Comments by "Black Cat Dungeon Master\x27s Familiar" (@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. If you believe that, you should invest everything you have in Ukraine. When Ukraine wins you'll be rich.
    37
  2. Sure. If you believe that you should sell everything you own and buy property in Kharkov because right now it's really cheap. When Ukraine wins you'll be rich beyond your wildest dreams.
    10
  3.  @TankandDimples  There's zero evidence for this. If you actually believe it, it's obvious you don't follow the fighting closely. Even pro-Ukrainian maps don't support this claim.
    10
  4.  @eddiemarten3381  LOL. "Putin is brittle". So NATO soldiers cross into Ukraine and Russia just hits them with Iskandars. What then? WWIII? Or NATO backs down. Russia isn't going to back down so escalation either means WWIII or NATO backs down. You really haven't thought this through have you?
    8
  5. In reality, Russia has very low debt and a positive balance of payments - the exact opposite of most Western countries despite that Russia is fighting a major war.
    7
  6.  @Rammbukk  I'm not talking about total debt, Russian debt to GDP is low. There is a huge capacity to borrow either overseas or off their own citizens. This guy's theory that the Russian economy can't sustain this for long is implausible. He's a serving NATO officer producing propaganda.
    7
  7. Not really, European militaries are in an appalling state.
    6
  8.  @TorianTammas  It looks like that but that's not the whole picture. Ukraine is getting weaker, Russia is getting stronger day by day. Remember the 1914-1918 war, in France/Belgium there are many similarities. In 1914 things were very fluid, there were rapid advances (like the first month in 2022). Then in the West at least there were years of stasis. Then in 1918 the weaker side tried a desperate and costly assault that put the stronger side under pressure (the Ukrainian counter offensive). After that failed, the weaker German side had used their best reserves. We're now at the June 1918 stage where the British and French started pushing back the German army. It's starting to become obvious to everyone the Ukrainians are weakening, even the Western media is starting to admit this. In 2024, the Russians will have the option to take the four oblasts they have already annexed or if they are prepared to pay a heavier price, advance further into Ukraine.
    5
  9.  @marcoobin4571  Where do you get your info from? Russia expanded 4.10 percent in the second quarter annualised and that's with a declining population. Is this what you call a collapsing economy? Most of Europe is in recession!
    5
  10.  @umjackd  The USA has the same attitude towards small countries. Look at how they bombed Serbia and then seized the province of Kosovo. Look at how US forces are still in Syria despite the Syrian government wanting them out and the UN confirming they have no right to be there. Look at US missile strikes all over the Middle East including in Iraq and Syria.
    5
  11. LOL have you already forgotten Ukraine switched to small squad infiltration tactics soon after their "counteroffensive" resulted in hundreds of destroyed Western vehicles?
    4
  12.  @Panj0  Can you give me an example anywhere of any time where a society collapsed because it had full employment?
    4
  13.  @allanmason3201  Russia heavily subsidised the rest of the USSR during Soviet times. Much of the periphery was economic dead weight, especially the central Asian republics which was part of the union due to ideology rather than economic advantage. Most of the seriously productive parts of Ukraine are populated by Russians and mainly in Russian hands due to this invasion - most of the coal, much of the gas fields and the most fertile farmland.
    4
  14. 62 of 73 shot down is implausible. We know there have times Ukraine has claimed almost every missile was shot down and yet there were multiple explosions and electricity knocked out for hours. A Ukrainian military official recently admitted in an interview they've never shot down a single hypersonic missile even though the Ukrainian government has claimed many shot down.
    4
  15.  @utrian4148  LOL if you follow neutral channels you'll see Ukrainian claims are full of contradiction. Sorry to burst your echo chamber bubble.
    4
  16. Ukraine is winning the meme and propaganda war. Russia is winning the artillery and economic war. Comparisons with Vietnam or Afghanistan are misleading unless Russia is stupid enough to occupy the north west of Ukraine. The territory Russia will take is populated by people who speak Russian and mainly prefer to be part of Russia. There's no reason to think Russian consolidation of Kherson, Mikulayev, Odessa and Kharkov will be less successful than it's consolidation of Crimea and Donetsk.
    4
  17. When Putin took over, Russia was disintegrating, it had suffered a massive drop in GDP, life expectancy was plummeting and oligarchs were looting the country. Under Putin, Russia has become stable, much richer and the oligarchs have been reigned in despite the endless hostility of the West. I think more neutral historians will be more favourable about his legacy than Taylor expects.
