Comments by "Black Cat Dungeon Master\x27s Familiar" (@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311) on "Willy OAM" channel.

  1.  @Bluest_of_Blue_Waffles  I don't think so they all attempt to be neutral. Acknowledging Ukraine is losing this war is obvious even to pro-NATO people with a brain like Dan Davis. Admittedly Dima from Military Summary has a lot of eccentric speculations but they're pro Ukraine as often as pro-Russia. And he does a good job of distinguishing between fact and speculation. Guys like DPA and History LEgends have no skin in the game they're just calling out NAFO delusions. They both call out pro-Russia BS too.
    2
  2. It started before Hamas even existed
    2
  3.  @ohmightyzeus6135  There are studies from Iraq and Serbia, especially Falluja where birth defects and still births shot up after the war.
    2
  4. I doubt they'll help much, the Russians will shoot at them before they even get close to the front lines. They might be useful for launching missiles themselves but they won't affect Russian air superiority.
    2
  5. So his reason for fighting is racism :)
    2
  6.  @Sukhothai77  I don't have a link but I've seen in on Twitter and Dima from Military Summary channel showed it. This guy lost his shit, told someone to give him a grenade and threw it in the bunker where his men had just been arguing with him.
    2
  7.  @Papaghost8902  I agree with your overall assessment but 10 to 1 casualties isn't plausible. It's certainly one sided but we've seen plenty of footage of Ukrainian successes.
    2
  8.  @teddypicker6969  How can you believe Ukraine is getting stronger and Russia is getting weaker? The Russian economy is actually growing despite the war. Russia has only had one round of mobilisation. If Russia had any doubts at all about where this war is going don't you think they'd mobilise another half million, million, two million men?
    2
  9. LOL since when? He mainly repeats the MSM.
    2
  10.  @Fankas2000  I think he's Latvian - based on things he said.
    2
  11. ... "to the last Ukrainian"
    2
  12. It's a lot like Saigon in 1970
    2
  13.  @teddypicker6969  When did Russia commit to major offensives? Last I heard Surovikhin explicitly said they're NOT going to do major offensives, they're going to use their artillery to destroy the Ukrainian army.
    2
  14. Yeah it's huge. Even with drones. Even a 6m elevation advantage helps a lot for visibility.
    2
  15. Why stop at Crimea, why not just advance all the way to Moscow and simultaneously, launch a naval assault on Vladivostok?
    2
  16. If Ukraine joins NATO when the war is over, Russia has a strong incentive to keep the war going and ensure they control the important parts of Ukraine when the war finally is over.
    2
  17. A month into the war Russia decided it would be a long war of attrition so pulled back from anywhere where their supply lines were in danger including Kiev. Putting valuable aircraft and pilots in danger over Bakhmut just wasn't worth any advantage, they achieved the same result with artillery and expendable criminals. It's a mistake to think because Russia doesn't capture ground quickly means there isn't an overwhelming disparity of resources.
    2
  18.  @mikemckinnis3877  I'd guess there was a slight chance at the start of the war that Putin's government would collapse. But it was always a long shot.
    2
  19. C is the best estimate but we could easily see surprises like Prigozhin's coup. We do know Zelensky has some serious enemies now including Poroshenko, Timoshenko and Zaluzhny.
    2
  20.  @adam90670  Using cluster munitions against enemy soldiers is not a war crime. Using cluster munitions against central Donetsk City most certainly is.
    2
  21. She says "we're not targeting civilians". Anyone who believes that should look at the footage from Gaza - already over 6000 bombs used several days ago, at that rate, over 10,000 by the time I'm writing this.
    2
  22.  @Sapnfap  It's irrelevant whether the majority of bombs kill civilians. In any war, only a tiny minority of ammunition used kills anyone. The point is you can't use thousands of bombs on a city with its population in place and then claim you aren't targeting civilians.
    2
  23.  @carlosandleon  Lead and DU are not comparable in toxicity. DU used as anti-tank ammunition gets vaporised; in addition to its radioactivity which lasts practically forever, it's chemically far more toxic than lead. Google Falluja birth defects.
    1
  24.  @SFHFWill  You're wrong about depleted uranium, the radioactivity is dangerous when vaporised because it's an alpha emitter which gets inside your intestines when you eat food grown on polluted farmland. Also, it's chemically highly toxic. There are hundreds of studies published on this. Please look into them. Yes it is slightly safer than enriched uranium. That doesn't mean it's safe.
    1
  25. We can see the bigger picture. Anyone with an open and sceptical mind can see it's not going well.
    1
  26. I'm 99.9% sure the Americans did it but I wouldn't have put it past Ukraine if they could have pulled it off. Consider lots of the other things they've done - assassination of civilians in Russia, showering Donetsk city centre with butterfly mines, a kill list including all kinds of Westerners, shelling Energodar power station ...
