Comments by "Sean Cidy" (@seancidy6008) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. The standard Western tactic in modern war is pin with fire and concentrate for maneuver against an enemy weak spot to break through to an objective. The first Russian offensive maneuver in years has no serious territorial intent and yey opening up a new front line. I think they are trying to use active defence to engage the entire Ukrainian army along an immense front line, and soak up any new Ukrainian troops that are being drafted.
    3
  2. I am sure Ukraine is right about its security requirements; it is far from obvious why Ukraine's agenda ought to be aligned with Nato's by Nato moving toward the Ukrainian position. Amping up the aid for Ukraine might make Russia back down, but it might not. Security guarantees for Ukraine at this point would be a step into the unknown because the issues have not been worked for decades in the way that the West overagaint Soviet confrontation along the Iron Curtain was. I would point out that the thinkers on both sides seemed to believe nuclear weapons were a deterrent to nuclear war, but Nato and the Warsaw Pact did not act as if they thought having nuclear weapons were a deterrent to conventional invasion and occupation.
    3
  3.  @BjornSeverinLarsen  Ukraine could hardly have predicted that
    3
  4. Russia is a land power, it's Naval spending has been a compete waste of money and probably explains a big part of why the Russian army consistently underperforms, except in the South in the initial stages when Naval Infantry played such a prominent role in the Russian victory in the South. Turkey is in Nato and has planes and pilots capable of using the US nukes stored on Turkish airbases. Of course Russia does nor want trouble with Turkey, which sees itself as a mediator. Ukraine is not going to run out of money because it is backed by the West.
    3
  5. Exactly.
    3
  6. Why not an economy of force operation rather than a such a rigid defence complete with counter attacks. Russian convict casualties were a feature not a bug.
    2
  7. The reason they did not react is they knew it was Ukraine not Russia all along.
    2
  8. That is the way the real world works. Everyone tries to pretend they don't care but everyone cares. Russia does and so do we.
    2
  9. 1:56 Fanfaronade from Ukraine about their perma imminent mighty offensive may be a ploy intended to get the Russians dedicating resources to digging in, thereby obviating any major Russian attack. Ukraine is going to throw its laboriously accumulated, superbly equipped, and trained crack brigades into a very predictable drive South against what is by now a deeply echeloned Russian defence a la Kursk(2)?
    2
  10. The West have zero experience of maneuver warfare against a near peer with intact anti aircraft systems and its own airforce. Western theories have been exposed as worthless. So far in Ukraine whichever side is on the defence has the advantage. Maybe an insurmountable one. If the West gives Ukraine the military wherewithal to slowly but surely wear down the Russian army, then the Russians are going to quickly realise that they can't win by conventional means. Maybe they will just lose interest and withdraw. But that seems very unlikely. as all indications are their objectives in Ukraine matters too much to the Kremlin. Ukraine is heading for 'catastrophic success' that will usher in a new era where use of nuclear weapons will be seen to have a real military purpose
    2
  11. Many of Russia's top commanders have been killed, and Russia conquering all Ukraine seems to be an unattainable objective now, especially given the defensive advantage conferred by the so called transparent battlefield. It would be surprising if Russia set even as a lower order objective of was trying to get men killed for an uncertain psychological or propaganda impact rather than strengthening the Russian position. Surely the more plausible explanation is the Russian commanders are being pressured to supply results and the Kremlin has a higher tolerance for the cost of those results the Russian army is actually able to achieve. In other words Russia sees neutralising Ukraine as an asset of of the anti Russian Washington alliance as essential.
    2
  12. Halford Mackinder was irrational? Zbigniew Brzezinski was irrational? They thought control of Ukraine was vital.
    2
  13.  @worldpeace1822  No, the US has VAST stocks of Abrams tanks and every other sort of thing Ukraine wants. An order of magnitude more that Ukraine has been given would be no problem if Washington really wanted to defeat Russia in Ukraine. But it doesn't..
    2
  14. Reasonable from their point of view. It had been quite clear what their point of view was since 2014.
    2
  15.  @mariaf.6601  Poles not only dislike Russia, they have abrogated their agreement to renounce claims against Germany for WW2; Poland is in the process of demanding trillions from Germany. Poland wants to be the 51st state and pursue independent initiatives that increasingly seem like trouble making.
