Comments by "Heads Full Of Eyeballs" (@HeadsFullOfEyeballs) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. The bulk of the US arms going to Ukraine have been decommissioned old gear that the US military already paid for and had just sitting around, waiting to be dismantled and recycled. So the profits for US industry have been relatively minor. (This is also why the official price tag put on these arms shipments doesn't tell you much: The stuff was paid for decades ago and would have been thrown away if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine. The only added cost was shipping.)
    2
  2. You keep saying NATO. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine. If NATO entered this war with its own forces, Russia would be toast within two weeks.
    2
  3. Nitpick, but Henry Ford wasn't an appeaser, he was an enthusiastic collaborator. His factories in Germany produced military vehicles for the Nazis even during the war, staffed by POWs and forced labourers from concentration camps.
    2
  4. Turns out he was wrong about that and NATO worked great for decades after his death.
    2
  5. That's kind of a big missing thing, though. Also, Russia's neighbours started joining NATO because they wanted to be safe from Russia. It worked, too: Georgia and Ukraine have had chunks taken out of them, while little Latvia with its huge Russian minority is still in one piece thanks to its NATO membership. Russian belligerence is the cause of NATO expansion in Europe, not a reaction to it.
    2
  6. That isn't a military issue, so it doesn't fit this channel.
    2
  7.  @uninstaller2860  If Russian forces occupied Finland all the way up to the land border with Sweden, NATO absolutely would intervene though. That's a whole other level of escalation from occupying a strip of wasteland as a "security zone" or whatever.
    2
  8. Grody chan meme avatars continue to be a reliable red flag.
    2
  9. NATO isn't fighting in Ukraine. If it was, Russian forces there would be crushed in a week. Putin knows this, that's why he hasn't touched a hair on a NATO country's head despite constant Russian propaganda claiming that the war is really against NATO.
    2
  10.  @BarrySlisk  Other European countries, who can't just retreat into geographical isolation when Russia starts a war in Europe.
    2
  11. Conflict Intelligence Team looked over satellite images of the dam from throughout the Russian occupation period. They conclude that the dam probably failed due to neglect: They say that the sluice gates were badly damaged already and hadn't been moved since November. The water breached the gates, and that sudden burst caused the turbine hall to collapse. Then the mines the Russians had placed on the dam got swept away and blew up.
    2
  12. Every day Ukraine loses men 5x faster than Russia? That's disinfo.
    2
  13.  @nichevo1  Trump isn't nearly sophisticated enough for any of that, though. He just thinks Putin is a cool strong dude who gives him lots of compliments and must therefore be correct in his views.
    2
  14. Turkey chose not to invoke article 5, so the question never came up.
    2
  15. The right-wing intellectual tradition has historically been openly in favour of a powerful state, and still is in most of the world. The idea that the right stands for "small government" is pretty much exclusive to American right-wing propaganda. And they're lying obviously -- government spending, debt and use of power don't decrease under Republican governments. They're just reallocated from benefiting ordinary people to benefiting their cronies and the military-industrial complex. And nationalism and imperialism go hand in hand, of course. If you believe that your nation is inherently great and virtuous, it's natural that it should get to impose its great and virtuous will on other, lesser nations.
    2
  16. Of course being there sucked for the troops, especially on the retreat. Being on a battlefield sucks. That doesn't mean it wasn't strategically useful.
    2
  17. When did he say that? I've watched all his videos and I don't remember that at all. Maybe you could look it up and post a timestamp for us?
    2
  18. Ukraine had """open borders""" with Russia because it was part of the Soviet Union. They were one country, there was no border. That's how Russians got to Ukraine, as with every other country that used to be part of the Soviet Union and/or the Russian Empire. There was no Russian immigration to Ukraine post-Soviet Union. In fact (again, as in the rest of the former Soviet Union) the Russian population declined sharply because many of them moved back to Russia. In summary, you were talking out of your entire ass in an attempt to wedge your pet culture war issue into this conversation.
    2
  19. Elite: "Of high birth or social position; aristocratic or patrician." You may believe that these people don't deserve to be in the elite, but that's where they currently are.
    2
  20. I've seen a lot of people argue that Ukraine couldn't possibly hope to win a war against Russia because they have a much smaller population and economy, and so they should just capitulate and do whatever Russia wants. Strangely those same people never seem to apply that argument to a conflict between the EU and Russia. Given the overwhelming population and economic advantages of the EU, shouldn't Russia do whatever the EU wants, no questions asked, lest they get crushed in a short, victorious war?
    2
  21. There isn't a single NATO soldier fighting in Ukraine.
    2
  22. NATO doesn't "push". Countries voluntarily apply for membership because they find NATO attractive. As for why Russia's neighbours keep joining NATO...well, look at what happens to the ones that don't, like Georgia and Ukraine.
    2
  23.  @StPiter111  So you concede that NATO didn't "do it around the world for decades" like you originally claimed?
    2
  24. You're talking about Donald Trump, I assume?
    2
  25. Counterpoint: European countries didn't need NATO at all after the Cold War, until Russia started getting belligerent again. The US meanwhile needed, and still needs, its NATO allies for its network of military bases around the globe. The logistics of the American military empire would be a nightmare without NATO.
