Comments by "Miriam Weller" (@miriamweller812) on "Weeb Union" channel.

  1.  @Anakeish  Why move, when your enemy is creating a nice shooting gallery for you?
    4
  2.  @kampfer91  And even then it took weeks to brutally bomard everythin (with more dead civiilans then soldiers most of the time by the way) and on the ground monthes and years to often just reach nothing, have to move out and actually still lose the war, after that genocidal slaughter, though they did manage to ruin the country.
    4
  3. 1. There is no village left. It's some ruins with zero value. 2. You don't control something, that is under fire of the other side.
    4
  4. It's... quite a big offensive and indeed, while It COULD be the case, since overall, there is not really much left of the Ukrainian army, it's also still risky to push in like that. Of course to leave the enemy in the dark what you do or not is the most essential part of strategy and tactic.
    4
  5. "A HUB for supplies." Again: this is no videogame. This isn't a spawn zone or whatever. It's just another loation.
    4
  6. People don't get that no movement on the map doesn't mean it's a stalemate. Especiall not in modern times, where weapon systems got such firinig range that you simply don't have to move to attack anything.
    4
  7. I mean, the majority of mercenaries are ex soldiers. It's the freelancer version of a soldier.
    4
  8. People want some Hollywood shit it seems, some giant army rolling over the fields with fanfares or whatever. In reality, giant offsives like that are also very risky and bound to higher casualties. There might be a bigger push, but no one here is in the position to decide that, since we got pretty much ZERO information of the situation on the ground. Those maps show close to nothing. A line and some arrows are simply not enough for that. It can be, that Russia is going full in one day - or they keep doing this, what is fine. Just less "the big battle of..." movie like.
    3
  9. Area close to those lines on the map will never have heavy arms there, just light infantery scout troops and of course those don't hold a position against an assault, that's simply not their job.
    3
  10.  @jone8626  When the western allies attacked, there wasn't much left of the german army to begin with, especially not in the west.
    3
  11. They got no need to speed anything up.
    3
  12. Google Nazis mass censoring as usual. They will never learn that you can't censor the truth, it will always remain.
    3
  13. It would have been much easier for Ukraine, if it wouldn't have followed NATO insanity...
    3
  14.  @Turbo999be  Able to != worth the risk.
    3
  15. Coming from the Ukrainian Nazis, I wonder if that footage is real or showing what they say about it. Overall I see little sense in that action. Why should the Russian do that, even more with a whole bunch of vehicles on open field. Nothing to gain there. Why should they copy/paste the Ukrainian stupidity?
    3
  16. "By motorboating to the villages in the north." That sounds... uuuh...
    2
  17.  @Danuxsy  Hell, you really believe any shit they tell you, eh?
    2
  18. ERA isn't useless against those kinetic round. And HEAT IS anti tank (that's even in the name) and overall better over long distance, since the penetrating energy is always the same. ERA is a bit less effetive against DU ammunition. Still: it's not like it has no effect at all, this is simply physics. The counter detonation of an ERA WILL take energy away from the kinetic round and may deven deform or break it, what massively reduces the chance for penetration.
    2
  19.  @ianhaylock7409  Also why should they risk to stay there, it's not like they need to destroy that other tank, there are many systems waiting to do that for them.
    2
  20. Not really, it would actually be smart to do that, or actually just normal warfare, the thing is more, that this doesn't work, when you are not able to push forward, since for all the lines far away with the bad surveillance, aviation and artillery, there is simply no way to cause heavier losses to Russia than Ukraine is receiving.
    2
  21.  @MiltonMoJunction  It's the exact opposite, kid...
    2
  22. They get rid of the drones all the time. Ukraine is just big and there are hundredthousands of drones during the SMO, so you can't get all of them.
    2
  23.  @Kenny-bj2zq  Overall it takes so long because Russia got no need to hurry anything. There was a try at start to shock Ukraine into a peace deal, that was worth the risk, but after that it wasn't worth it anymore. Higher speed means higher risk, means more lives lost and yes, soldiers are humans too. Just because dead civilians are bad doesn't mean that it's fine to waste the lives of soldiers, both are human beings. Still: without NATO fascism pumping billions in weapon to Ukraine, it would still be over since monthes. This is nothing NATO can keep up and of course the regime in Ukraine is running out of men to sacrifice. What COULD happen is, that the NATO fascists try to make a pure terrorism network out of the Nazis. Question is - will those follow after NATO let them fall? Or will they do a Bin Laden on them?
    2
  24.  @Costa_Conn  No, it's not. This is not an anime, where you just bend the world around you by will and plot armor. There is also a CLEAR line between bravery and sheer suicidal stupidity. No matter how much will you bring up, when you run against a wall, your skull will break, not the wall.
    2
  25.  @volkanyilmaz8068  That's the point of attrition. Why move, when the enemy is so retared to keep running in front of your barrel?
    2
  26. Nah, Poland is a very aggressive and borderline fascisic state that wouild love to rob Russia of everything it has all on its own. It's simply too weak for that. Poland attacked Russia directly after its revolution 100 years ago and it would have loved to do it again together with Hitler, what just didn't work out, Finland was more lucky with that. Saved by the Russians, they still learned nothing and are just even more full of hate. Without Russia there wouldn't be any Poland today, germans would have made sure of that. Wonder how many Russian's today think about how things would be, if they would just have waited and let the germans slaughter the Poles...
