Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "TLDR News EU" channel.

  1.  @untalkativeowl6774  Why would Russia destroy they dam? 2/3 of the damage is on their side. Most of the dead are on their side. Most of fortifications are on their side. They killed their prized Crimea water supply. Draining also creates issues for their nuclear power plant. Russia never even touched the dam - it was always shelled / attacked by Ukraine. The main reason of why Russian troops moved out of left hand side Dnieper river is b/c of the dam. So it is quite certain Russians did not do it as they have no benefits from doing this. This can be seen also now, with Ukraine moving in across the river more --- i.e. the side that benefited is Ukraine. I still think this is mostly an accident, but clearly if not, it was Ukraine. As to how? Come on, they can mine it with divers if the need to. The sheer idea of using artillery is a lunacy. Himars did more damage but mostly to the bridge and to the gates. Since water level was at the top & gates were damaged & we have sat photos showing the collapse an accident is still most likely. I have no idea how pp can suggest it was Russians as they have no benefits from doing so. Please, do let me know what Russians gained b/c of the flooding. Or do you imply they love the bath?
    6
  2. I am more and more convinced that the dam was blown up by Ukraine, not an accident. Claiming it was Russia is a joke. Especially given what is happening now.
    4
  3. West: Kosovo needs to be independent country Also West: No to new countries.
    4
  4.  @Jo-Jo8vs  But why replace him? If they replace him with "Bob" what do you think Bob would do - are you suggesting he is running the war badly? Would "Bob" be better war time leader? Maybe "Bob" would attack Ukraine harder with air strikes and artillery? Do we really want "Bob" from western perspective?
    3
  5.  @rogerphelps9939  Nope - they did advance 7km in the river valley through and now Russinans are countering. The main defensive line is around 10km away from where Ukraine is - and it is the first line. So no, UA forces are still far away. I say chances of breaching this line are slim to none for UA - if they manage to get there they will be way too spent to take this out. They consolidate some gains and call it a victory.
    3
  6.  @siimtokke3461  There is no Hitler - Putin comparison. Hitler wanted libersdartum - he invaded Poland and there was no "talks" - he bombed cities relentlessly. As a side note Warsaw was not taken, it surrendered when situation got hopeless. Putin does not want any Hitler goals of enslaving inferior race - instead he said these are more or less same pp (he is correct) and wants Ukraine out of NATO & implement Minsk. Ukraine signed Minsk and Minsk simply says that Russian speakers should have minority rights. The war can be seen as Russian Kosovo. It is super similar. NATO invaded to liberate Kosovo b/c Serbs were bad. Here Putin wants to liberate East as Ukrainians are bad + no NATO. This does not mean Putin is a nice guy and all good, far from it. It simply means Zielninski is not the good guy - its gray, both are bad.
    3
  7. Nah, they just did standard Soviet stuff too much. Same issue as right now. But they kicked Georgians out. A lot of the army is simply "low quality" - he is a cheap bastard and does not want to use his "top" stuff unless he is pushed to use it. So far things are going well, so no need.
    2
  8. Yes, Ukrainian morale is very low. No one wants to fight for Zielinski! Thus he first removed age limits, no more 18+ kids are ok now. Then he released criminals. No he wants foreign legion. What happened to the 300k plus army?
    2
  9. Sanctioning them would be stupid PR move by UK for local consumption. First of all none of them have any major holdings so minimal loss. But the message would be clear, UK is not country of law and order. These that do have lots of property are not exactly friendly with Putin, usually they are criminal element. Sanctioning them would be great especially for Putin.
    2
  10. Dude, it took weeks to take Grozny and it took US army weeks to take Falujah. We talk in three weeks and see how it is going for Ukraine then. So far Russians today are shelling zaporozhia. Which is 300km deep into Ukraine. they have so far taken two mid sized cities. Mariopol is currently under heavy pressure from all sides as well as from inside.
