Comments by "Nattygsbord" (@nattygsbord) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1.  @uralcrusader5621 Then why are Ukraine now given training on fighter jets? Why was it recently trumpeted out that they will get Mirage jets from France? And Gripens and ATACMS as usual do you kremlin bots just spam out claims that you cannot back up with anything substantial.
    3
  2. I look forward to join the UK friendship club and quit this EU nonsense :)
    3
  3. Not a single German solidier will be able to land his feet on British soil, since the US navy is stronger than all navies in the world combined - the US navy got more aircrafts than most all other navies combined. And only 1 aircraft carrier have more planes than most countrys airforces. And EUs economy will self-destruct. Simply because the ECB is wrongly designed and cannot print money like the Federal reserve - which will result in deflationary crashes. Furthermore is the EU banking system a ticking time bomb with its huge banks and reckless risktaking, non-existant regulation and non-transparancy. And retarded rules like the convergence pact, the ban on capital controls, the 4 freedoms have made the EU economy unflexible, vulnerable to economic crashes, and it harms economic growth. USA doesn't have any of those problems. The banking sector is however problematic, but US banks are much smaller, less risk taking and more regulated so the damages of an economic crash would be less severe to society. EU on the other hand have no upsides at all compared to USA. EU doesn't have any oil, while USA is one of the largest oil producers. EUs economy have an ageing population, while USA is younger and the population in the anglosphere is larger so that the market of the English speaking world will be more important in the future than the EU. USA is also self-substaining with fertilizer for its agriculture and it can get the phosphorus it needs from Florida. While none of the EU countries have anything of that, so that the EU needs to lick the ass of dictators (like Morocco) to get the resources it needs. America also have more Fortune 500 companies than Europe. And those huge companies are key for technological leadership in the world. And EU have nothing like DARPA, NASA, Silicon Valley, or Seattle.
    3
  4. I think that the south will be better terrain for Russia since there are a railroad there and less muddy terrain - which will benefit tank warfare. However. Tanks are worthless without supplies. And with Rangers and special forces behind enemy lines attacking supply trucks will all Russian tank offensives get destroyed. The mud will last for some time - which is not good for the attacking Russians. And to make matters worse will spring mean more green forests and bushes for Rangers to hide in and more positions are available for making ambushes, and it will become easier to get closer to the Russian forces without being discovered. And replacement tanks will also have lower quality than the lost Russian tanks. And the Ukrainians have probably now gotten more experienced with their anti-tank weapons and could now employ them more deadly and with less losses for themselves. And against outdated Russian armor will their effect be devestating. However Ukraines forces have not had a rest for a while - maybe they will in the coming two, three weeks. But if the war lasts longer they will become a bit exhausted. That might be true for Russia as well. But Russia got large manpower reserves in their conscripts, mercenaries and Belarussians.
    3
  5.  @Din0za  "You may believe that WW2 was won by a mass assault and extreme casualties from Soviet Union, but that's just fake news." Maybe according to the science fiction books you read in Russia. Other people read books based on collected hard data such as "The battle at Kursk in 1943" by Zetterling, where on can read how increadibly incompetent the Red army and suffering from gigantic losses for themselves while inflicting minimal losses to the Germans. So yes the red army was worthless. The Red army also humiliated themselves against the finns as well.
    3
  6.  @Din0za  "Do not confuse incompetence of the commanding officers with the skills of the soldiers actually following orders." The Russian soldiers are unskilled as you see from this video from the war in Ukraine https://youtu.be/4Lpf_KsFYg8 Russian troops lacks the ability to take own iniativies. It lacks dicipline - as the mass rapes in Germany in 1945 shows. And Russian soldiers are also generally lacking motivation to fight - and data shows that Soviet WW2 soldiers were the ones most likely to surrender compared to German, British and American troops
    3
  7.  @Mexicanj0ker2  "try fighting over 6 million German troops then talk, the US and UK encountered bare minimum of the Wehrmacht in France, Italy and Africa, 96% of German casualties came from the Eastern front. Talk when you don't have only 7-10 German garrisons stationed in France when Russia destroyed over 230-300 German divisions." We all know that Russia only won the war because of help from USA - just the same way as Russia is losing the war in Ukraine because of the help USA have sent 😂😝 According to Russian propaganda it is impossible to win when you get backing from USA. The loss in Ukraine got nothing to do with Russian incompetence and skillful defence of Ukrainians or anything 🤣😂🤣
    3
  8. Do you think 450 million would fight? If the EU goes to war, then I rather side with UK despite I am not a British.I would refuse to serve in the military, and if the EU wants to force me into consciption then I will start killing EU troops.
