Comments by "jeppen" (@jesan733) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1.  @TheErazar  thanks Ivan for trying to sow division.
    166
  2. Swede here. I really love our JAS fighter jet, but we tried to give a big batch to Ukraine but the US vetoed it. I'm really annoyed about this tbh. Apparently a number of components including engines that are US-made. Yes, we could design our way around it, and we should. And perhaps we can just disregard the US' will now. But for now it's a problem.
    55
  3. Thanks, great perspective, helped me at least understand better what has happened! Btw, I'm a very reasonable centrist, anti-conspiracy-theory-minded, and I find youtube automatic comment moderation absolutely horrible and frustrating. It's really hard to discuss anything at all because the auto-moderation is so harsh. I have no idea if even this comment will survive or be shadow banned.
    55
  4.  @DavidGitongawriter  the Kherson exit, the Kupiansk sprint and the Kursk incursion says otherwise. Ukraine can clearly take territory. Also, the Kremlin could collapse and then it's pretty likely the army will just retreat.
    49
  5.  @BronnBlackwater  perhaps Russia should have tried to fix demographic decline, low birth rates and bad economic outlook in some other way than starting a war that exacerbates those same issues.
    25
  6.  @dainisboumber6030  one inch per day, will reach Kyiv in 1300 years.
    21
  7. We do exaggerate Russian weaknesses, but the weaknesses are there and Russia is by no means invincible. We continue to not give Ukraine full support to win this war and eject the Russians. One example is the very slow pace in providing western air capabilities and e.g. ATACAMS, another is that we forbid Ukraine to use our ATACMS and similar to target Russian soil.
    19
  8.  @Princip666  I see from your many comments that you're immersed in ru disinfo.
    18
  9.  @SaikaAnida  are to telling me Trump is grounded in history? That's truly laughable. Is that why he's suggesting taking over Canada and Gaza?
    17
  10.  @jabezhane  I would say as a taxpayer, we've steadily been getting richer since the industrial revolution began. This war is not a significant cost for the western powers. E.g. for a US that spent 6%-ish of GDP during the cold war to counter and contain Russia, now spending 0.3% to truly grind down the Russian army is mindboggingly cheap.
    15
  11.  @pedritochocolate4094  he has said he could accept continued occupation and relegate it to diplomacy to get them liberated eventually. I don't think he can accept a deal where the occupied territories are internationally recognized as Russian.
    13
  12. Where is the population advantage coming from? Europe is 744m, but that includes Russia, Belarus, Turkey, Serbia, Georgia and Kazakstan. Sure Turkey is part of NATO, but let's assume it stays on the sidelines, and Russia draws from at least Belarus and occupied territories. Then it's 160m vs less than 500m, so it's 3:1 in Europe's favor, not 6:1.
    12
  13.  @ByZHellas  ok, Ivan.
    11
  14.  @hyhhy  you frogs said Russia would easily proceed from Bakhmut once that was taken, but Russia did not. You say the same about the counteroffensive now. Btw, Ukraine wasn't trying to keep Bakhmut. They optimized attrition ratio through elastic defense, methodically retreating a street at a time in most cases. And also they kept Russia busy before the counteroffensive. Sadly Russia had enough resources and enough desperation to throw up gigantic minefields while battling for Bakhmut.
    10
  15.  @evgeniya7853  the Minsk agreements stated that foreign military should exit Donbass. Putin refused, and he refused to let his puppets execute on the other parts of the agreement as well.
    9
  16.  @angeurbain6129  the western economies have pretty much realigned after the initial supply chock of sanctions against Russia, so it's ceasing to be a problem. The direct cost to the western world is very, very low for supporting Ukraine. However, Russia having an interest rate approaching 20%, increasing repression and wasting a thousand men a day on the front lines is obviously not sound economics. Eventually the palianytsias are going to wreck Russian electricity production and gas distribution as well, so the winter of 2025/2026 in Russia will be cold and dark indeed.
    9
  17. ​ @rosenleshtarski472  this war was meant to be won by Russia, because Russia initiated it with that goal and expectation. The west expected that to happen as well, but Ukraine performed better than expected and Russia worse than expected. The west didn't want this war, but when it was forced upon them, the leading governments have tried to contain it but haven't provided Ukraine overwhelming capabilities, fearful of Russian escalation beyond Ukraine if it loses quickly and decisively.
    9
  18.  @jabezhane  the only way for taxpayers to be angry at this is if Russian propaganda convinces them to be angry. It's not a significant cost so taxpayers shouldn't complain about it. Also, it's such a moral and geopolitical slam-dunk to continue supporting Ukraine that people need to be seriously out of touch to vote against it.
    8
  19.  @Princip666  you exemplify pro-Russian maturity.
    8
  20.  @glintongordon6811  fact remains that pro-Russians talked about Bakhmut being strategically important as the most fortified place and that it would be smooth sailing thereafter, but Russia is pretty much stuck still.
