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

  1.  @simonbucci1041  Actual scholars - as if you actually read any. Take John Mearsheimer for instance - he saw this coming and warned against it almost twenty years ago.
    1
  2.  @apacheattackhelicopter8185  The Crimean population is mainly Russia and overwhelmingly wants to be part of Russia. We don't have to take the referendum result at face value, we can look to opinion polls run by professional Western organisations before and after the Russian annexation. That logic was good enough for Kosovo. Yeltsin at the time warned the West that detaching Kosovo from Serbia set a dangerous precedent. So what did Russia do in Crimea that NATO did not do in Kosovo? As for corruption in Russia. It's not my job to defend Putin. Nevertheless, corruption in Russia is less under Putin than it was in the Yeltsin days. Ukraine is probably worse - at least it is worse according to some surveys. But Russian corruption is not really our business. I'm personally more concerned about growing corruption, censorship and authoritarianism in the West. One thing I do find amusing is that questioning the blatantly inaccurate and hypocritical Western media narrative on Ukraine gets me called a Russian bot/troll etc. Just shows how tight the grip of censorship is getting on the narrative about this war.
    1
  3.  @apacheattackhelicopter8185  What difference does it make whether Kosovo is independent or joined Albania? The point is NATO broke up a sovereign country in Europe. What Russia did is no different. They just followed where NATO led the way. Check out the poll results for yourself. I can look up references if you want help. You should read Ukraine in the Crossfire by Chris Kasper de Ploeg for a more balanced understanding of Crimea and Russian-Ukrainian relations. When you've done that try Ukraine and Russia by Paul D'Anieri - certainly not pro-Russian but at least shows both perspectives. So far you're just repeating all the same double standards arguments that you'd consider contemptible if Russia used them against the West.
    1
  4. It's NATO propaganda. This guy is literally a serving NATO officer
    1
  5.  @velvetmagnetta3074  The problem is, you think Russians are incompetent and Ukrainians are creative and resourceful because you watch pro-Ukraine channels in a medium controlled by American/NATO censorship (Youtube). The reality is, it's easy to cherry pick examples of incidents to make whatever narrative you want and that goes for each side. Yes of course there are examples of Russian incompetence, uncaring commanders etc. but there are 100% the same examples from the Ukrainian side. And whereas Russia is generally improving, things in Ukraine are generally deteriorating now. Really quickly. Just remember this guy is a serving NATO officer. It's his job to build this narrative. There are good neutral sources too but if you watched them, you wouldn't have the same assumptions you do have.
    1
  6. Yeah I know the narrative, only problem is that it's based on the very worst examples cherry picked to create a Russia is useless story. It's not typical.
    1
  7. 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.
    1
  8.  @martin-cheers  Yes that's the story but what's in it for Russia? Even without the USA, France and Britain have nuclear weapons. What is the advantage to Russia of a new war? What you have to understand is the reactive nature of Putin's actions so far. Imagine the best possible outcome for Russia. It shatters article 5 and reoccupies the Lithuania to create a corridor to Kaliningrad. So what? It takes over a whole lot of territory with no resources where the people hate Russians. The Russians already did that in 1945. It was just a big economic drain on resources. The main thing Russia cares about is pushing American nuclear weapons away from Russian borders. Why? for security. Fighting a war against any NATO country is not something Russia is ever going to do to INCREASE its security because anyone can see it results in a DECREASE in security
    1
  9. Who do you think just seized a big chunk of Syria and has murdered tens of thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza? Which superpower has attacked around thirty countries over the past thirty years? Who do you think the bully is?
    1
  10.  @markotrieste  Not at all, why are you holding Russia to a blatantly higher standard than the world's biggest aggressor of the past forty years, the USA?
    1
  11. The recent anchor dragging looks pretty deliberate. Although compared to the US destroying Nordstream it's totally trivial.