    2
  11. But he said like 1000 times he is not invading. So there is no need to back down from anything.
    2
  12. Wait, how many years it took US to take Vietnam? Oh wait, they failed. And mighty US *mobilized*. Yep, did not help them. How US has fallen! Oh and what about later wars? Do I need to remind you of these?
    2
  13. ATCMS is not being sent as the range is too long. I expect them to send aircraft before they sent these missiles if ever.
    2
  14. Prolonging the war is providing weapons. Without weapons there is a chance Ukraine can be forced to the table. With weapons they will fight to the very last Ukrainian and force Russia to take over all of Ukraine. If Ukraine was provided tanks sooner Russia would have also escalated sooner so there would be no affect. Any provisions of weapons to Ukraine will be matched 2x by Russia so there is little point going into the hole unless you do not care about Ukraine & just want the world to burn around Ukraine.
    1
  15.  @iceonthemoon  Why Russia cannot match "combined military and industrial capacity of the west" - so far it has exceeded it. Russia can easily match anything the west throws for a tie - i.e. even if west opens new factories and makes millions of weapons Russia can just put atom at the front and ask China for help. Combined west has not ability to match China's industrial output in heavy industry as China is more than 50% of earth. So if gloves come off - lets play. Lets see who wins - money is on the world - not on the west.
    1
  16.  @iceonthemoon  Its not wishful thinking - China does care only about itself - so to preserve itself it would have no choice but to help Russia. Read my comment carefully and realize that in any nuclear war China would be reduced to ashes. So they would risk full sanctions to not end up as dust - its rather very big incentive, no? Russia is not exactly throwing everything they got - they still have plenty of people they can mobilize and they still did not fully mobilize the industry. There is little chance they will need to do this as the 300k plus hidden troops should be enough. But if not, they add another 300k plus hidden troops. Nukes would only come afterwards. However, I have a feeling that before they would use nukes they would ask China for help. Its a little game being played - with multiple players.
    1
  17. Nah, I don't have a clue why Russians even went that way or are moving north from Kherson. Maybe b/c there was token resistance. Komsomolska Pravda openly points out to dividing Ukraine into East and West based on Dniepr River. So why Russians are ... to the left of it is a mystery. Political points?
    1
  18.  @kennethferland5579  Problem is that the river is so wonderful you can build a border on it ;) Works both ways. This is openly suggested in Russian mass media. Remember Russia will not grab Ukraine that is loaded with anti Russian Ukrainians. Why would they do that?
    1
  19. Russians are slowly grinding Ukrainians away. Every day, new town or village or two is take. Last big move was taking Popasna.
    1
  20. Umm, three weeks. 5 days would be impossible to drive the distances involved.
    1
  21. Yeah, so far they were able to do exactly zero offensives only small local counter attacks. Heck they even have issues pushing weak screen forces north of Kherson and near Kharkiv. There is no way Ukraine will be able to retake much land. Especially not in Donbass.
    1
  22. Window of opportunity is not with Ukraine at all. Time is running out for them, not Putin. As they are squished economically right now all Putin needs is wait till they crack. I.e. he will tire them out. Idea is not to absorb big chunks of Ukraine, it is simply to control Ukraine enough to keep US out. Ukraine is not going to become "western" anytime soon. They are the poorest state in Europe. It will take many decades to reach EU level needed to join. Like 50 years. Current tension prevent any NATO joining. Putin as plenty of time. Years.
    1
  23.  @Jo-Jo8vs  ok, so you want more radical leader whom will act more like US. I am sure when 1000s of Ukrainians civilians will die daily they will then you form heavens.
    1
  24.  @Jo-Jo8vs  So you want Putin++ whom will be even worse for Ukraine? What about US and Zielinski? Why they did nothing to stop the war and called Putin's bluff?
    1
  25. Why a lot? Cost is minimal. They just moved some hardware. etc. If west diversifies gas its GREAT! EU gets cheap gas from Russia, its good for EU, not Russia. Asia pays more. If EU pays more and buys gas destined for Asia... Putin can sell his gas destined to EU to Asia and make more $$$$. So Putin pivot to asia === $$$ for him and a big loss for EU. Also huge loss for Ukraine.