    8
  21.  @hyhhy Russia first failed at maneuver warfare and got ejected from Kiev and Kharkiv. Russia was then outsmarted in the Kupiansk sprint and later dislodged from Kherson and kicked across the Dniepr. Its navy was defeated despite Ukraine having no navy, and they had to retreat in desperation to the furthest reaches of the Black Sea. Russia desperately tried to take Bakhmut and eventually got it as Ukraine just used it as a meat grinder. Russia then desperately mined to the extreme to avoid being overwhelmed by Ukraine's offensive, and also desperately blew up the Khakovka dam in order to free up forces to counter the counteroffensive. And now Russia desperately tries to exploit a short lapse in the resolve of US congress by throwing meat waves of drugged-up expendables at Avdiivka. It's all so incredibly pathetic, but sure, let's say I'm the one coping.
    8
  22.  @jabezhane  the US has provided approximately $44 billion in military assistance since February 24, 2022. This is over 654 days, giving an average of just 25 billion per year. As you know, the US defense budget is $800 billion. Thus spending 25 billion on Ukraine is extreme value for money, and it's just 0.11% of GDP. Any US president in post-WW2 history, probably even Trump, would do the same, because it's simply a slam-dunk from both a moral and geopolitical perspective. Furthermore, the spending is in equipment that will be replaced by US manufacturing, which is strengthening a too-weak US military industrial base while providing well-paying jobs in the US. Considering money clearly isn't the issue, what is? That you feel loyalty to this "movement" you're talking about? That you've said it's about money so many times that you can't back down?
    6
  23.  @ailinofaolin8897  the Russian blitzkrieg toward Kiev was stopped, and that's why Russia was willing to negotiate and withdraw under the guise of goodwill. The Kharkiv offensive was a rout on the part of the Russian military, including the best units Russia had, and they lost lots of equipment and people while Ukraine lost hardly anything. The only thing you're right about is that it was the least defended part, because Russia had been tricked to spend their resources on Kherson, which they eventually lost anyway. Do you truly believe the Russian propaganda that you're reproducing? If so, I feel a bit sorry for you.
    6
  24.  @petermomanyi529  "Nato countries even deposed a pro-russian government and imposed a pro-western one." NATO did not. Denying Ukrainian agency is typical Russian propaganda. The Revolution of Dignity was the culmination of the indigenous Euromaidan protests.
    6
  25.  @michaelotieno6524  the Eastern front has not collapsed. Not sure it's been downhill, really. Russia has grabbed 0.5% of Ukraine since then, but at a cost that is clearly not worth it. The issues are mounting for Russia.
    6
  26.  @jabezhane  everyone serious, knowledgeable and responsible say what I say. It's not time to move on, it's time to stop playing politics and support freedom, democracy and US interests. It's time to stop lying about it being expensive. It's time to stop aligning with Russian propaganda. Come back from the dark side. You've spent enough time there.
    5
  27. Great reflection, but this was on how an interview could be much better and more beneficial for the west, and this was never in the cards. Probably Putin recorded it all and then handed Tucker the tape, and he wouldn't have if it was disastrous. My reflection is that the interview could've been so much more damaging if Putin had been better prepared himself to press on Western painpoints, exacerbating the lack of trust we have in our own institutions. Instead it was this rambling, boring stuff about history and so forth that won't leave much of an impression. And this in turn is evidence that Putin is winging it to a large degree. He's not taking help from his team of experts in influence operations, for some reason.
    5
  28.  @bugsygoo  unless the US killswitches our F35s.
    5
  29.  @johnadam2885  the Afghanistan engagement took up political and military bandwidth. Also progress in nation-building was perceived as slow. Also populist framing was increasingly that we have no business there and that the costs are too high, even though they weren't that high. So it was politically expedient to exit. Americans are polarized and divided for a lot of reasons, but none of them is that Ukraine support is truly expensive. It's not. But in populist rhetoric it is. Populists nurture a culture of taking pride in selfishness and reckless ignorance. People conflate budget deficit and printing dollars. It's not the same thing, and the problems are vastly overblown. There's no significant de-dollarization, and the US didn't incite the war in Ukraine. Quite the opposite, and frankly that was part of the problem. A criminal isn't provoked by the police, but by the absence of, or weakness of, the police.
    5
  30. Why wouldn't he root for the small democratic defender over the bigger fascist invader? Everyone of healthy mind does.
    5
  31.  @black_triton9264  yep, normal inflation. It has come down, the stats are in. Sorry. putinist, but that's just facts.. E.g. in Europe, the average volume-weighted electricity prices have halved in 2023 compared to in 2022.
    5
  32.  @wyskass861  Gripen integrates the long-range Meteor air-to-air missile. That's probably better than the AMRAAM, helping with standoff attrition against Russia's R-37 missile.
