Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "Covert Cabal" channel.

@jonahhekmatyar time. This guy and Perun ARE journalists. They're researching the topic and they're talking only in the area of their expertise, like how fishing journal doesn't make car reviews. However as a result they post once a week at best, but usually once a month or even more rarely. Meanwhile modern "news" networks are part of "entertainment" industry and they live of from advertising and "engagement".
10
US operation plan for Arctic: guys, let's gang pressure Canada into being our military base and make canadians serve as meatshields againt russians when we they invade!
9
Sorry for asking, but there are two questions I've been trying to figure out: 1)"russian" T-62's. The russian media official excuse for getting them back into service was that a factory specialising in their refits in Far East had survived the corruption that had striken T-72 production lines over the years. The reality however is likely connected to the fact that right before that Russia started buying north korean ammo in bulk. And North Korea is main producer of T-62 nowadays. So Russia could just be buying repair kits from NK if not outright delegating the repair work. How can this be checked? Are there any particular markings on north korean engines or transmissions or other units that should be on destroyed T-62's if that were the case? 2)T-72 numbers. Russia has insane disparity between the amount of those it had claimed to be in use and the amount it had when it needed them. Where are they? Were they lost in Syria? Were they cut down and taken for parts to allow production of T-90A and other vehicles like MSTA-S back in 2000's? Were they just sold under the carpet? Or have they never existed and are result of inflated propaganda numbers cooperating with low quality intelligence reports of other countries? Again, how can this be checked? Can serial numbers on units inside T-90A tell if they were taken from T-72B? Hopefully my comment makes sense😅
8
That's... weird? 1)Russia and USSR view MLRS as one of the niches to be proud of. So they'd be more cautious with it and prioritise it's production more; 2)MLRS(unguided) is easier to produce then full blown SPGs as far as I know so again, higher priority in production to get more firepower; 3)I don't recall mass usage of MLRS breaking news and neither their mass losses. If anything, it's the equipment you'd expect to see more of, unlike critically important, but slow to replace IFVs.
7
 @paavali1896 will you delete your profile and stop using "western" smartphones if it doesn't?
5
 @kuunoooo7293 may 2022 account, no activity or subscriptions, posts only here. Don't engage, people, report for propaganda of terrorism.
5
Idk, Tokaev is 50/50. On one hand he said that if he has to have an eastern patron, he'd rather talk with Beijing directly. On the other - transfers of people fleeing Russia. Either case, those would be updated and refurbished in the upcoming years and by nature of companies doing the work, you would probably be able to guess where the tanks are going. If the contractors would be israelis or chinese, likely the tanks would be staying to protect your sovereignty. If contractors would be belarusian or russian, well...
4
Because on defensive you can choose heavier armament at the price of cutting the range. Anything else?
3
Can't wait to see some guy making a video why you're wrong... despite this tank obviously being inferior to Arjun.
2
Only if Elon will become a president for Space X to be counted as a US achievement in any way. Otherwise call back once SLS proceeds to something useful and won't be put away for 50 more years:P
2
Video title and thumbnail: claims to read Putin's mind. Me: can we just skip straight to his bank account number and password since you read his mind?
2
Other people might not look up your account info and decide that you're a tankie simping for Putin, you know?:D However those early losses were logical as result of command circus we've seen from russians. Once they've figured that they aren't welcome and that some self awareness and self preservation are in order, even ukranian claims dropped by two orders of magnitude. What a coincidence?
1
@brokenpotato438 hopefully you don't imply serbian and hungarian sources?;)
1
@trashtrashisfree Black Sea fleet was the smallest one Russia has. Yes, it's full of obsolete in doctrine(and sometimes in hardware too) vessels, but it wasn't that huge of money sink. Besides with their corruption levels, expenses don't matter, there won't be any money left anyway.
1
Well, at least in terms of replacing their tank losses they haven't yet realized how hard it'll be to launch new production line in case they'll need more tanks after all possible restorations and refurbishments are done. Hint: it's not the same as turning T-90A into T-90AM and claiming that it's newly produced T-90M. And that's if we're optimistic and trusting about info on T-90 production not being connected to modernization of T-72B to T-72BU standard. It sure as heck would help explain how Russia is missing several thousand tanks that it supposedly has in active service. I would have been a bit more worried if we would have started seeing something along the lines of TR-85 Binozul or TO-120 or ZTZ-80 being introduced on T-55/62 production base to allow Russia to field truly expendable "people's tanks"😅
1
Well, at least in terms of replacing their tank losses they haven't yet realized how hard it'll be to launch new production line in case they'll need more tanks after all possible restorations and refurbishments are done. Hint: it's not the same as turning T-90A into T-90AM and claiming that it's newly produced T-90M. And that's if we're optimistic and trusting about info on T-90 production not being connected to modernization of T-72B to T-72BU standard. It sure as heck would help explain how Russia is missing several thousand tanks that it supposedly has in active service. I would have been a bit more worried if we would have started seeing something along the lines of TR-85 Binozul or TO-120 or ZTZ-80 being introduced on T-55/62 production base to allow Russia to field truly expendable "people's tanks"😅
1
@Lock484 yeah, fields of tarp tents would be absolutely not suspicious 😅 Russia hides high priority equipment from satellites and that's TELs for ICBMs and SAMs and planes. If they would hide everything, the amount of effort to hide would outrun any benefit of enemy not knowing about the equipment.