    1
  12. The difference is, in 1944, the Allies had an overwhelming material and manpower advantage, the only German advantage was the difficulty of attacking a fortified coast. In Ukraine, the Russians have the material advantage and manpower is pretty similar. It's hard for the Russians to crush the bridgehead but it's also hard for Ukraine to break out of it. The Russians have nothing to worry about. The Ukrainians have Avdivka to worry about.
    1
  13. The Russians seized a fifth of a huge country in about a week. The narrative of Russian incompetence was a lie from the start. Almost everything in the media about this war has been lies from why it started to how it's fought to the nature of the current Ukrainian regime to who blew up Nordstream to who was attacking Energodar power station, to the silence about Ukraine attacking Donetsk city centre with butterfly mines and artillery to who blew up the Novakharkovka dam. The more dangerous narratives are about Russians intending to continue on to Warsaw and Berlin.
    1
  14.  @The_Stef  Not just too optimistic but outright propaganda merchants. Times Radio's coverage was unfiltered Ukrainian government disinformation. The Telegraph wasn't much better. Sometimes these guys were transparently lying.
    1
  15. The west has already tried escalating over and over, at some point Russia responds and then we have a real crisis, the potential for nuclear war. That would be a disaster for everyone. What is there in Ukraine you want to risk your country's future for?
    1
  16. @SnorriTheLlama LOL Chechnya already fought two wars against Russia and realised it's easy to just fight Ukraine.
    1
  17.  @louiscypher4186  A better analogy is the Scottish Highlands after the 1746 war a generation later, the former enemies of the British state were their elite shock troops. The Chechens fighting for Ukraine are exiles who have left.
    1
  18.  @wlhjr77  LOL ok when the fighting stops, see who is dictating peace to whom and who controls the Donbas.
    1
  19. ​ @marktrotter8971  You guys are deranged. Russian controls more territory now than at the start of the Ukrainian summer offensive. Russia's advancing over most of the front. Putin's popularity is higher than when the war started. The economy is growing, the predictions of collapse were bollocks. Which ever side you support there's no excuse for ignoring reality. You've been lied to over and over and you never learn.
    1
  20.  @wlhjr77  The claim that Russia wanted to annex all of Ukraine is wrong. There's no evidence for it. And it would be a nightmare for Russia to annex the West of Ukraine where the locals hate Russians. All they wanted at the start of the war was an agreement by Ukraine to uphold the Minsk accords and stay out of NATO. We know that for a fact because senior people from both sides have acknowledged the agreement.
    1
  21. Yeah that's why it will be impossible to break out of the bridgehead.
    1
  22.  @tuehojbjerg969  Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Russian casualties are higher than Ukrainian let alone four times higher? Ukraine admits Russia has the ammunition, armour artillery and air power advantages, it must take some impressive mental gymnastics to believe Russian losses are higher. As for four times higher, how do you do it? Psychedelic drugs?
    1
  23.  @The_ZeroLine  You seriously believe that Russian losses were ever 10-12 x higher? Where are all the dead Russians? Mediazone can barely find 40,000 from teh whole war.
    1
  24. Ask Biden the same question, the USA pays more for their military than the next highest paying ten countries combined.
    1
  25. Where's the evidence Russia blew it up and not Ukraine? Is this another story like Russia shelled their own city, attacked their own Kremlin, shelled the nuclear power station they control and blew up their own multi-billion dollar pipeline?
    1
  26. "Ukrainian offensive actions" where are you getting your news? Russia is advancing faster now that at any time after the first month of the war.
    1
  27. Ukraine can't get equipment like HIMARS across the river.
    1
  28.  @DIREWOLFx75  I mainly agree but claiming 20 to 1 manpower loss ratio is about as realistic as the NAFO guys talking about resuming the counter offensive next year. Those kind of numbers lose credibility for your overall argument.
    1
  29.  @stream2watch  If Russia has a stockpile of missiles from decades ago and is now fighting a major war, it would be strange not to use the old missiles. It doesn't prove they are running out of more modern alternatives.