    3
  9.  @szpoti "We are talking here about the potential of both sides. You understand it's as hypothetical as it can get, right?" You said that Scotland are not loyal to the UK. And then I said that it is atleast equally true that much of the people in Europe are not loyal to the EU. 40% of the Germans wants British style referendum. Most Italians wanna leave too. Leave is also strong in Greece and Spain. And even in EU-positive countries are EU skepticism very high, but it takes other forms.... A strong majority of Poles do not wanna leave the EU, but it is also true that there is big portion of the population that thinks that EU have grabbed too much powers for itself, and that it therefore needs to get some of its powers rolled back. It should give some of its powers back to national parliaments. So even if most poles don't hate the EU as much as me, I think they still would not be very happy with the EU if it starts another war. People would be tired of the war already from the start. And I think this feeling would be a bigger problem for EU than for Britain. After all do I think that most Scots would remain loyal to the UK - like they were during their vote about independence for Scotland. And many Europhiles in Britain does not love the EU so much that they would betray their country or forgive every bad thing the EU does. "Also, I'm not fully following your reasoning - you don't want to get conscripted to avoid fighting, but you would join guerrilla to fight?" I don't wanna be forced into fighting for a cause I don't believe in. And if the EU gonna tell me that "either you are with us, or against us". Then I will be forced to pick side, and then I would join EUs enemies.
    3
  10.  @cfnmedia  Tell us mr History expert how the EU have created peace. Because it seems like you are just full of shit and make baseless claims and attribute peace and lovely things to the EU without providing any proofs what so ever for your claims.
    3
  11.  @ivanlaplante  He didn't day the Russian people needs to be eradicated. He just said that Russia needs to be eradicated. This artificial institutional construct. And I agree with him, the Russian state has been a plague on humanity the last 350 years or so.
    3
  12. russian projection as usual accuse others for what you are doing yourself - the only side that is forcing ukrainians to fight are the russians, that force ukrainians living in donetsk and luhansk to fight for the russian army or getting tortured and killed if they refuse.
    3
  13. USA signed the Budapest agreement with Ukraine where it promised to defend Ukraine if one country attacked it. So USA needs to fulfill its promise.
    3
  14. Rusbot, sorry to have to break it for you but your sh*thole country is losing your evil unjustified war. It is what you deserve. You are losing terrain, and you are losing equipment each day. Your kill/loss ratio have been terrible throughout this entire war despite enormous initial superiority in heavy equipment and artillery shells. But I guess the eternal russian never denies himself - he will always suck at war and lose 10 times more men and equipment than his enemy. It is megalomania to think you can take on Europe, North America, Australia, Japan and South Korea all on your own and expect to win. Your threats have not worked as Ukraine gets all kinds of weapons now. Your professional army has been wiped out and all you got left are civilians with no military training that use rifles from the late 1800s. At one point will russia run out of their last heavy equipment - and once that happens russias already catastroply high losses will spike upwards astronomically. I look forward to that day. Once Putin have totally gotten rid of all russian males will the evil empire in the east be unable to threaten the world again =)
    3
  15. Helicopters are 10 times costlier than a drone and you will also lose an experienced pilot as it is shot down. A drone is a bit more stealthy. And it is probably also less vulnerable to ground fire, as just one single rifle bullet hitting the hydralic system can easily bring down even the largest helicopter.
    3
  16. Why are so many russians astroturfing and pretending to be americans that are upset about this war costing money? Maybe I should pretend to be a russian and complain that I do not wanna pay for Putins war?
    3
  17. If you don't get a Brexit there is no point in having any military. There would nothing left to defend. You country would already be occupied by a foreign power.