    2
  16.  @Pnaraasi94  Mearsheimer has an explanation why almost three years and hundreds of thousands of casualties later, Russia is going for broke in Ukraine. Not clear that Anders can explain that.
    2
  17. Russia is definitely the underdog, and it has 20% non ethnoRussians in a relatively impoverished population that is one sixth that of Nato and a quarter of America's. Russia's total population is comparable in number to Java's and Russia's economy is only twice the size of Taiwan's. Zelensky has openly said that Russia will split up under the stress of war, and all that will be left is Muscovy.
    2
  18.  @johnadam2885  Nothing that Westerners talk about has much affect on the Russian perception of the war.
    2
  19.  @jonlittle5032  They have a hermeneutic value if nicely done.. But your is hardly apposite. How Russia sees the war is probably a mirror image of how Ukraine and the West sees things. I very much doubt that Russia is self aware enough to have the ultratoughminded realist viewpoint that Anders is attributing to it.
    2
  20.  @jonlittle5032  Capone's successor Big Tuna Accardo never spent a single night in prison in his life. Anyway, the international system is not one where there is a cop to call on a sitting regieme in country such as Russia. And knowing if they lose power they are going to be hauled off to prison is the very best of incentives for Putin and company to follow through on their aggressive war to the bitter end rather than ever be convinced to relinquish power. They have nothing to gain by backing down. As Kris Kristopherson put it ''Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose'. The ICC is not achieving anything, unless their aim is to appear to be relevant.
    2
  21. is outer Manchuria more important to Russian that Ukraine? Not now I think.
    2
  22. Ukraine may have missed that a federalised Donbass though the Steimeier modification of Minsk would have been no real concession to Russia because the European members of Nato veto would have prevented it so the unrealism was one both sides from the begining. The Russians can destroy the Ukrainians' weapons and the West will replace them with better ones. Ukraine's fighting manpower is the thing the Russians would be better concentrating on attriting, and they seem to be doing that. Despite the fanfaronaded reiteration of Ukraine (and Georgia) joining Nato being made every year since 2008 by Nato, Ukraine joining Nato was a dead letter after the invasion of Georgia, so Russia's fears were not very rational. Yet that does not mean they were not genuine. While Zelensky was in Paris in 2019 negotiating for peace through a modified Minsk agreement that would have obviated any need for Russia to stay in a special autonomous status Donbass (because Donbass although a part of Ukraine could have constitutionally prevented it joining Nato). it was made clear to him if he signed then he would be overthrown by 2014 style mass demos. Currently, Zelensky would not be able to agree to any settlement that did not entail the return of Crimea (dubious the majority in Crimea want this), which many in the West are encouraging Ukraine to insist on as a rock bottom demand; it does not seem to me at least merely an initial negotiating position. I think there is an unspoken agreement in the West to not say anything that can be interpreted as encouraging to Russia. Nevertheless, General Milley said Russia and Ukraine have taken 100,000 casualties each. Ukrainians between 16 and 60 who have been forbidden from leaving the country constitute a reserve army of manpower and yet is Russia substantially different apart from having three times the population. Men not machinery are the best target for Russia, and overall commander Surovikin seems to approve or he would have terminated the Bakhmut operation which the Wagner boss says is an attrition one. Now if the West actual gives Ukraine troops, Russia can forget about even emerging with a draw, but it seems most unlikely those things will happen.
    2
  23. True but such Russians are not the stuff front line combat soldiers are made of. And them going abroad makes Putin more secure domestically.
    2
  24.  @AndrewBlucher  In war subpar human resources are sometimes just the ticket. Both sides are progressing by using low quality troops in small groups to draw fire so that the artillery gf the enemy can be pinpointed by drones and destroyed. The Russians invented those tactic and used the Zconvicts as cannon fodder to draw fires. but Ukraine is having to use troops who are ordinary men for such high attrition roles. Both Ukraine and Russia are going to pay very dearly in demographic consequences for this war.
    2
  25.  @leninstreet  The Russian have made their first decent territorial gain in years. Of course they are going to reenforce it. Lapon knows the area is open country suitable for offensives from having to retreat back through it in 2022. And most people think the offensive was prompted by the Ukrainian cross border raids, which have proved to be counter productive from Kiev's standpoint. So whose side are the most incompetent generals on?