    3
  18.  @velvetmagnetta3074  Same cause, same solution. AFVs are too vulnerable to use in large concentrations and you can spot concentrations building with satellites. Large troop concentrations are vulnerable targets so both sides move to small unit infiltration for the same reason. The narrative that when Ukraine does something that's smart but when Russia does the same it's incompetence is so blatant especially on this channel.
    3
  19.  @markbryant4641  Yep. It's pretty interesting the monthly profile of Russian losses as tracked by Mediazona. There's big peak around the Bakhmut operation time but it was mainly convicts dying. And Russian losses dropped off after this.
    3
  20. No because nobody with a brain takes Macron seriously.
    3
  21.  @georgethompson1460  1) The Ukrainian army is suffering severe attrition. The Russian army is not. After the Russians pulled back from Kiev, the balance of forces was quite even. Over time, the Russians built up greater forces and the Ukrainians lost their experienced veterans to greater Russian artillery. When the Russians moved on Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, it all collapsed quite quickly, two or three weeks. The attrition continues every day and will presumably speed up rapidly now Ukraine is on the offensive. 2) Currently, the Russians are extremely casualty averse. They only take a position when there's no opposition left and an infantry patrol notices vacated Ukrainian defences, we don't see aggressive assaults any more - so their gains are very slow. However the Russians have amassed large air mobile reserves. If it suits them and they want to pay the price in casualties, they can move quickly. Quite likely they'll do this with an airmobile strike because of the thick minefields all over the front now. 3) The Russians currently judge that time is on their side. Diplomatic opposition is gradually crumbling. It could be they want to avoid panicking the West with rapid moves. It could be that they're waiting for ongoing Ukrainian casualties to weaken the opposition. In any case they've got the capacity to fight a lot more aggressively than they currently are.
    3
  22. How do you think what the Russians are doing is any different from the Ukrainians in Robotyne? Except the Russians have more firepower to cover their advances.
    3
  23. "That Russia is about to lose the war" - obvious sign this guy is full of s**t
    3
  24.  @buck4490  Not how I read it at all - he's not hysterically anti-Putin like some Western commentators but he's definitely hostile. The only famous Western commentator I can think of who is sympathetic to the Russian position right now is John Mearsheimer - who has been warning about this war for years. And maybe Peter Zeihan who thinks it's all about geography and nothing else.
    2
  25.  @simonbucci1041  Western countries are geopolitical rivals of Russia therefore almost every commentator and scholar in Western countries has an anti-Russian bias. A deferral to the number of people holding a position rather than the merits of particular arguments is the sign of someone who is incapable of independent or original thought.
    2
  26.  @apacheattackhelicopter8185  What does it matter what the people of a region think? Well do yo believe in democracy or not? Because if you do, how can you deny the people of Crimea the right to decide which of the two countries they're members of? Why was Crimea part of Ukraine anyway? Only because Khrushchev wanted to buy the Ukrainian communist leadership in his own bid for power. Crimea was part of Russia much longer than it was part of Ukraine. Most of the people who live there are Russian. Apply your same logic to Kosovo if you can. Who gave NATO the right to break up Serbia? There was some violence but it was heavily exaggerated in the Western media. After Maidan there was quite a lot of violence in Ukraine too. Dozens of anti-Maidan people were murdered in Kiev and Odessa and in the south and east. Actually let's go back further. If borders are set in stone regardless of the realities of the preferences of the people who live somewhere, who gave the USA the right to rip Texas from Mexico? Personally I've seen too many videos of Ukrainian soldiers in places like Lysychansk and Mariupol complaining about the locals who hate them. I've seen convincing evidence of atrocities by Azov in particular against the locals in places like that. If you care about the Serbian army's brutality against the Albanians of Kosovo, don't be a hypocrite and admit how the Ukrainians have behaved in the east is no different.
    2
  27.  @57thorns  The Crimea referendum wasn't perfect but Western observers agreed it was generally run ok. A few Tartars didn't get voting papers which isn't ideal but there's no doubt about the overall result. See also the polls run by Western polling companies before and after the referendum showing a heavy majority in favour of annexation by Russia. Ukrainian elections have also had serious fraud BTW.
    2
  28. It wasn't Russia that destroyed Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Serbia, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It was the biggest "bully" of all.
    2
  29.  @Jeroen_Maes  Ukraine has also used blocking detachments behind the line to shoot retreating soldiers.
    2
  30.  @TomTomicMic  US and Israel have attacked a lot more countries than that. Why aren't you upset by Israel's recent land grab in Syria?
