Comments by "Rick74" (@rick7424) on "Covert Cabal" channel.

  1. ​ @StrangerHappened copypaste
    196
  2. Well their claims about avalibility and the numbers that were going to be produced were so far removed from reality it is hard not to take everything they say with a massive grain of salt.
    47
  3. ​ @Pope-enhiemer  F-22s actually exist.
    20
  4. It is not even the official successor.
    16
  5. The TOS-1A has a maximum range of 10 kilometers.
    15
  6. More inprecise artillery. Just what Russia lacked...
    15
  7. Yes, he has noted this in several videos.
    15
  8.  @hakunamatata1880  Lol. They aren't even the second strongest army in Ukraine.
    15
  9. Blatant strawman fallacy.
    13
  10. Not useful? Sustainment is not useful? I can't take this comment seriously.
    11
  11.  @rodrigorodriguez6332  The increased polarization in the US is a significant problem.
    11
  12. He does not assume that. He has explicitly stated that is not the case
    10
  13. ​ @External2737  That made no sense.
    9
  14. ​​ @wonkagaming8750  Lol. You have no evidence. In fact the losses of NATO supplied tank are litterly on the website.
    9
  15. See Perun.
    8
  16. They are losing more equipment than they are producing. Preparing for a war by starting one before you are ready sounds incredibly dumb.
    8
  17. The US was invited by the Kurds. It all depends who you see as legitimate.
    8
  18. Did it shoot down superman? I half expect your "sources" to claim such a feat.
    7
  19. As of the 30th of December, 2023 over 980 F-35s have been produced
    7
  20. Your numbers are wrong.
    7
  21. We know too much about the canabilization rate and poor storage conditions in Russia to think that
    7
  22. ​ @MrDael01 Not the Leopard 2a7 or the M1A2 SEP 3. Yet these artillery pieces have no really changed
    7
  23. You can tell the Russian bots are active based on the sheer amount posts that get 5-10 likes within ten minutes.
    7
  24. Wrong? He uses satellite images of storages. What evidence do you have this methodology produces false results?
    7
  25. Prove it
    6
  26. ​ @ToyaRobbins  there isn't.
    6
  27. Yet has produced no photographic evidence, except that time they showed a burned out lumber truck and a second storage building.
    6
  28. Yes, he has stated that something being pulled from storage does not equal a loss on several occasions. Your 7-1 claim lacks citation.
    6
  29. Not really a good thing, though it works wonders for military procurement.
    6
  30. ​ @trollek7823  Nonsense. This is a typical myth of rugged Soviet equipment.
    6
  31. ​ @Princip666  You cannot actually point at any inaccuracy so you just pretend everyone kniws they are bad. Bandwagon fallacy and burden of proof fallacy.
    6
  32.  @user-pd9ju5dk5s  Not for the US which is geographically isolated from the rest of the world, if you understand my point. The defence of the US mainland won't defend its trade or other interests.
    6
  33. Very true. There was alot more division in 2014, especially in Odessa. Now the war has rallied most Ukrainians. A common threat tends to do that.
    6
  34. ​ @yarnickgoovaerts  You do not pay taxes in a NATO country Dmitry.
    6
  35. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." Satellite images do not care about your political views.
    5
  36. Source: I made it up
    5
  37. I recall a certain leader of Germany claiming to have a thousand jets in underground bases in 1945, none of which existed
    5
  38. During the Gulf War the Coalition Army showed the quantity of Iraqi tanks did not mean much.
    5
  39. They had to pull 77% of their arsenal out of storage. 426 mlrs systems have been visually confirmed as destroyed. That rate sounds pretty unsustainable.
    4
  40. ​ @Howardlifts  You are failing to understand some pretty basic economics.
    4
  41. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." Oryx has all the pictures on file. I have seen them.
    4
  42. Whataboutism and inaccurate comparison at that
    4
  43. You have never heard of quantitative analysis?
    4
  44. You ignore the actual analysis. He never claimed Russia has no hardware. Your argument is invalid.
    4
  45. That is not how it works.
    4
  46. He never said that. Obvious strawman argument
    4
  47. Covert cabal never said that.
    4
  48. So the Gulf War and the SEAD capabilities displayed in every war since don't exist in your world?
    4
  49. Nonesense. He never claimed any such thing.
    4
  50. It's own strategy included losing 10,000 vehicles and 350,000+ men? Their strategy sucks.
    4