    3
  18.  @mikaelpetersen3331 Nonsense. Putin and with that russia did recognize Ukraines 1991 borders in 2003. But that like all other promises russia makes is worth nothing. And it is ironic that you use the historical lands argument against ukraine when it is the silly russians that use it against ukraine as an excuse to take this land. But this is not russian land, it is just occupied territory since a 2014 when this war started. And no this area is not mainly inhabited by russians, it have a russian speaking majority but that is not the same thing. That would be like saying England is inhabited by Americans. Ask Zelensky who grew up in a russian speaking home if he considers himself as a russian - I bet his answer will be "hell no". Furthermore did the majority of people in Crimea vote if favor of becoming independent from russia in 1991 - which I doubt they would vote in favor of if they felt that were russians. But it is good to know that you support the idea of giving back historical lands like Karelia to Finland, Königsberg to Germany, Siberia to China, Kuril Islands to Japan, eastern russia to Mongolia, and western russia to Sweden. One can ethnically cleans those areas and make a fake referendum - just like russia done with lands they have stolen from Georgia and Ukraine. Putinists are okay when that happens to other countries, so they have no right to complain if that would happen to russia.
    3
  19.  @mikaelpetersen3331  Sweden have owned Finland for 800 years. There are a large Swedish speaking minority there. Finland have only existed since 1917, but that does not make it a fake country. Because finnish speaking people have existed for thousands of years. Just like Ukraine is a young country, but its people have existed for a thousand of years. And just because we used to own Finland does not give us the right to take over that land by force, if they should be a part of sweden again it must be done with the support from the people who live in Finland. Just like Russia cannot just grab Crimea which voted to leave russia and join Ukraine in 1991. Russia claims so much bullcrap. They claim to be the protector of the russian speaking minority in Ukraine. But most russian speakers do not want their help. They don't want their cities destroyed by the russian army and see their neighbours murdered by russian troops. Russian speaking cities in Ukraine such as Charkiv, Odessa, Dnipro, Zaporizjzja and Mariupol are not grateful for russia invading their country - on the contrary are they filled with hatred towards russia for murdering so many of their countrymen, and all the torture, rapes, looting, kidnappings of children and destruction. Russia fired rocket artillery on Mariupol and 200.000 civilians died as a result. That is how russia treats a russian speaking city. So I can totally understand that nobody wants anything to do with russia. Crimea will be retaken, and ukrianians who had fled can return back. And the russians living on stolen land better just return home to where they came from. Putins home on Crimea will of course be stolen, and it will be interesting to see what happens to it. If it becomes a shelter for homeless ukrainians or something else.
    3
  20. Everything in this special military operation is going according to plan
    3
  21. 50 CV90 are given by Sweden to Ukraine. 40 Marders from Germany. And 109 M2 Bradleys from USA.
    3
  22. In the first half year of Russias invasion did France with its 70 million people send half as much military aid to Ukraine than Estonia with 1 million people. This is how much France cares about Europes common security and solidarity with Eastern Europe who for years have felt threatened. Macron seems more concerned about not humiliating Putin than what he is concerned with Russia starting one war of aggression after another, Russias bombings of kindergartens and 800 hospitals, or how russia have kindpapped and stolen 200.000 children from their parents, how they have destroyed cities like Mariupol and Bakhmut. How russia have made hitlists on people they planned to kill in order to get rid of Ukraines intelligentia and russify the country. France have no problem with massacres like Bucha and Irpin or the deliberate murder of 600 children in a bomb shelter... or the plunder and destruction of museums, or the theft of 600 airliners from western countries russia have done, or the fact that russia have built torture centrals - including torture cells for children, and they have regulary ignored the geneva convention... France is okay with all that. This is the kind of friend France is. Its siding more with Russia than with western countries like Poland, Estonia or Sweden. So to hell with all pro-russian french politicians. And since all major names in French politics is pro-russian, I guess I have to say to hell with France. Where is the freedom, brotherhood and equality in Putins russia that you love so much? Where is the brotherhood to help Ukraine? Why shouldnt Ukrainians be free and not having to live under russian opression? Who have decided that russia have the right to play the masterrace and rule over all countries in Eastern Europe? Why should the consent of Ukrainians, Georgians, Poles, Balts and such be ignored? France should feel ashamed of itself for its russophile stance. And there is a long list of French companies that needs to be boycotted for helping Putin pay for his war and murder of civilians.