    2
  31.  @marktrotter8971  In the Robotyne/Verbove area, not it really is hundreds of AFVs. Dozens is a massive understatement. There were around 50 destroyed in about three days alone. it's not called Bradley Square for nothing.
    2
  32.  @yohanannatanson4199  Yes, certainly, Allied airpower over Normandy was fundamental to the Rundstedt and Rommel debate. In Ukraine, I don't think air power is quite as important as most people do, even though the Russians have a huge advantage - because they can't use that advantage by safely flying sorties over Ukrainian lines.
    2
  33.  @wlhjr77  I'm curious. How can anyone still be claiming Russia has lost? Are you following the same war as me?
    2
  34. No, there will never be thick enough ice that far south.
    2
  35.  @marcoobin4571  Neutral projections are that the Russian economy will be growing nicely the next couple of years. An overheating economy is normal when you've got high economic growth. So is high employment and wage pressures. Jumping from the Russian economy is overheating to it's going to meltdown implies no understanding of economics.
    2
  36.  @marcoobin4571  Of course war is expensive but the idea the Russian economy can't sustain this for long just isn't plausible. In case you haven't noticed, Ukraine is in serious trouble.
    2
  37.  @LutherusPXCs  And if you believe a general's claims in war time about enemy casualties, you've never studied history. Everyone lies in war time, if you don't believe Gerasimov's claims about Ukrainian deaths, why would you believe Zaluzhny?
    2
  38.  @enpakeksi765  Theti Mapping, Defense Politics Asia, Weeb Union. Another good channel is Military Summary, pro-Russian bias but best for detailed twice daily updates/analysis of the fighting. Also see History Legends, not frequent updates calls out propaganda from both sides.
    2
  39. Back in the real world, Russia already got the Finnish border it wanted in 1944. The idea that it's going to risk a major war to attack Lapland where it has no strategic interest is beyond ridiculous. Probably Nielsen doesn't seriously believe this, it's just typical war hysteria to feed the NATO gravy train.
    2
  40.  @ABCBCNM  Yeah I understand the narrative but please, turn on your BS detector
    2
  41.  @ABCBCNM  I think I've been shadow banned. I answered that already and I can't see my answer.
    2
  42.  @aaronbaker2186  Not really, the parts of Ukraine which Russia has taken is mainly Russian speaking, settled by Russians and mainly pro-Russian. Look at how successfully Russia assimilated Crimea. And whereas Vietnam didn't matter to the Americans, Ukraine really does matter to the Russians.
    2
  43. Look at the big picture. Russia is not going to accept being pushed out of Crimea. It would use nuclear weapons if it had to. NATO leaders know that or the smarter ones do. Nobody except maybe Zelensky wants a nuclear war.
    2
  44.  @ForOurGood  The difference is Russia has more firepower, ammunition and an air force. What's the same is both sides use small squads to infiltrate.
    2
  45. LOL It's a CIA approved channel
    2
  46.  @untubus  The US hasn't annexed territory recently but it has invaded or otherwise regime changed literally dozens of countries in just a few decades. If you want an example of a sovereign country being ripped apart by the US look no further than Serbia: Kosovo was taken from Serbia by force and made a US satellite.
    2
  47. Yeah the stalemate narrative is ridiculous. Every day the war continues results in a worse outcome for Ukraine.
    2
  48. You're talking as if Russia can't retaliate.
    1
  49.  @LoneWolf-rc4go  Completely false that British soldiers at the Somme weren't fully trained. Also false that Russian soldiers now aren't fully trained. It's Ukrainian officers complaining about receiving guys who have barely fired a rifle.
    1
  50.  @apacheattackhelicopter8185  "paid Kremlin propagandist" - no I'm a patriotic Westerner who calls out BS from either side. Russia now is vastly richer than when Putin took over - look it up. Disintegrating - under Yeltsin the whole country was dysfunctional. Chechnya got close to breaking away. Dagestan would probably have followed. Putin sorted out the military and sorted out Chechnya. Now, Chechnya is solidly behind the Russian state for the most part. Like Gorbachev and Yeltsin, Putin was popular in the West to start with because Western leaders assumed he'd follow Yeltsin in allowing continued Russian decline and NATO expansion. He only fell out of favour when he stood up against both. Ukraine and particularly Crimea are crucial for Russia. He couldn't safely ignore the Maidan coup. Forward thinking Western politicians should have foreseen that. Instead people like Victoria Nuland encouraged a Ukraine hostile to Russia. Now we see the result. And it was foreseeable. People like Putin himself and John Mearsheimer predicted this would happen.
    1