Comments by "PNH 6000" (@PNH-sf4jz) on "Is Ukraine running out of soldiers?" video.

  1. Presumably, you are referring to pro-Russian sources, such as the following which I believe to be far less credible than those used by P. A. Nielsen: You would probably recommend reading and listening to such illegitimate characters and sources as the Russians and pro-Russians that present the classic lies, "Russian vranyo", that are presented by so many of these shills and trolls for the Russian political and military establishment. Many present their ideas and disinformation in slickly presented videos and in comments under videos. All this can be referred to as the "Russian fire-hose of falsehood". People such as Solovyov, Skabeyeva, Mardan, Simonyan and others. Alex Jones may appeal to you, Richard Medhurst, Max Blumenthal, Garland Nixon, Matt Ehret, Tucker Carlson, Eva Bartlett, Scott Ritter, Patrick Lancaster, Gonzalo Lira, if he is still around, Douglas MacGregor, Aaron Mate, Sonja ven den Ende, and John Meersheimer, The Duran with Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris, The New Atlas with Brian Berletic, Redacted with Clayton and Natali Morris. Alex Jones, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone. Media sources may include TASS, RT {Russia Today}, the Hindustan Times, WION, the Timur Tribun ........ So, there is plenty of scope for finding the type of garbage that these people spew out and spread on behalf of the Russian establishment. Disinformation that will appeal to the pro-Russian scammers in their carefully nurtured little echo chambers. Thanks all the same, but I am aware of these so-called proponents and sources and I strongly believe that I am in the company of the right group of people. They sure ain't perfect, but neither am I. However, I believe that "we" are a heck of a sight better than the alternative Russian brand.
    3
  2. You can either believe or not believe a person according to whether the information correlates with other information that you access. It is not really necessary to know the person. How much do you know about other commenters who are native English speakers. Ben Hodges is a person whose presentations I like, both in terms of information and projected personality, However, I really do not know very much about his military or diplomatic history, and does it really matter in the whole scheme of things.
    3
  3.  @SophiesDriver  🇺🇦 👍 🇺🇦
    2
  4.  @limedickandrew6016  Not the point !!! The point is that more than 60 other countries, and the majority of their populations, are prepared to assist and support Ukraine against Russia's military aggression. Putin and the Russian political and military establishment were quite prepared to take advantage of the fact that Ukraine had been militarily emasculated. That neutering of Ukraine was a consequence of agreements (1991), memoranda (1994) and treaties (1997) to which the Russian Federation was a party and Putin was personally a signatory. As a result of the provisions and outcomes of these agreements, it is reasonable to believe that Russia had reason to believe that Ukraine would be an easy 3 to 10 day conquest. By condition of those agreements, Russia had assured Ukraine that Russian would not wage WAR on Ukraine but would, instead, provide Ukraine with protection and assistance if Ukraine were attacked by any other country. The UK and the US gave the same assurances, with Russia, to Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Russia was a recipient of much of Ukraine's military assets, including the Tu-95 heavy bombers, among many other weapons that had been transferred to Russia, that have since been used by Russia in attacks against Ukraine. While you #limedickandrew6016 attempt to put the moral sanction against Ukraine, it is the Russians that have earned themselves the moral, legal and economic sanctions that have been placed against them. Indeed, I most sincerely hope, as #volpeart2963 has said, that "Russia will not be able to bear the costs of the war economically, unlike Ukraine, which is {justifiably} supported by other countries. Slava Ukraïni!" 🇺🇦 Victory for Ukraine, Absolute Victory 🇺🇦
    2
  5.  @limedickandrew6016  Because Ukraine was militarily emasculated and neutered by agreements involving transfer of most of Ukraine's military assets, including all of the Tu-95 heavy bombers, during the period Independence {1991}, Budapest Memorandum {1994} and Russia-Ukraine Friendship Treaty {1997}. Most of those weapons have since been used against Ukraine. Russia was a party to those agreements and recipient of the military assets that Ukraine had relinquished. Putin was a signatory to the agreements. Ukraine would reasonably have believed, as a result of assurancees for protection by Russia, the US and the UK, in the event of military attack by any other country that Russia, the UK and the US would abide by their assurances of protection in the event of any oither country attacking Ukraine. Ukraine would hardly have thought that one of the countries providing those assurances would be the country to attack them, which Russia did.