    1
  27. The Americans in Syria are starting to look very exposed.
    1
  28.  @dreambadger  It is proved beyond doubt that depleted uranium is an ongoing health hazard to the population of any area where it's used in war for generations after the war is over.
    1
  29.  @rezcon  Firstly, don't even bother paying attention to what the WHO says after all the lies it told us over Wuhan, the origins of the virus and China's handling of it. Check out the studies from Serbia and Falluja. It's irrefutable this is some nasty stuff
    1
  30.  @rebelmango2141  Glad you find cancer funny - check these two studies Jia G, Belli M, Sansone U, Rosamilia S, Gaudino S. Concentration and characteristics of depleted uranium in water, air and biological samples collected in Serbia and Montenegro. Appl Radiat Isot. 2005;63:381–399. Duraković A. On depleted uranium: gulf war and Balkan syndrome. Croat Med J. 2001;42:130–134.
    1
  31.  @rebelmango2141  The war was over 2 decades ago! If you want to find more recent studies, you can google just the same as me. Mate there is zero doubt at all, tons of evidence uranium is dangerous. Vaporised uranium is way more dangerous than solid uranium. DU is 40% less reactive than natural uranium. It's just ignorant to argue DU isn't dangerous. It's like arguing smoking isn't dangerous or mercury isn't dangerous.
    1
  32. Corruption in the Soviet Union times was less than now.
    1
  33. The Wagner sledgehammer incident was fake, the guy who was supposedly executed was filmed with Prigozhin a few weeks later.
    1
  34.  @SP-nx8qx  haha ok well google the Melian dialogue it describes an early example of a genocide by Thucydides
    1
  35.  @SP-nx8qx  I've been to some of those islands, not that one. Beautiful country, excellent people.
    1
  36. I don't know this for sure but if I had to bet, USA and Germany accusing Ukraine is a distraction from the actual culprits - and Seymour Hersh told us who they are. It goes without saying that elements within German intelligence and the German government were onboard with the sabotage.
    1
  37.  @Leiska86  North Korea produces vastly more artillery ammunition than all EU countries put together. Yes, you're right that Europe hypothetically could increase armaments production massively. But it's an entirely hypothetical argument. In such a serious emergency that doing so out prioritised economic health and social spending. It's not going to happen and even if it did, by the time they've finally build up that industry the war is over. Let's stick to what is likely to happen, not hypothetical speculations about something we know will not happen. What I expect to happen is new European leaders are going to want nothing to do with Ukraine.
    1
  38. Definitely, the US Army was hoping to replace a lot of their old equipment with new equipment, using the Ukraine armaments funds.
    1
  39.  @MarvinWestmaas  You're less human than most Russians, you're the worst kind of racist, no self awareness.
    1
  40. I bet Blackrock isn't buying assets east of the Dniepr!
    1
  41. Russia's nuclear weapons are pretty modern, most US nuclear weapons are cold war era.
    1
  42.  @Lesminster  Probably true but this narrative that a nuclear war against Russia is "winnable" is blatantly wrong and extremely dangerous.
    1
  43. The "official" Western narrative is just as bad as the Russian propaganda narrative. Also youtube and the like push pro-Ukraine channels. There are good neutral channels: History Legends, Theti Mapping, Weeb Union, Military Summary. Willy's channel is pro-Ukraine but at least attempts to be a bit sceptical.
    1
  44. Or more likely just don't care about Ukrainian lives and want to cost the Russians as many losses as possible even if the fighting is extremely one sided.
    1
  45.  @AG-vb6vv  In the lead up to the invasion, Ukraine was put on a membership path to NATO and Zelensky started talking about acquiring nuclear weapons. I don't think the waiting game was realistic for Russia. The two options were either invade when Russia did or alternatively, just accept that Ukraine was going to get stronger. Unless the Kremlin was willing to give up both Donbas and Crimea, war was probably inevitable. I can see how the Kremlin's calculation was better fight a war now than fight a war later with Ukraine even stronger and possibly with nuclear weapons. BTW, Ukraine had the technology and the infrastructure to build nuclear weapons very quickly if that decision were made. And obviously it also has its own effective delivery systems.
    1
  46. There's no chance the Ukrainians did it, that story is just the Americans deflecting attention from themselves.
    1
  47. 27 million is probably for the whole Soviet Union,16 million for Russia is probably not far off.
    1
  48.  @ad2040  Maybe but it still has a large air force and in a longer war it could expand to millions of men pretty quickly. But anyway nobody wants an accidental nuclear war.
    1
  49. Exaggerated ... his takes have always minimised Russian problems. It's obvious Russia is winning but Scott Ritter goes way too far.
    1
  50. There's strong evidence the missile which hit the market place came from the north. Irrefutable evidence even. Hard to see how it can possibly be Russian. Even Julian Roepke pro-Ukrainian journalist for Das Bild admits this.
    1