Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "The Cold War" channel.

2:26 T-14 Armata is a meme. It's basically a prototype with only 20 built and still working it out. They HAVE sent their best. Honestly Perun has covered this very well and basically just blew up from like 3 videos that initially covered it.
4
@sjewitt22 You wouldn't be at fault by the naming convention, but no it is Kings and Generals
2
You can be a hard-core believer in it (which looking at history you probably have to be if you're honest) and still be balanced with the presentation of information.
2
I'll be honest I kind of called this invasion. 2:02 kind of nailed it on the head with building the Russian empire back together. However, the question is why. Specifically it has to do with borders as currently the Russian borders are completely indefensible. Kazakhstan is a very important one but he has that as a puppet government as well as Belarus. They're safe in real terms. However, Ukraine went toward the west and at the same time stood up to Russia. The west also wasn't having any of the Saber rattling. Strong-arming Ukraine for a year didn't work and the government is now pro-western. From here, the final option was invasion. With that the gap on the north European plain is much smaller being only with Poland and then Ukraine (and likely Moldova) will be pushing up against the Carpathians. From here eastern Europe is defensible and it gets all of the resources of Ukraine. Honestly however, either the Russian empire exists or Russia is an exposed rump state at the edge of Eastern Europe since their economy and population is not in a place to sustain their place as a country or civilization when the central Asian peoples can just out-populate them East of the Russian heartland and then China can take Siberia even farther east. So it's either this empire exists which contains China and either integrates or suppresses the central Asian peoples (either by out-populating them or keeping them oppressed) or they don't really exist at all.
1
@dheosilalahi7241 The biggest thing Trotsky did was say he wouldn't do the same thing Stalin did... IN THAT WAY which means they really didn't disagree. Trotsky was just a threat to power by legitimacy but not by policy.
1
@kimobrien. Explain what you mean by Spanish revolution and if it had succeeded. I'm also curious to what you're trying to refer to regarding Trotsky's Criticisms and what you mean by Cuba lacking a bloody Stalinist counter-revolution (especially given the amount of people Cuba ended up killing).
1
@kimobrien. What were his overall criticisms? And was it really a favor or was it a move of necessity to keep the war effort intact as many concessions took place on both sides to keep it up. You also didn't actually answer my questions on Cuba.
1
@kimobrien. Thank you for answering my questions and my only reply is on the Marxist's historian's perspective which seems just so flawed and narrow and seems like a very poor way of understanding the world. Also the leadership being determinate seems to mirror greatly the "Great Men" version of history.
1