Comments by "" (@ericp1139) on "Russia closes in on Bakhmut in the face of fierce resistance I DW News" video.

It's Western coping. If Russia were to surround Kyiv again, they would say Kyiv isn't very important.
6
The West saying it's not strategic is just a massive cope. If Russia surrounds Kyiv again, they will also say Kyiv has no strategic importance.
6
@notapokemontrainer800 It took NATO 8 years to fortify Bakhmut. The fact that Wagner dismantled the defense in half a year is a testament to their skill. And Kramatorsk was not heavily fortified and relied on Bakhmut holding out, so it will fall much faster.
5
@LogisticsWW NATO is already running out of weapons and ammo, by their own admission. They had to kick each other just to agree on tanks, and even then they are reneging on it. They can send all the checks they want, but this problem isn't something that can be solved by cash.
5
If you use that argument, then the AFU is tying up its forces that can't be used in any counter-offensives either. And if Bakhmut is so insignificant, then why did NATO spend the last 8 years fortifying it? Why does Zelensky call it the impenetrable fortress that he will never surrender? Think critically.
3
@tatyana5532 Then the experts are surrounded and about to be "successfully evacuated" to Russian camps.
2
@nicgb098 so fortresses defending valuable targets are not valuable? Where is the logic in that? It's like saying a vault is not valuable, only the gold inside it.
2