1
 @GG-si7fw Star Trek is now, old man!;)
1
1)USSR armed every dictator, real or wannabe one as long as they claimed to be against west(US kind of did the same so every authoritarian hellhole was properly armed to bully its neighbours). Majority of the time it wasn't done for free. 2)USSR took arming Warsaw Pact as excuse to taking away raw resources from those states So it wasn't a single customer situation. It's just that they were VERY bad with counting expenses.
1
@aesopsaintours4491 from your comment I assume you haven't lived in USSR and don't have relatives who did? No, russian corruption IS soviet corruption. They're literally the same people still in power in many cases, but more often their kids and proteges. Modern russian regime is made up by "descendants" of RSFSR internal services and military command. They're the same people, who took USSR under by stealing all they could during Afghan War.
1
@chad_8313 dear 2014 profile, look up how long it took to train crew even for simplistic by modern standards T-34 at the peak of WWII. Now increase that by order of magnitude due to all complicated equipment of modern tanks and the fact that they're likewise an order of magnitude harder to replace in terms of pure human capital. Now go try to sell your bs to someone else. Ебанько, твой слив засчитан. Совсем на своих диванах зажрались, теперь каждый подпивкович считает, что сможет водить и обслуживать Т-72 в боевых условиях. Иди играй в свое "есть попадание".
1
 @neowuwei7851 you do realize that it's november 2023 now and that march 2022 was far further away the 6 months? No? Were you in coma, comrade?
1
@jamesgornall5731 mostly yes. Though a lot of tanks were lost back in 2014-2015. But here comes the difference - Ukraine was restoring all available tanks and training crews since said 2014, for 8 years. And you can see that number pop up a lot, for example in mentions of numbers of trained infantrymen with combat experience. Ukraine had put several rotation of conscripts through "low intensity" conflict on border with occupied territories. That's the reason they held to begin with, they were preparing for Russia to try the second time. Sadly preparing not as competently as they should have goven the size of the opponent, but given the circumstances, it's hard to blame them. The other point worth mentioning is how Russia and all other operators of soviet equipment use them differently. You might have heard about why non-russian T-72 suffer ammo explosions less frequently - they leave ammo only in autoloader as Morozov himself intended. 22 rounds out of maximum capacity of 48, less then a half(numbers from my memory, if I recall right those are for T-80). Russian officers don't want to deal with logistics and organize the supply truck delivery of extra ammo so they load tanks with ammo to the brim. So any penetration is a guaranteed turret flip. It was that way in Chechnya, it was that way in Georgia, in Syria and in Ukraine. Crews KNOW that they shouldn't do it for their own safety, but officers apparently don't care about crews ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯
1
1)not with these drones. 2)ukranians aren't russians, they don't attack civilian targets. 3)nah, Moscow's air defense is not better, guys, stop coping. Do you really think that it's defended better then military bases that house the russian fleet of strategic nuclear bombers?! If there's a priority for defending, it would be on this base instead. If best equipment is absent even here, then it's solely parade equipment not used in actual service \/(-_-)\/
1
@chechennel4817 and that is... whom? No, seriously, who is that?
1
@orionide4032 so his "expert" is some no name with no credentials? Who could have thought...
1
@chechennel4817 well, I guess Putin doesn't have balls to take responsibility for his own actions once again, so I guess that remains to be seen as we don't know whom will replace hit. Yet.
1
@chechennel4817 it's okay. Слив засчитан;)
1
Ah yes, "carriers killed battleships" myth is back again. Why weren't carriers themselves then retired under the threat of supersonic transcontinental strategic bombers carrying cruise missiles and nuclear submarines? /cough/ because they're great FOBs and troop transports for beating up smaller countries just like battleships weren't a one trick poy that was somehow hard countered by a few planes /cough/
1
Ironic, isn't it?;)
1
Sorry for asking, but there are two questions I've been trying to figure out: 1)"russian" T-62's. The russian media official excuse for getting them back into service was that a factory specialising in their refits in Far East had survived the corruption that had striken T-72 production lines over the years. The reality however is likely connected to the fact that right before that Russia started buying north korean ammo in bulk. And North Korea is main producer of T-62 nowadays. So Russia could just be buying repair kits from NK if not outright delegating the repair work. How can this be checked? Are there any particular markings on north korean engines or transmissions or other units that should be on destroyed T-62's if that were the case? 2)T-72 numbers. Russia has insane disparity between the amount of those it had claimed to be in use and the amount it had when it needed them. Where are they? Were they lost in Syria? Were they cut down and taken for parts to allow production of T-90A and other vehicles like MSTA-S back in 2000's? Were they just sold under the carpet? Or have they never existed and are result of inflated propaganda numbers cooperating with low quality intelligence reports of other countries? Again, how can this be checked? Can serial numbers on units inside T-90A tell if they were taken from T-72B? Hopefully my comment makes sense😅
1
 @tarstarkusz the fact that no recorded case of immortal human exists yet. But I'll gladly hear your argument on this one.
1