    1
  30.  @tomk3732  Do we know for sure that one dropped on that mall? Or did the mall catch fire when the huge armaments repair factory next door was hit? Video footage appears to show bricks thrown from the explosion are from the armaments factory rather than the mall. If the mall contained a thousand people as Zelensky claims and was in fact hit by this missile, why are casualties so low? The official Ukrainian story seems suspect.
    1
  31. Lithuanian wanted to do that earlier, Russia reminded the world that by treaty Lithuania's independence is conditional on Russian access through the Suwalki gap. Lithuania backed down pretty quickly. And that was a couple of years back when Russia was struggling. Say Lithuanian seriously decided to do that. And the Russians land a thousand missiles on every military base in Lithuania. What's any other country going to do? Do you seriously think the USA or Britain or France or Germany wants to risk a nuclear war to protect a country like Lithuania when they provoked the attack on themselves? If you seriously believe that why aren't they fighting in Ukraine right now?
    1
  32.  @marcoobin4571  "burning reserves to generate wasteful economic war output" is exactly what the USA has been doing for decades now. It hasn't collapsed yet but yes, the US economy will collapse. It's deficit is out of control, debt is out of control. British debt to GDP just passed 100%. Europe is in recession and across he West, a lot of national leaders have the exact opposite of Putin's close to 80% approval rating. It takes a lot of wishful thinking to believe Russia will collapse before Ukraine does. BTW Vuhledar is falling right now after two years of fighting.
    1
  33.  @marcoobin4571  Wars aren't won by wishful thinking and propaganda. The Ukrainians are getting pushed back all along the front and are running out of men gullible enough to fight for Zelensky.
    1
  34. Ukraine isn't capable of beating Russia. The effort of trying is destroying Ukraine. If you don't believe me wait a few more months and see what Ukraine has achieved through another year of fighting and tens of thousands more dead.
    1
  35.  @monkeyboy9555  Sure. Russia would quite like that excuse to take back Lithuania. Remember that Lithuania's independence is conditional upon Russian transit access through the Suwalki gap. Deny that and 500 missiles hit every military base in Lithuania the next day. What's Germany, Britain and the USA going to do? Risk a nuclear war for the sake of Lithuania's suicidal idiocy?
    1
  36. It's not a fact and it's not true. Mediazona is the only reliable source for Russian casualties.
    1
  37. Flat, soft sand several km wide with no buildings, no forest to then attack prepared positions in the face of artillery and Lancet drones.
    1
  38.  @Panj0  Full employment is normal in a country fighting a major war.
    1
  39.  @toddinde  Russian losses are tiny compared to the overall size of the Russian population. The Russian economy is not collapsing and the war is not unpopular in Russia. The Western media is full of wishful thinking.
    1
  40.  @mariaf.6601  Stick to the facts. Russia is fighting a major war against one of the most powerful militaries in the world backed by NATO with auxiliary forces and volunteers. If you think Russia's economy is going to "collapse" then you should provide some evidence. Do you remember how in the first few days of the war we were told the rouble would collapse? How Russia was running out of tanks? How Russia only had enough missiles for a few days? etc. etc.
    1
  41.  @mariaf.6601  17% inflation is not much higher than many Western countries right now. Energy inflation in Europe in particular is crippling. Russia has ample food and energy. High inflation of luxury goods in Russia like smart phones is less important than high inflation of gas an electricity in Germany where already the government is looking at energy rationing to industry. If you don't believe me you should take all your money and invest in German heavy industry right now while equities are cheap. The old T62s are being used to give extra fire support to the auxiliary forces on the Russian side particularly the DPR/LPR forces. In this role, the deficiencies of the older tanks are unlikely to be important ie. they're unlikely to be fighting more modern tanks directly. If your enemy is infantry and lightly armoured APCs without air support, any MBT even an old one is adequate. If the regular Russian forces start using these T62s then your argument that Russia is running out of tanks would become persuasive. Until that happens it's more like Western armies giving Ukraine their stockpiles of ex-Soviet equipment and obsolete Javelins. It doesn't mean that Western armies don't have more modern technologies - obviously they do.