    1
  6. Absolutely agreed and supported. Good to see that you and others are aware that taking ground is not always, and at all times, the best approach and tactic. "Since the summer, volunteer units have experienced the highest number of casualties, contrasting with the figures from February and spring. In the war’s initial weeks, the Airborne forces faced the heaviest losses, followed by the Motorised rifle forces. A significant portion of those killed in action without a designated branch were volunteer fighters." "By the end of 2022 and into the start of this year, the death toll among prisoners recruited by the Wagner PMC surged. These individuals were organised into “assault groups” targeting Ukrainian positions near Bakhmut. In March 2023, inmates constituted the most substantial portion of our war casualty data." "We are aware of 181 military pilots who have lost their lives. Such losses are particularly devastating for the military: it takes approximately 7–8 years to train one top-tier frontline pilot, and costs around $3.4 million. Every pilot’s death often means the loss of expensive equipment." "As of August 11, we’ve been able to verify deaths of over 2,400 officers, with 295 holding the rank of Lieutenant Colonel or above."
    1
  7. Based on what evidence and sources of information?
    1
  8.  @limedickandrew6016  Yours is a typical Russian based Perspective that correlates with other comments that you have made.
    1
  9. #rickster4k Absolutely agreed and supported. Your statement is totally consistent with my own thoughts, including the rider ".... it's clear what you are saying ...." and, I have no doubt, the thoughts and beliefs of milions of other people.
    1
  10.  @limedickandrew6016  No !!!
    1
  11. I wrote up some figures regarding the relative strengths of Ukraine and Russia 44 million total population of Ukraine 67% of population are 15-64 years of age = 29.48 million men and women 46.3% M/F 53.7% = 13.65 million men 144 million total population of Russia. 67% of population are 15-64 years of age = 96.48 million men and women 46.5% M/F 53.5% = 44.8 million men Another way of calculating Ukrainian fighting men available is based on remaining population in Ukraine (the statistics being somewhat variable by virtue of movements to and from regions) Ukraine population as at 8 Mar 2023 = 36.3 million after subtracting refugees to other countries 67% of population are 15-64 years of age = 24.32 {possibly higher %age} 46.3% M/F 53.7% = 11.19 {will be higher %age} Adjustment for refugees to men remaining = 13.56 million men {44/36.3} A reasonable estimate of able bodied Ukrainians to able bodied Russians would be approximately 15 million Ukrainians to 45 million Russians. While the same figures are not likely to be maintained across all front lines and in all scenarios, the relative losses in the Bakhmut front are reported to be 7 Russian military personnel KIA to each Ukrainian member KIA. Even if the ratios balance out between 7:1 and 3:1, the total losses are going to be 45 million Russians to 15 million Ukrainians. Let's hope that the Russians decide that enough is enough, long before those figures are reached.
    1
  12. #frankvelez691 Is a person who cannot face realities of WAR waged by Russia in Ukraine and accuses others of being a "Fear monger".
    1
  13. Journalists from the BBC and Mediazona have identified the names of 29,217 Russian military members killed in Ukraine since February 2022. At least 870 of them died after the Ukrainian counteroffensive began in the spring of 2023. The researchers said that the real number of dead could be at least twice as high. The ORYX website states, "This list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. Therefore, the amount of equipment destroyed is significantly higher than recorded here." "Mediazona, in collaboration with BBC News Russian service and a team of volunteers, continues gathering information on the Russian military casualties in Ukraine. The figures we provide are derived from publicly accessible sources, such as social media posts by relatives, local media reports, and statements by local authorities. Therefore, they do not capture the complete death toll." "The actual number is likely much higher. A joint data investigation by Mediazona and Meduza estimated that by the end of May, the conflict in Ukraine had resulted in the deaths of 47,000 Russians below the age of 50." Because the figures provided by ORYX and Mediazona are those confirmed and verified by "photo or videographic" {ORIX} and "publicly accessible sources {Mediazona}, they are the least possible number of casualties and are therefore considered the lowbar. Ukrainian reports of Russian casualties are derived from figures provided troops on the ground as estimates {they are not confirmed by independent sources} and may vary in reliability and therefore be considered the Highbar. Mediazona: "At least 31,665 confirmed military deaths from 24 Feb 2022 to 7 Sept 2023 The timeline shows the number of confirmed casualties within a given time frame. This number is not equal to the number of casualties per day: if the report does not mention the date, we use the date of its publication, that is, the earliest date we know when the person was confirmed to have {died}"
    1
  14. To me your comment seems cynical and perspective unjustifiable. I can only assume that because you use the word "orgy" in your comment, that you must be intimately familiar with orgies.
    1