    2
  26.  @harmless6813  First of all, Russia has no way of knowing what the intentions of other countries are or might become. Secondly, losing conventionally to a medium sized country like Ukraine would show Russian army as unable to win conventionally and not just in Ukraine. It is of course possible Putin would accept such a debacle, but showing such a lack of nerve when playing for the very highest of stakes would hardly leave Russia's nuclear deterrent to a conventional invasion much credibility, would it; so what would the point of having either conventional or nuclear forces, or RusFed as a unitary state to pay for them? It would break up.
    2
  27.  @tokeherkild8038  We'll both go on living and in a year we shall be able to agree on what happened in 2023.
    2
  28. An event is best characterized by how it ends. Ukraine started well ....
    2
  29. I think Ukraine is playing into Putin's hands with these assassinations of Russian ideologue civilians like Dugina (Anders does not mention those), and drone attacks. The latest drone attacks are on residential buildings. Russians can feel patriotic in relation to attacks on Russia proper, so is getting Putin's population to support his contention that Ukraine is a threat to Russia a path to victory for Ukraine? I think it is the quickest way for Ukraine to lose. If Ukraine has drones to spare it ought to use them on the battlefield, where it has not had a victory since November. Saddam was not overthrown by domestic dissent or armed resistance from within Iraq as a result of missile attacks he failed to prevent. No, Saddam was overthrown by a massive invasion taking his capital. That is not going to happen to Russia. Judging by the recent costly advance against heavy opposition and increasing bombardments, Russian generals do not believe they are about to run out of soldiers or arms.
    2
  30. Ukraine and Russia are something like near peers and they tend to go tit for tat case in point the assassination of Dugina was quite possibly in retaliation for the killing of agricultural logistics tycoon and militia funder Oleksiy Vadatursky, who was killed 3weeks ago in a targeted missile attack on his Mykolaiv home 40 km from Kherson, shortly after the Russians had agreed to let the shipping of grain resume. Ukraine ostensibly preparing in the South for a huge offensive operation would detract from establishing a defense line. The danger is the Ukrainian fanfaronade about a Southern offensive might give the Russians the idea to launch their own major attack from their west bank foothold in the South rather that having the troops pouring in to that vulnerable area just accumulating and in an untenable position. There is in fact currently a developing Russian advance towards Mykolaiv.
    2
  31. If this is the effect of a bad Russian plan then Ukrainians better hope Russia does not come up with a terrible one!
    2
  32. Ukraine knew all about the forming up of the Russian 50 thousand force near Belregod. What Kiev did not know was the lack of proper prepared positions for defence.
    2
  33. That Ukraine would do this suggests Ukraine is not in the slightest worried about a nuclear strike. They ought to be slightly worried, especially now.
    2
  34. Are the majority of billionaires populist? That would seem counter intuitive as they are by definition an elite. Are most of the super rich even neutral? I would say most of them that do donate do so to socially progressive causes
    2
  35. ​ @freedomfighter22222  The US could have supported an indefinite effort in Vietnam economically, but that was academic because there was no end in sight and so what was the point. Nothing is ever spelled out about how Ukraine is going to actually win. Insofar as there is a Ukraine wins scenario, it seems to be an unspoken one that that the Russians are suddenly going to realise they are losing and quit, but why would Russia be constrained to that 'we have lost' reaction to losing instead of a more pugnacious response?
    2
  36. Wagner is a light infantry formation with an expendable component of irregulars, they are specially designed for advancing through heavily fortified and mined urban areas. Russia is currently standing on the defence, which requires regular units with heavt weapons and engineers. Moreover, Wagner in Belarus is necessitating a diversion of Ukraine's troops from the east and south.
    2
  37. The morale of Ukrainians can be affected by a relatively minor tactical defeat if it is taken as a sign the tide is turning. And morale has strategic implications.
    2
  38.  @kalinmir  Journalists understand the strategic importance of morale. Russia's has got a boost.