    3
  23. "Germany, the UK, and France do nothing and pass the buck to the US" Both France and Germany have been ramping up its weapon shipments to Ukraine lately and their shipments is quite huge. "I have no desire for a war with Russia over a non-NATO country" Ukraine was invaded and it have the right to defend itself according to the UN charter and international law. NATO is not at war. It is only assisting Ukraine. Russia have over and over again started imperialist wars with its neighbours only the last 20 years, so it is good that EU finally say that enough is enough. East European countries have complained in the past when Russia invaded Chechenya, Dagestan, Georgia, Crimea and Russia have poisoned foreign presidents, poisoned people in England, blown up arms depots in Czechia, shot down a Malaysian passanger plane, harmed western democracies with funding politicial extremists to create hatred and division in our societies and undermine our democracy and quality of life, they have wages cyber attacks on western companies... and the list goes on and on. It is therefore about time that we strike back at Russia so they stop their aggressions towards the free world. If Russia refuses to leave us alone, then it must be taught how to do so the hard way. And the only language primitive barbarians understand is brute force. We have tried everything else now, and it was useless. Now we kill Russian invaders/genocidal child rapists / toilet thieves. We wreck their pathetic 3rd world economy. We diplomatically isolate them. And the Russians themselves do the rest of the job themselves for us to humiliate their own country to the entire world by showing how pathetic and useless their military is, and one can only laugh at their claim to be a superpower with their tiny economy and useless military. "a non-NATO country that has spent most of its existence as part of Russia" A total non-argument. Finland have belonged to Sweden for 800 years. They have only been an independent country for 100 years. I guess that this means that Sweden can just invade that country and you will say nothing. Not even if we torture, mutilate and kill entire villages of people and throw them into mass graves. You will say nothing about a war of aggression either. And you will say nothing if we decide to deliberatly kill 600 children in bomb shelter, and when we decide to deliberatly target hospitals with artillery fire and white phosporus that burns through concrete and steel. And if we choose to also do all those things Russia do in Ukraine as well as targeting ambulances that helps people injured by our bombs... then I guess a normal person would sympatize with Ukraine (or Finland in this case). But not you. Your moral compass is broken. Only a psychopath country are okay with those things. Those are the things that Russia stands for today. Indeed, Russia has always been evil and barbaric. Its no wonder that the former Eastern bloc countries decided to join the EU and Nato. Holodomor, forceful deportations of balts, Prague 1968, Hungary 1956, the Chernobyl disaster is all what Russian rule gave them. So no wonder that they had enough. As long as Russia does not respect borders I see no reason why I should respect Russia. I am happy that this warmongering terrorist state now is bleeding. It deserves it.
    3
  24. We should give ukraine everything ukraine needs including nukes. And you can read the titles of his previous videos where he called the struggle between russia and ukraine a david vs goliath struggle, where russia played david - which is complete nonsense. For the first months of the war it was rather the contrary russia that had more resources of everything - deadly artillery, more airpower, thousands of tanks and ukraine lacked everything and had runned out of artillery shells for its old soviet guns in the middle of a war. Russia had all odds in its favor and yet it screwed up royaly and embaressed itself. Binkov insists on using russian governments own numbers despite every neutral observer knows that they are useless dogpoop. Those things undermine some of the trust I have in Binkov. He have also said that russia should be able to dominate the skies over ukraine by now unless the west dramatically stepped is military aid with more surface to air missiles. But they west have not done so, so according to Binkovs doomsday prophecy should Ukraine have runned out of old S-300 missiles by now and the sky over Ukraine should be unprotected. But despite no western fighter jets are used in ukraine yet are we not seeing any massive russian bombing raids over ukraine. So in my opinion are Binkov leaning too much to team russia for my taste. And I mostly just watch his channel as a mental excercise. I do for example think his statement that there is no such thing as the best fighter jet to be incorrect. Gripen E is beating the competition in parameter after parameter.