    1
  42.  @mariaf.6601  Here are some facts. Russia is running a budgetary surplus despite fighting a major war. No major Western economy is running a budgetary surplus in fact the USA has not has a surplus since 2001. Yet you believe it is the Russian economy which is collapsing. If you want to talk about high inflation, NATO member Turkey currently has inflation over 70%.
    1
  43.  @mariaf.6601  I wouldn't say there are no problems with the Russian economy, that would be exaggerating but I have provided you with much evidence that your own position is heavily overstated. You haven't even engaged with that evidence. We have debated long enough that it's clear to me that you are obviously someone who bends evidence into your predefined ideas rather than someone who updates your understanding according to new evidence. You're welcome to your wishful thinking.
    1
  44.  @mariaf.6601  What do you want? Your only evidence that the Russian economy is collapsing is high inflation there - about twice as high as inflation in the USA and much lower than in some NATO countries. Meanwhile much of Europe is making preparations for energy rationing. You object that the Russian surplus is "tiny" - totally missing the point that it's fighting a major war with a budget surplus at all! You don't seem to have serious arguments, you're arguing with me because I'm pointing out evidence that the wishful thinking narrative is wrong. I'm not learning anything from a discussion with you.
    1
  45.  @Elbuarto  Zelensky himself told the population that the Russians were going to invade just before ... the Russians invaded :) Ukraine certainly isn't about to fold but likewise, I'd say anyone who predicts Russia is going to lose has zero credibility. There's just no evidence whatsoever that Russia is even struggling much less losing.
    1
  46.  @Eder-bk5mm  You really need to look at how the First World War started. It was basically a game of chicken. Neither side wanted a general war but both sides took risks to get advantages i.e both sides escalated. And neither side backed down. The result is a devastating war which neither side wanted. The theory that Russia will always back down from red lines is stupid because this war only started by NATO crossing a red line for Russia. Russia explained over and over that Ukraine joining NATO was unacceptable, the Americans knew this (see wikileaks cable from Burns to Whitehouse) and the Americans were pushing Ukraine towards NATO anyway. Did the Russians back down? No. They went into Ukraine. If NATO keeps escalating in Ukraine, either Russia backs down which only an idiot believes will happen - or there's a hot war between NATO and Russia - which will probably turn nuclear. Further escalation is hugely dangerous. The smart thing to do for both sides is negotiate, let Russia pocket a win and whatever is left of Ukraine keeps out of NATO. The alternative is either world war killing billions or an eventual Ukrainian collapse which NATO can't do much about. Take your pick.
    1
  47.  @hedgehog3180  Russians captured dozens of military vehicles in Lysychansk. There are plenty of videos online. Likewise of Ukrainian infantry escaping on foot because the only road out was under fire control. According to your logic an advance which isn't rapid is embarrassing. What would you recommend the Russian generals do? A massed tank attack across minefields into towns where a poorly trained territorial can fire a cheap anti-tank missile? That's just stupid. Rommel fought much of WWII in an open desert where there were no forests and few towns and in the days when infantry anti-tank weapons were only dangerous at short range and from flanks.
    1
  48.  @ABCBCNM  These guys keep trying to pretend Russia is going to stomp all over Europe. Why would Russia want to? There are specific reasons Russia went into Ukraine which don't apply to Lapland or Warsaw or even Riga.
    1
  49.  @aaronbaker2186  Out of two and a half million population there are a couple of sabotage operations. Which have apparently now been shut down. So it's hardly a popular insurgency.
    1
  50. LOL yeah like when Russia attacked Serbia on the basis of lies and a few years later attacked Iraq... and then Libya and then Syria and funds the mass murder of innocent civilians in Gaza ... oh wait
    1