    1
  26. Why? They are about to loose a big city and are fighting with all they got while Putin fights with regional forces only.
    1
  27.  @Sofia_LT  Relax, US may have sleepy president but his generals are neither sleepy or stupid.
    1
  28. So far, with ignorance of their own doctrine, Russia is winning, even without fully sending its reserves. Battle of Mariupol is almost over & whole frozen forces there can attack north to encircle army Donbass - which is already encircled from the top. Once this army is dealt with Putin can claim victory and switch to defense only.
    1
  29. Russia will pull troops back once they secured at least Donbass. Most likely east bank of Dnieper and a natural border.
    1
  30.  @TorianTammas  maybe. However, why should we force people to join one country or another. Why should we force Taiwan to be part of China, if they don't want to? Why should we force Crimea or Donbass to be part of Ukraine if they don't want to. People were wiser afrer WWI then today. They did referendums and land was distributed based on what pp wanted. Same should have been done after dissolution of Soviet Union. Dozens of wars could have been avoided.
    1
  31. Ukraine has small advantage in numbers, probably 1.5 to 1. This was the case in Bakhmut - it was between 2 to 1.5 Ukrainian defenders to 1 Wagner trooper. However, this is no longer some huge advantage and Russia has heavy advantage in artillery, air power and armor. Main idea is to let Ukraine bleed out over the month of constant attacks while loosing as little territory as possible than do a devastating counter.
    1
  32. The short answer is a NO. Why they crossed the river? To cause trouble. The failure of the Ukrainian offensive is rather clear. Same deal with Bakhmut. Where Ukraine is trying without much success to attack on the flanks. Situation for UA looks poor. They are loosing a lot of offensive power and troops for little gain. We know almost for certain Russians did not blow up the dam. We also know for certain that artillery could not do it. Also as you can see, it's UA benefiting from the dam collapse.
    1
  33. I am also hoping for some newer tanks to be sent - this way Russia has a way to analyze and counter the threats of latest western stuff + good intel for China.
    1
  34.  @MrIzvraten  They did not invade, Soviets did or more like they got it handed down at Yalta. The land taken was added to Ukraine. Today Ukraine has zero EU values as far as minorities are concerned.
    1
  35. Well, it can fly somewhat deep one way ;) S-400 proven to be super deadly against any 4 gen aircraft.
    1
  36. Most Russians can see through false flags. Also includes some APCS - was gone from RT within like 2h. Genocide was also just mentioned in passing, did not last more then 2h. I doubt this will be any "official" pretext for war. The current narrative is that Ukraine failed to implement Minsk accord (which is 100% correct) and is "not nice" to minorities (again 100% right) as well as it continues to threaten Russian security with NATO. Not sure whatever this is enough for war - but certainly there are calls for Ukraine to move out of occupied territories of both republics.
    1
  37.  @bjornstahle4652  I fail to see how people can say Russians bombed themselves and its OK as they are stupid or something. They are same humans as everyone else. Would you bomb yourself? Or how about your family?
    1
  38.  @Speedkam  How can the dam be controlled by Russia when Ukrainians we on the other side of the river???? HOW!!?? Do you have any Logic?
    1
  39.  @Speedkam  Even if they did so what? Even if Ukrainians did not have their own tunnels so what? Either side could blow it up from the outside - no tunnels needed.
    1
  40.  @theonh9365  Well, we now know it was Ukraine with Polish help. After the war Ukraine will have to pay compensation to Germany for this.
    1
  41. What you mean by 1st line of defense is actually observation points on the security zone.
    1
  42. None - it cannot win. That was easy. Eventually long range missiles and aircraft will be sent - its certain. This will not however, in any shape and form lead to any Ukrainian victory - it will simply prolong the conflict & destruction of Ukraine.