    4
  33.  @angeurbain6129  in the 60-ies, defense spending was 8-9% of GDP. Now it's 3.5% with a 0.2% of GDP add-on for supporting Ukraine. This does not stop the US from balancing the federal budget, nor from supporting its communities. Also, the deficit is financed by borrowing, not by printing money. The dollar as reserve currency is not threatened in any way.
    4
  34.  @gags730  what was it you didn't understand? Explain.
    4
  35. He might not see that as a deal-breaking problem.
    4
  36.  @Princip666  very clever. Obviously I made a judgement based on the contents of your many posts, not their numbers. You're clearly supporting Ru disinfo narratives, so either you're paid, a s-dist tr-ll or a useful idi-t. I'm trying to be charitable, so I'm assuming the latter, thereby "immersed in Ru disinfo".
    4
  37.  @johnadam2885  the US could easily afford staying in Afghanistan, and can very easily afford supporting Ukraine. In fact, it's far cheaper to support Ukraine than to contain Russia through ordinary US military spending.
    4
  38.  @AlexKarasev  ">"The west didn't want this war, but when it was forced upon them" On which evidence is this view based?" The evidence is that the US virtually withdrew from Europe after the cold war, refused to send Ukraine any heavy weaponry before the war to not provoke, refused to give Ukraine any means to take back occupied territories before the war, that Germany and large parts of western Europe continued to make itself consciously energy dependent on Russia while having merely symbolic defense spending. Also, the west desperately negotiated before the war, which Putin did not respond to in good faith. And the west offered Zelensky a ride, expecting Kyiv to fall. If the west had wanted this war, don't you think they would have had prepared for it? Russia attacked exactly because we had not prepared for it.
    4
  39. Yeah, shovels. Pro-Ru people laughing at the same unfunny joke for 2 years straight. No tism there, nosiree.
    4
  40.  @glintongordon6811  the Wagnerites in Africa are mostly not Russians but local mercenaries. I'm not surprised that from Prigozhin's perspective only 50% of his men were injured, because he only counted his paid real mercenaries, not the much larger volumes of cannon fodder prisoners.
    4
  41.  @markbryant4641  Putin thanks you for your propaganda efforts.
    4
  42.  @ИринаЛукьяненко-ь3ъ  "Keep dreaming Russia has hundreds of petrol refineries" And all of them will come off-line because of destroyed fractioning columns.
    4
  43.  @ИринаЛукьяненко-ь3ъ  Russia is not too big. Drones are long range and can also be smuggled in to be launched from inside Russia.
    4
  44.  @dr-rexmangrca113  dude, we don't have hyperinflation, not even close. It's 2.4% on an annual basis in November, so almost back to normal.
    4
  45.  @runethorsen8423  the US has basically halved its spending on defense/containing geopolitical threats since the cold war, so the spending is not ridiculous in a historical context. In fact, recent events have shown that the US (and Europe's) spending is way too low. And supporting Ukraine is VERY cheap in relation to overall military spending, yes. There's nothing free about letting the global security order collapse. The idea that the Ukraine war is a "local border dispute" is disingenuous at best. The Ukraine war is Russia crushing the global security order, attempting to collapse NATO and moving 40+ million from the category of European democratic citizens to Russian cannon fodder for the next war. There's nothing "free" about letting a new age of Empires replace Pax Americana that has locked borders since WW2. You say "your entire economy is hinged on military spending abroad". No, it's not. That's why I'm pointing out it's incredibly cheap. Supporting Ukraine is 0.1% of GDP. There's no war economy, and that's evident from how Ukraine is not easily winning. If 1 billion rich people in the west would truly mobilize resources to beat 140 million poor people, then Russia would be quickly evicted. But the US and Europe run complacent peace-time economies. No, 25 billion couldn't be spent better. This is the first thing the US should spend on, not the last.
    3
  46.  @jantzfitzgerald6115  artillery rounds were more important early on. Now drones is the leading killer. How do you know Russia is outproducing Ukraine in drones, and why do you smile at the idea that the fascist aggressor is outperforming the defending democracy?
    3
  47.  @michaelotieno6524  correctly so. NATO expansion has prevented Russia from e.g. waging war in the Baltics.
    3
  48.  @Princip666  fact remains, and as I pointed out, people see it.
    3
  49.  @AlexKarasev  "The cost of the war in Iraq exceeded $3T" The US has allocated approximately $30B annually for the Ukraine war, meaning it would not reach $3T until after 100 years. At the same time, the US defense budget is approaching $900B annually, meaning the Ukraine war is a tiny fraction. And it's extremely good value for money, reducing Russian capabilities in a way that would require trillions to match through mere readiness. In other words, now we have 3.5% of GDP in defense spending + 0.1% in Ukraine spending. If we just give up on Ukraine, the US should probably spend 4.5% of GDP to deter a strengthened Russia from going further.
    3
  50.  @sullathehutt7720  you have never listened, or if you did, you didn't learn anything. Go and learn outside your eco chamber, then suggest policy.
    3