    2
  26. Only if you mistake "quiet" for "peaceful". Occupation and subjugation aren't peace for the victims.
    2
  27. Because Wagner isn't enough of a threat to warrant an unambiguous act of war against Belarus just on the chance they might be planning something.
    2
  28. It's not the "thought police", it's YouTube's brainless content moderation algorithm. They would never spend the money on an actual human thought police. It deletes comments that have too high a density of "advertiser-unfriendly" words, regardless of context. Doesn't matter if you're for or against [bad thing], as long as you describe it in explicit terms, the comment gets removed. Talking about war is always risky in that regard.
    2
  29. The EU has passed 17 cumulative sanction packages against Russia since the start of the war. I see no reason why they wouldn't go for number 18 over this.
    2
  30. Of course Ukraine was shelling Doneck, they were fighting Russian-backed separatist forces and Russian "little green men" there.
    2
  31. Re 2): NATO doesn't endanger Russia's security though. It has never shown any interest in attacking Russia. When Russia talks about "security concerns" in its neighbourhood, what they mean is that they want to be able to invade smaller neighbours when it suits them. And if those neighbours join NATO, that's no longer possible. NATO is the reason little Latvia and Lithuania are still in one piece, while Georgia and Ukraine have had chunks taken out of them by Russia. Russia's other neighbours see this, and naturally seek the protection of NATO.
    2
  32. When we're comparing the Ukrainian and Russian manpower pool, it's also worth keeping in mind that Russia has to keep troops around for other purposes. They have other unfriendly neighbours, and internal factions, who might take advantage if the state throws everything it has into Ukraine and leaves the rest of the country unsecured. Ukraine's military meanwhile has only one job, fighting Russia and its allies/proxies.
    2
  33. But they absolutely did gut washing machines for their missiles. Just because it's embarrassing for Russia, and thus good propaganda for the West, doesn't mean it's not true.
    2
  34.  @НиколайПостников-у2м  It's called conscription, it's what you do in a large-scale war that threatens the existence of your country.
    2
  35. A couple reasons (besides outright Russian blunders like the terrible planning of the initial invasion): 1. Ukraine's military was designed specifically to fight off a Russian invasion and nothing else. 2. Ukrainian troops are more motivated. 3. Russia maintains a lot of expensive gear it can't use in this war (like its navy), while Ukraine doesn't, see point 1.
    2
  36. The Belarussian military is pretty pathetic, as far as I'm aware. Poland surrendering without a fight is the only way Belarus would ever win that war.
    2
  37. 1. Why on earth would an American law restraining the actions of the US government apply to the comments section of a video uploaded by a Danish guy to a privately-owned international internet platform? The 1st Amendment absolutely does not exist here, nor should it. 2. Comments get removed by YouTube's brainless filters if they contain too many "advertiser-unfriendly" keywords, regardless of context. Talking about war and violence or currently hot political topics is always risky in that regard.
    2
  38. He's Danish.
    2
  39. America and allies killed loads of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan. That was very bad and they should never have done it. Russia is currently killing loads of innocent people in Ukraine. That is also very bad and they should stop doing it immediately.
    2
  40. Or...Putin didn't kill him then because he didn't want to make him a martyr, and killed him now because he figured that danger had passed.
    2
  41. Plural verb agreement for words referring to a group of people is absolutely standard English. You can say "the staff (sg.) at this restaurant are (pl.) very friendly", for example.
    2
  42. Germany has given more aid to Ukraine than the rest of the EU combined. France has spent like one seventeenth as much as Germany. And this isn't factoring in that Germany has exposed itself to huge economic damage by going cold turkey on Russian gas and by sanctioning an important long-term trading partner, triggering a recession. It's time the others did some stepping up.
    2
  43. Austria and Switzerland aren't in NATO.
    2
  44. YouTube wasn't demonetising his videos to please Putin. YouTube just has extremely dumb automated filters that respond to combinations of "advertiser-unfriendly" keywords and images regardless of context. So if you have tanks and explosions in your intro and talk about war and violence, as Anders does, you're likely to get demonetised and have to wait for a manual review (which they're usually too cheap to do, because humans want wages). It's a capitalism thing.
    2
  45. I mean, let's compare the combined GDP of everybody who sided against Putin, the GDP of Putin's allies (which would be, uh, North Korea I guess?) and the GDP of the countries that are trying to stay out of it and play both sides, like China and India.
    2
  46. Ukraine has plenty of manpower, in theory. They're just reluctant to draft more people because of the economic and social consequences. They're still preferentially conscripting older men, for example, to avoid pulling the young out of education and training. If they (or Russia, for that matter) switched to total World War-style conscription, they would have bodies to throw into the war for many years at current casualty rates.
    2
  47. No, "people" in the sense of "populace, nation" can be used with singular agreement.
    2
  48. NATO hasn't "expanded eastwards", Russia's neighbours have moved westwards. They've joined NATO of their own free will in order to be protected from Russian aggression. And it worked! Ukraine and Georgia have both had chunks taken out of them by Putin, while little Latvia with its huge Russian minority is still in one piece thanks to NATO membership. If Russia doesn't want NATO on its doorstep, it should try being a better neighbour.
    2
  49. Because they win either way: If Russia wins it weakens their NATO rivals, and if Russia loses they can turn it into a client state. So they don't need to pick a side.
    2
  50. Could you stop copy-pasting your conspiracy manifesto in these comments?
    2