    3
  25.  @oconnor6456  Ukrainian volksturm without training and weapons vs russian units with enormous amounts of firepower to compensate for their slightly smaller number. That was the situation in the beginning of this war. But russian logistics, corruption and such failed the russian army and the tanks driving towards Kyiv without infantry support made those overstretched russian units vulnerable to ambushes. So that rather than any ukrainian farmer with an old rifle was the reason why russia failed. Russia regrouped after its failure and pushed its forces in south eastern ukraine instead. And with its murdering superior artillery fire of 60.000 shots per day was the situation hopeless for the ukrainian defenders who lost ground and took heavy losses every day. But then came HIMARS and changed the playing field completly in just one week and a half. Russias offensive was finally brought to a halt. And later on would Ukraine take back lands in Khersun and Charkiv. And while one can accuse Putin of making a half assed effort to win the war and waited for too long to mobilize the country just in autumn last year after the professional army had been almost wiped out. One can on the other hand now not say that Putin is fighting this war half assed. He tries his best to win. All talk about winning back the friendship with France and Germany seems gone. Russia mobilize whatever it have... including stone age tanks and artillery pieces. But its too late for that now. When russias professional army was wiped out, were there no longer any men that could train all the newly mobilized recruits properly, and with the lack of modern weapons for the infantry and the lack of artillery support it doesn't look good for russia. Girkin, Prigozhin and General armageddon all had bigger brains than Putin but they are all gone now, and I do not think Surovikin can save the russian military from disaster at this point. Putins idiotic micromanagement of russian troops from his bunker and the incompetent men Gerasimov and Shoigu is making things even more difficult for russia. It was Putins idea to rush towards Kyiv with the tanks without infantry support for example. So disasters like this are completely of his own making. He is a spy, not a military guy. But after the coup by prigozhin I suspect that he feel like he cannot allow the Generals take control over the military, out of fear of another betrayal - just like Hitler lost all trust in his Generals in 1944 after Stauffenbergs bomb nearly killed him and he found out that many of his Generals had not been loyal to him. Even one of his favorites - Rommel - knew about the coup but did not try to warn Hitler about it, and that made Hitler distrust him and think his betrayal was unforgiving. And I suspect that Putins feelings towards Surovikin is the same, Surovikin knew about Prigozhins planned coup months in advance but did very little to stop him.
    3
  26.  @montrelouisebohon-harris7023  Where do this number 400.000 dead ukrainians come from? - I just made it up from my ass.
    3
  27. The aid is free it is called lend lease for a reason. Don't post information if you have no clue what you are talking about. Now log out from the internet Sergei and join the russian military instead of dodging the draft.
    3
  28.  @aziris7257  Nope. Lend lease means that Ukraine gets military equipment and if it is destroyed in battle it doesn't need to be returned to USA, but if say a tank survives the war then it should be returned to USA after the war. That is not what any normal person will call a shark loan or usury. But a vodka brain with 45 IQ will start screaming despite they have no clue what they are talking about. Kremlinbots are tards.
    3
  29.  @aziris7257  You can buy the equipment from USA after the war is over, or you can return the tank or artillery piece to the USA. Simple as that. You simply have no clue how the world works. Maybe you should just log out from your russian newsfeed for a while. You will get brain damages from reading such dumb shit.
    3
  30.  @Keijjeum  " the RAF was in a very well apparent faltering state" Nope. German aircraft production was running low while Britain outproduced the Germans. And there was never any real chance that Germany would have been able to deal a final blow to RAF before the winter arrived and put an end to all invasion plans and air battles. The German air force was good at what it was doing. The problem was that this airforce was built around the idea of having an airforce to support the ground troops and sitting closely behind the frontline of the ground troops. This doctrine was brilliant. The German army had much help from their bombers. And since the German airforce was sitting close to the frontline in a nearby airfield it only needed to fly for about 20 minutes to get to the enemy and drop their bombs. The french and British airforces usally had to fly for 1-2 hours before they could get to the frontline. So since German planes was so close to the front could they fly many more bombing missions in a day than the allies could. And they could reach targets more far away. But the problem with the German way of war was that they quickly can pile of heavy losses, and having an airfield close to the front makes it vulnerable to enemy air attacks. And in the battle of Britain it was soon discovered that German planes were not built for fighting this type of war. Their range and bombload was too small. Me109 only had enough fuel to fly over Britain for 10 minutes. The Ju87 Stuka was slow and vulnerable to enemy planes and its bombload was extremely tiny. Herman Göring loved the Me110 before the war, but the plane turned out to be completly useless. It was used to escort German bombers, but soon the Germans realized that the Me110 was too slow and clumbsy to take on British fighters alone so therefore did also the Me110 need German fighters to escort it. Do17 and He111 were medium bombers that the Germans used, but what they really needed was heavy bombers with 4 engines that had a heavier punch. Britain also had the advantage of their weather which gave them time to rest and recover their losses. They had radar which helped them focus their resources. And they were able to use their own pilots again if they were shot down in an air battle - while German pilots who were shot down became prisoners of war. I really don't see how Germany would have been able to destroy the royal navy before the end of 1940. Germany simply did not have enough bombers with range and bombload to sink the homefleet at Scapa flow. And nor do I think it would have been possible to destroy RAF if it had deployed its planes deep into the interior and out of range of Me109 planes, and German bombers flying without escorts would only have suffered heavy losses. And even if both the British navy and airforce had been destoyed, then Germany would anyways not have enough landing ships. So this invasion seems like doomed from the start to me. Hitlers advisor should have told him not waste pilots and planes to try to invade England in 1940. Instead should he save his bombers for the war in Russia. Or atleast try to make another attempt to take England in 1941 with Fw190 planes that atleast had a little better range, and build some landing ships meanwhile and train some marine infantry, and try to get the Italian and Vichy French navy to help make the odds more even at sea.