    2
  39. The international order consists of sovereign states and Taiwan isn't one; it' is not an independent country; does not itself claim to be such. If Taiwan were to declare independence it would be invaded by China, and we know this because China has said so. After the shock of the Korean war, the US knows that China does not bluff. China did not have nuclear weapons at the time of the Korean intervention by China. A few years ago the US made veiled threats of thermonuclear weapons use against China if it attacked Taiwan. To the apparent surprise of American diplomats, China responded by pointed that it has the capacity to hit the continental US.
    2
  40. Of course they are going to seize on any opportunity that comes up without regard to whether it is 'not in the plan'.
    2
  41. I suppose it is true that malicious Russian mischief alarming the Western pubic could interfere with Washington/ Nato's effort to help Ukraine win the war, but as far I can see, Washington is not trying to end the war by helping Ukraine win the war. Superpower America has VAST stores of all kinds of useful armament not longer in service that it could give to Ukraine. Take Abrams tanks, they could easily give 300 but have only supplied 30. Washington wants Russia to get discouraged and give up with what it could claim as a sort of victory. The reason is that Ukraine really winning with American help make Russia see the US as an enemy forever more, and that cannot be allowed to happen because Russia will be needed in the future when China becomes a MEGAPOWER.
    2
  42. No one has been consistently right about it. Moreover, Nielsen is employed by the Danish navy and in what he says is constrained to follow the country's official policy.
    2
  43.  @BellaMcMill  Anders has a point about 2022, but now two years later Russia's effort in Ukraine is almost total. I think there is more than some caprice of Putin driving it.
    2
  44. It is questionable if Russia can win the war given the increased support the US gives Ukraine any time Russia has any success, but why can't Putin can keep the war going so as to not have to explain how it was lost? So how does Ukraine win if it cannot end the war?
    2
  45. If the US did not see it will one day need Russia against China, then that would be truly baffling. All indications are that America does and will not try to crush Russia in Ukraine.
    2
  46. Anders seems to be saying either Ukraine is free to become a member/ de jure member of Nato (with aspiration to regain occupied territories Russia says are its) and member of the EU, whereby Ukraine as poorest country in the EU necessarily gets massive transfers of funds (for economic convergence), or it becomes a Russian puppet. No middle ground, or room for compromise. Where is all the money to build a new strong Ukrainian army and rebuild Ukraine AND bring it up to EU economic convergence level? Not from America, Trump has said the US ain't paying for s**t. Poland lost a lit of its territory and had a vast number of its people die in WW2, but it has experienced a resurgence. Ukraine will too, in time. Virtually no person, no country is completely free in the absolutely inviolable way Anders is holding up as the minimal acceptable level of independent sovereign democracy that Ukraine must be raised to ASAP by the West once the fighting stops. None of this is anyone's fault because no person is responsible for being born to the parents they are or for living in the circumstances of their life and times. Like people, some countries come into being more favourably ensconced than others. Ukraine is next to a large paranoid military autocracy and parts of Ukraine are heavily larded with Russians. Ukraine might still move to relatively quickly to be a prosperous secure country in Nato and the EU of course. But that would take an enormous transfer of wealth from Western taxpayers (including from the population of countries like Poland that are accustomed to being net recipients of EU funds).
    2
  47. ​ @karenrobertsdottir4101  One could argue that Twitter in its pre Musk heyday did too well fore outre single issue causes with one Tweeter's outrage being retweeted massively. Ezra Kien said Obame was able to keep those factions under control but his successors could not. Lind thinks Twitter's autodidacts are likely going to do similar damage to the right as the non profits did to the left.
    2
  48. China was built up as a counterweight to the USSR. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the attenuated Russian power then became the unspoken counterweight to a burgeoning China. However with its Ukraine policy, Washington has brilliantly wedged Russia away from considering China as a danger, and, through huge losses in the SMO, handed the Chinese a geostrategic coup by alienating Russia forever after from fighting on the side of America. Putin falling will not alter the new alignment.
    2
  49.  @Luke-pp2lw  No, he just thinks they are too big for Ukraine and says so.
    2
  50. Does anyone?; the 'solution' Anders is talking about is a nightmare for the US. It would tie America down in Europe, and lead to it facing off against Russia in a nuclear sense. Anders needs to take East Asia into account, but people in Denmark don't seem to worry about such things.
    2