policy..." US State Dept, August 8, 2024. 😂
    1
  5. Because they've been lied to by Zelensky (who himself was lied to by US diplomats and experts in Biden Admin.). NATO is the problem. No NATO, no war. Ukraine didn't have to choose to be a future vassal of NATO; look at Sweden. Neutral, non-aligned but still EU and all the gay sex they could ever want to have, no problem. US convinced Zelensky only NATO membership could give him this future and he believed it. All that promise has brought is war and ruin for Ukraine.
    1
  6. It has been well documented by bloggers like Alexander Mercouris that the US and UK have been going hard at Romania to be more active against Russia. The want them to shoot down Russian missiles that get close , be more aggressive in general. They have to be careful the don't become the next Ukraine because the US/UK do not care about them to any degree beyond their usefulness in countering Russia.
    1
  7. NATO/EU has GIVEN (not sold) to Ukraine weapons the value of which exceeds all of Russia 2022 military budget; that is TWENTY countries giving weapons vs. Russia (plus cheap drones from Iran that Russia has to pay for). 20 vs. 1.3 and Russia still standing, grinding it out the hard way. Russia is becoming the "Rocky" of the World. Of course Ukraine wants option #4, they have nothing to lose from the nuclear risk as they barely have a country right now. This analysis completely ignores the Hard Truth: Biden holds Zelensky's leash------Ukraine can only do what Biden enables it to do and Biden is under severe political pressure back home. 80 tanks won't stop Russia; and 300 or 400 tanks are years away. In those years Biden may not be President (and he is visibly deteriorating age wise). Imho, Ukraine's options are limited to what can occur in less than two years time and #4 is not militarily feasible in less than two years. End of story.
    1
  8. Right. The "industry" that RU can put FIVE Iskanders into anytime it wants.... Yeah, suuuurrreee.....
    1