    3
  31. Europe and the EU are NOT the same thing. Many European countries are not part of the EU: Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Ukraine, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo, Albania, Macedonia, Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, Vatican City, Montenegro. Stop being so ignorant.
    2
  32.  @ssharma1384  Look at the list of equipment that France and Germany has sent / or will send to Ukraine and you see that those countries give more to Ukraine than Britain. French support was small in the beginning of the war, that's true. But that was true then, but that is not true now. But then of course one should not stirring on just on weapons and ammunition. Boris Johnsons diplomatic support was incredibly important for dragging other western countries to supporting Ukraine at a time when they seemed hesitant to give further help to Ukraine. And aside from diplomatic support is Britain going to train 100.000 Ukrainian soldiers - something which will of course provide a huge advantage on the battlefield.
    2
  33.  @TGTexan  I think a recent post by Swedens largest military blogger is worth quoting: Det mest använda och på många sätt det vapensystem som givit mest utdelning för Ryssland är artilleri. Efter att den första offensiven blev tillbakaslagen så har ryska arméns alla meningsfulla framgångar mer eller mindre gjorts genom lokal överlägsenhet av artillerield, en överlägsenhet som mer eller mindre sprang in i en vägg när HIMARs gjorde sitt intåg. Estland uppskattade att Ryssland hade 17 miljoner granater vid krigsstarten, en siffra som grovt motsvarar Ukrainska uppskattningar och RUSI Report. Uppskattningsvis avfyrades 10 miljoner granater under 2022, och med nuvarande konsumtion så kommer man att avfyra 7 miljoner under 2023. Ryssland tillverkar mellan 250.000 och 1.000.000 granater per år, beroende på om man frågar Ukraina eller Ryssland. Det antyder att Ryssland kommer få slut på sin ammunition tidigt 2024 om man fortsätter som man gjort hittills. Ryssland har dock ett extra förråd av artilleri-granater, nämligen Nordkorea. Enligt sprida offentliggjorda statliga rapporter (US primärt) så har Ryssland köpt miljontals granater av Nordkorea. Den bästa uppskattning jag kunnat hitta sätter toppsiffran på 3.000.000 granater. Om det stämmer och om Ryssland inte kraftigt ökar sin ammunitionsproduktion (osannolikt) så kommer vi att få se en sänkning i intensiteten av rysk artillerield, antingen skarpt Q2 2024, eller gradvis under 2023. Jag har ingen direkt data på det, men anekdotiskt verkar man ha strypt mängden ammunition vid stora delar av fronten redan. Eldrör är också en vanlig fråga då dessa verkar slitas ut i en hygglig takt, men Ryssland har enligt de källor jag hittat inte haft några problem hittills. De håller sannolikt längre än granater, så mer av det sovjetiska arvet finns sannolikt kvar.
    2
  34. Don't insult Norway. The country is NOT a part of the EU.
    2
  35. I agree. And since russias nukes are mostly not working and their missiles nowadays does not even have a warhead at all, and since their military does not consist of soldiers, but civilians with no military training, no motivation and primitive and outdated weapons it is clear that the game is up for russia.
