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

  1. But there is a continuity in Russian policy toward Ukraine going back to the Tsarist regieme. The Kremlin was shocked at the losses initially but persisted and currently is not being put off by huge and mounting casualties beyond anything they dreamt of at the start of the invasion. There is an ineluctable logic behind Russian policy that surely stems from geostrategic considerations rather than Putin's particular psychology. Germany fought two world wars against almost exactly the same opponents, even though in WW2 the systems were totally different in both Germany and Russia that they had been in WW1. Hitler single handedly ordered WW1, but the Kaiser was hardly informed of the decision to go to war in 1914. Ukraine is a bit like the FinnoRussia war in which Britain and French were aiding the Finns and nearly directly fighting, Russia. But the real war was to come and Russia was needed to win it. Russia will be needed to deal with China down the road.
    1
  2.  @farnarkleboy  They were getting worse off. Trump is the reaction. It is perfectly rational from their point of view.
    1
  3. Going by the undersized army he first went into Ukraine with, Putin seems to banked on Kiev asking for terms once the invasion reached the capital rather than fight it out. Putin is desperate to end the war on terms he stipulates. Putin withdrawing without what he could present as a victory would be tantamount to admitting the war was a huge mistake in the first place and loosen his grip on power. Too late for Putin to compromise, he must go on until the bitter end to (sort of) win or lose it all. Russia loses some fighter planes. Mariinka has been transformed into a 'hellscape' . Planes can be pulled out of service to preserve them, cities are there for the taking. Ukraine will run out of cities before Russia runs out of planes
    1
  4. The LGM were not resisted at all in Crimea, which is certainly not going to happen in Latvia ECT, the Russian army were already in bases on Crimea, and Ukraine was never a full member of Nato, so 2014 is zero precedent for any kind of operation against Nato members not being reacted to by Nato as a whole in accordance with the rules of the organisation. Furthermore. Nato as a whole has went well beyond its treaty obligations to help non member Ukraine; no one expected that the countries of Nato would give as much help as they did. Putin thought he could do another 2014 in 2022 and got a debacle because Nato was pro active. He will plan his next move with the experience of 2022 in mind. I don't think who is in the White House is a big factor in Putin's thinking because Biden and Obama being pres did not stop him. Trump is a such a loose cannon with reckless rhetoric that the the Kremlin would surely have no reasonable expectation that he would do what he said and not respond to a attack on a Nato country not spending 2% on defence; that was surely just yet another Trump complaint about European Nato members freeloading on the US taxpayer (while pushing the expansion of Nato so as to cocoon them inside Chapter 5 members on every border). @BosonCollider 
    1