    1
  43. Ukraine is going to lose between 1/3 to 1/2 of its economy. It has lost tons of equipment and is taking huge losses in soldiers. Russian casualties are these of Russian Armed forces - which do not include Donbass, Wagner or say Chechens. So Russian losses are very low. I do not see it as a disaster at all - if they can take Donbass plus say two more regions they certainly can claim victory - after all this would mean taking 150% more territory then they offered in peace terms to Ukraine. Ukraine is set to be a huge looser - but the west will surely claim victory.
    1
  44. @Olaf Sigurson Nah, I doubt Putin will occupy anyone - what would be the goal in that? Theory #1 here is that he will create East Ukraine.
    1
  45. Russian army is around 80k. They have at least 70k allies. Ukraine has at least 300k deployed. So far Russians despite at least 2:1 disadvantage and huge fortifications in depth are moving forward.
    1
  46.  @Quondom  Well, they are doing far better then say US in Vietnam. So Russian army is clearly superior to US army. They are clearly winning right now - so just wait a bit longer. Slow progress is due to making sure their losses are kept low. Give it few more weeks or a month and all of Donbass should be taken. Question is where they go next. I suspect Zaporozia and then Dnipro.
    1
  47.  @Quondom  They make their own parts. How do you think Soviets build their tanks, planes etc? Do you think they ... bought military parts from say US? LOL! Come on. Think.
    1
  48.  @hueghh3775  Its not night vision its thermals by Thales if I remember correctly. These were now switched, rather long time ago, to Russian systems.
    1
  49.  @hueghh3775  This all depends on T-72 model - there are dozens of variants, some have thermals, some do not, all sorts of versions are present, through I do not think latest models have 3rd gen thermals.
    1
  50.  @0xCAFEF00D  So far Zielinski's credibility is at stake. Ukrainian people are not resisting invasion - at most token resistance. By this time tomorrow I expect Russians to be somewhere close to Kiev (not paratroopers).
    1
  51.  @Gladissims  Maybe the best answer is ... it took US 6 weeks to take Fallujah. One city. Besides west insists that only about 150k regular Russian troops are involved as well as only 50k militia. Ukraine has at least 2x manpower advantage. Russia still holds the record for biggest advance in a day & the most land taken in two weeks.
    1
  52.  @arty5876  According to plain logic Russia has to suffer less then half of the casualties Ukraine is. If it was suffering more then 1/2 then Ukraine will be driving them out & there was no way they could attack.
    1
  53. Well we know Ukraine is lying as we have OSDE observers and they can tell who is shelling. Both sides.
    1
  54.  @ed-te1fp  yes France put up more of a fight.
    1
  55. @Atlantis Maybe, or they just fix things in place - i.e. do price controls. Once war is over it will go back to normal. Just a short level of pain which can easily be countered. One has to remember that Soviets did not exactly depended on US or EU & no one got hungry, at least no one after 1947.
    1
  56. @Atlantis Lend lease sure did help but lets not over or under state its importance. You also don't know how command economics works as I bet no one in the west took a course in the economy of socialism.
    1
  57. Russia started the war with about 2700 tanks in active service and used 1500 directly. Ukraine had 1000 tanks or so in the beginning. Ukraine realistically could have repaired another 1000 tanks from stocks of old junk. They got around 600 tanks from NATO. They lost about 11 x 150 tanks == 1650 tanks so far and have roughly same number of active tanks now as at the start of the war without any reserves left====> hence the panic to get tanks.
    1
  58. Nah they already got 1 done - connected Crimea to Donbass. They are close to 2nd getting whole Donbass. After that they can claim they also killed lots of Nazis (see Mariupol) and removed Ukraine war capability. And viola, war is won. Of course Ukraine can keep fighting. But Russia would mostly defend.
    1
  59. It is almost certain Russians Did not do it.
    1
  60. ​ @GorgeDawes how? Oh that is easy, mines, drones, etc. They had access to the dam. I say 75 it was an accident, 20% Ukraine, 5% Russia.
    1