    2
  36. Russia happily murders its own soldiers if it will give its dictator a victory. The traditional historic russian way of making war. The leaders doesn't give a crap about Russian lives
    2
  37. russian lives doesn't matter, just ask Putin
    2
  38. There is an election in russia in february next year. Putin will wait with unpopular decisions like mobilization before then to not upset the public too much and getting protests rising up. So I expect Putin to win this rigged fake election in the corrupt fascist maffia state called russia. And after that he will immidietly start taking all those unpopular decisions that he wanted to make all along, like forcing another wave of 300.000 russians to die in his stupid war.
    2
  39.  @mikakatzensuper0072  I think a short war would be difficult to win against UK (and a war against USA also would be a clear loss for EU). First do you need to defeat the royal navy. And when that is done then you need to win in the skies so that your troop transport ships don't get blown up by aircrafts. And then you need to fight against the coastal artillery. And even hastenly trained conscripts can cause lots of troubles for a beach landing... and you need to deal with bad weather, walking in the water while the enemy is firing upon you from prepared defensive posistions.. and then you got minefields to deal with. I mean just 1 single German machine gunner managed to kill 2000 Americans in a single day at Omaha beach in 1944. So amphibous operations are extremely difficult and the defenders have a huge advantage. And even if the EU would succesfully take over a beach, then it would have the difficult job of trying to break out from the beach and take over more land. The invasion army needs to take over a town with a big port, otherwise will the army starve to death by lack of food or soon run out of ammunition as they are trying to fight back British counter attacks. And if EUs troops just sit on the beach with 2 million men like the Allies did in Normandy and have no port in their hands, then they will run the risk of losing the entire army when the winter comes. Because then will the bad weather make air support much more difficult and supplying the troops on the beach by the sea will get increasingly difficult. D-Day nearly ended in a disaster for the allies for that reason, because the allies were stuck on the beach for 2 months before they managed to roll up German defensive positions and conquer some French ports so that supplies could be moved in. Being a defender is simply much more easy when it comes to amphibious landings. You don't need to worry about supplies, you can have prepared defensive positions, and you have somewhere to retreat. And you don't need superiority both on land, sea, and sky. And you will also have it much easier to bring in reinforcements to beat back an invasion force, than what an invasion force can bring in supporting troops for their landing. And I also assume that the British also have the benifit of better knowing the terrain then their enemy. And that they can figure out what places are likely places for an invasion and prepare defences there - I mean I guess the EU are not complete moron idiots that would land their troops on a unsuitable terrain out in place that is so far away that EUs aircrafts would not have the range to support them.
    2
  40.  @dodgedemonsrtx  Ukraine is a democracy, now go log off the internet Sergei so you don't embaress yourself with more stupid untrue statements.
    2
  41. Nuclear scientists like Thunderf00t do believe that Russia does not even possess any functioning nukes 😂 So I don't think that russia can nuke Ukraine, even if it would want to as the criminal terrorist state that it is
    2
  42.  @randomthing9712  Russias expenses are higher than its income. And if the war continues it will eventually run out of money. It started the war with large savings thanks to many years of export surplus. But this fund will not last forever. Then can Putin raise taxes and cut welfare spending to fund the war - but that is unpopular and therefore politically dangerous. He can try to borrow money, but outside of Swift this will be difficult to do at affordable rates. So he could print money, but that is also an unpopular measure. He could also sell off government land and privatize companies to gain cash. And when all those options have been tried and nothing is left to do then he only have the option left of ending the war or cutting his military spending with negative consequences for the war effort. But before the russian state collapses will people probably grow more and more unhappy about their government and the war and all tax increases, welfare cuts and inflation. The sanctions could also hit hard against the oil sector if what Peter Zeihan is true, that pipelines freeze and gets destroyed if there isn't enough oil flowing in them because there no international demand. And the results would be catastrophic - russias oil production will fall like a rock and never recover. Even with western oil companies assistence could it take decades to repair all the damages to get back to pre-war production levels.
    2
  43. It was one thing to build a plane or a tank back in the 1950s. Today things are much more complicated. Sweden created J-35 Draken in just 5 years. But creating a modern stealth fighter competative with the worlds best aircrafts is nothing you can do in just 5 years anymore I guess. Making planes with stealth, advanced materials, electronics are much more complicated.
    2
  44.  @Mexicanj0ker2  "the only thing USA sent the most was blankets" You really need to look up lend lease. You clearly got no clue what you are talking about. 😂 Try to read an American or west European books instead of the Sci-fic books you got in your Russian library.