    2
  27. To encircle something it must be there in the first place. It also has to be the only thing around. If you encircle some scout troops in A, while the main army isn't there but outside and got the whole location of A inside their main killing zone, you mainly fall for distraction.
    2
  28. The Guerillia tacts in Ukraine simply did not work well at all. Did they do damage? Sure. It's simpy impossible to have hundredthousands of soldiers and billions in eequipment and do no damage, you can't be THAT bad. But they lost way more than they damaged, what also lead that they mainly were more and more left with fresh recruits, the trained teams wiped out and of course fresh recruits are even worse in Guerillia warfare than in "hold/storm that position" warfare. And Ukraine simply has no jungle at all, nor other area that is well usable for guerillia warfare and of course constant drone surveillance makes it even harder.
    2
  29.  @Marshmobilise  Tanks lost a lot of meaning and that long before drones. They still got their use though. It's like saying trucks go no meanin after we invented trains and and trains got not meaning, because we got planes now.
    2
  30.  @simonbishop4160  Anti tank ARE HE. They are call "HEAT" High Explosive Anti Tank.
    2
  31. Military actions this size aren't about "we do this to reach that" alone. It's FAR more complex. That's the major reason why people don't see to understand it. They got some simple video game or movie idea in their head. We talk about HUNDREDTHOUSANDS of soldiers here following dozens if not hundreds of parallel going local tactics as part of a giant, very complex stratety and none of those tactics are that one crucial one, you don't act like that, because it's FAR to risky.
    2
  32. Regarding losses, even historians STILL talk a lot of BS about those, even when they are decades in the past. Happens, when propaganda is imptant and you also got 'historians' and other 'experts' working for that.
    2
  33. ERA works against kinetic rounds, too. Simply a bit less against the DU versions, but even then it's not guaranted success.
    2
  34. The gag while there is mainly Wagner going into the city is, that the actual and much bigger army created that fortress around it and over whole Donbass. Yes, of course, if it would be all about Bakhmut and Russia just going in there, it would work to just crush the weak sides and encircle them. The thing is: the fight inside Bakhmut is the weak part, fhe strong parts ARE the flanks. If it would be easy to rush in there and just get rid of the artillery and so on, this would have happened alerady.
    2
  35.  @Intrinseque52  It's the decision of these people to become freelancers, what is generally linked to better payment but less safity when things go wrong. So the typical freelancer problem in general.
    2
  36.  @grahamcroston  Warfare isn't some stupid Hollywood movie, where everyone just runs in and the protagonists survive thanks to plot armor (and nothing else). In reality such movement in warfare is simply normal. Overall tanks, especially today, are more used for the higher defense, not for their pretty short range offense capacity. Even when those two tanks retreat, the main problem of the other tanks aren't those tanks anyway but mines, drones, airforce and artillery.
    2
  37. Why should they when there is artillery, airforce, drones and so on behind them which can take on that Leopard without any risk?
    2
  38. Overall I only see that Russia would laugh at the idea that the Nazis go back into Bakhmut. Why shouldn't they just let them? City is ruined anyway. There is no real reason to hold it at all.
    2
  39. Why should the care about villages? This is not videogame, where you get respawnpoints or resources from a conquered village. The villages are like any other area on the field and without any special meaning at all.
    2
  40.  @marshalljulie3676  They didn't lose 3k at all... from what even?
    2
  41. First time you realize, that all western propaganda constantly contradicts itself?
    1
  42.  @CommonSenz  Indeed, Urkaine is winning, got close to no losses, is destroying the Russians and conquering more equipment from the Russians than they lose. The thousands of military vechiles from Russia now and all the begging from the Nazis for even more is just for the lols.
    1
  43.  @steverymer3355  When you listen to the numbers of the Nazis, by which they would have no need for any NATO support at all and should have easily taken the whole Donbass. That's the problem with reality, it doesn't care about stupid propaganda at all.
    1
  44. They do all the time. This is not C&C where jets just stay in the air.
    1
  45.  @ImperativeGames  How many spies does a land even have with a population of around 10% of Moscow?
    1
  46. I wonder with what exactly.
    1
  47. I don't get what the exact idea is in the south. Okay, let's say the storm there to the coast to "cut" the landbridge." They do get, that they will be 'raped' from the east, south and from the sea too with military ships having free fire on them and all, right? With how many troops and gear (wherever they are hiding that right now) do they want to storm in there to magically hold it, especially without any build up defenses? What an idea...
    1
  48.  @mynameisdominichughes3142  No need, if the Nazis want to reopen the grinder to jump in, what a gift!
    1
  49.  @volkanyilmaz8068  Which was no succesful offensive, but Russia not caring to fight over unimportant territory or in case of Kherson not gambling with the risk that the crazy Nazis with all their NATO support blow up the dam and flood the city - while massively improving their position from fighting with a river in the back to making it a natural barrier for their own good.
    1
  50.  @ZehManelCigano  The pro Nazi Nazis made that 3 day lie up in the first place.
    1