    2
  45.  @waynzignordics  Everything you accused Russia of doing Ukraine actually did Things you say without providing proof, can I also dismiss without having to provide any evidence to the contrary. There are not a single non-Kremlin newsource that have written about this supposed genocide in Donbass. Russia is full of sh*t as usual
    2
  46. Leaving the EU enables Britain to reindustrialize once EU rules preventing it has been removed. Traveling and trade will still be possible without the EU, just as I as a Swede could travel to EU member countries before my country joined the EU. Waiting 10-20minutes in security checks and showing my passport when going into another country is something one can live with. This downside is small compared to all the upsides with leaving the EU. Britain will be able to decide more things democratically instead of having article 13 and other shit pressed down its throat. Other countries will commit economic suicide with the Euro project, while Britain will keep its pound. You no longer have to accept importing diseases into your island because the EU wants "freedom of movement" of sick pets, romanian horsemeat, beggars, east european criminals with surplus military weapons from the balkans, or nurses with Romanian fake diplomas. You can now choose to have leftwing Lexit or a rightwing Brexit. Either way, do I think both those alternatives are better than staying within the anti-democratic neoliberal EU.
    2
  47. Your english is incomprehensible. Did you learn it in russia?
    2
  48. Europe would probably just fall apart if it decided to punish a member for leaving. Germany and France could possibly love the idea, and Spain would want to steal Gibraltar, and some East European country would probably suck Germany's dick if they gave that whore goverment a little sum of money. But other countries would refuse to participate in the war. Salvini would refuse to participate and threating with leaving the EU if Italy would be forced to participate in the war. Swedens cucksucking pro-EU government would probably like the war, but the population would strongly oppose it wanna keep their 200 years of peace and neutrality, and not bombing friendly country. Countries like Denmark, Latvia and Luxumburg would have nothing to offer in this military alliance even if they would choose to join the war. The Euroskeptic forces in the Netherlands would surge. Orban could use the situtation of a hard pressed divided EU to push through reforms that the EU otherwise normally would not allow him to get away. The German military is in a bad shape, and this unpopular war would only become even more unpopular as losses rises - and then Euroskeptic AFD would become the largest political party in Germany, since it is already the 2nd largest party in Germany today. And getting unity behind a war in France would be a difficult task. Macron only got support from 18% of the French people, and the majority of the French people distrust the entire political class of the country. Macron himself have even admitted that a British Brexit style referendum in France would probably lead to France leaving the EU - so therefore he have never given the french the option to vote on the issue. Many now fears that Front nationale might become the biggest french party in the European election, so gaing support for an EU war would be difficult - France is already tired of wars after all terrorist attacks and bombings of ISIS and Libya. And the yellow vest uprising have already caused so much divide in the country that it is very doubtful if either Macron or Merkel would even survive sitting out their entire term in office. So there would not be many countries in the coalition of the willing. Only France have a strong military - but France is too divided from the inside to even wanna fight this war.
    2
  49. Britain might be divided too, among brexiteers, remainers and scots. But I think the country would unite under the pressure from a common enemy, the same way USA and UK put aside class warfare conflicts and become 'one people' during world war 2. But the EU on the other hand is a fragile construct with too many internal conflicts - west vs. East on immigration, North vs. South in economic issues and farm subsidies, Federalist Germany and France vs. non-federalist Hungary and Sweden. And on top of that do you got ethnic nationalism on the rise in Catalonia. And nationalist parties are on the rise everyware in Europe which is threating the very idea of a globalist Europe. You got Salvini in Italy, Kurz in Austria, AFD in Germany, Orban in Hungary, Vox in Spain, Åkesson in Sweden, nationalists in Estonia and Latvia, Nationalism is also on the rise in France, Belgium, Greece, and the Netherlands. And in Denmark, and Finland. Countries have had enough of globalism. And a war of aggression can be the last that breaks the camels back.
    2
  50. Ukraine have won battle after battle so far. And the russians have done retreat after retreat from Kyiv, Sumy, Charkiv, Snake island, Khersun, and the russian navy have retreated from the western black sea. So yea the war is going badly for russia. The ruble is on decline. Russia just had a military coup attempt. And russia have just had 30 officers killed in just one missile strike this week. So russia is losing this war. Just like it have lost most of the other wars it have fought for the last 170 years.
    2