Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds"
channel.
-
234
-
31
-
26
-
25
-
18
-
12
-
Soviet Union was economically 1.5 times less developed than German Reich and half of occupied Europe (France, half of Poland, ChehoSlovakia, YougoSlavia, Greece) - GDP of USSR - 530 billion US$, GDP of Germany with all ocupued territories in 1941 - ~800 billion US$. Also we must not forget that Germany was in war with UK at that time - building of Atlantic wall cost
10 billion $ to Germany in period of 1941-44, production of submarines for battle in Atlantic was larger in spent of iron than production of tanks during all war, in the British air Germany lost more than a 1.5 thousand aircrafts. Also Germany hold ~half of it's troops (Germany had 7.4 million) in the rears. Soviet Union had 2.66 times more population - 160 million own population, but from which only a part is loyal to Soviet governent or Russia. - let's say 2.25 times. Germany had 60 million own population. In the start of the war Soviet Union had equal to German in numbers of troops army, with 5 times more vechicles. (5.7 milion troops, 4.6 in European part, 21 thousand tanks, 20 thousands aircrafts, 56 thousand artillery, ~370 thousand supply trucks and ~54 thousand large tracktors. Germany prepared for Soviet campagin 4.1 milion troops, 6 thousands tanks, 4 thousands aircrafts, 11 thousands artillery, 70 thousand supply trucks and 10 thousand large trackrors. And even with 2.25 times more population, with equal economy, with much bigger army, Soviet Union lost 11.9 million soldiers in combat and 1.8 in captivity against 4.2 million Axis combat and 0.4 million captivity casualities, totaly losing first 2 years of war with 7 to 1 casuality ratio dead and 3 millions troops surendered. During Napoleonic wars there was familliar situation.
Modern Russian economy - 3.5 trillion US$, while US and NATO - ~35-40 trillion US$. 110 millions own population against ~1.3 billion. Russian army is much, much smaller than NATO. Soviet Union had German millitary technologies, that were taken in 1941 by Molotov-Rebbuntrop pact - millitary production equipment, vechicle sights, systems, that were copied and put into massive production. During the WW2, USSR had Americian industrial equipment - ALL Soviet T-34-85 tanks were produced on modern Americian machine tools, that were copied and put on massive production by USSR. All Soviet machines from 1928 were build on Weimar Republic equipment, from 1940 - on German, from - 1943 on Americian equipment. Even Soviet fighter mig-15, best of it's time, was made of English equipment, that was bought by Soviet Union in 1945 with English sights and aviation technologies. Modern Russia have the same problems - all termal imagers, sights, special equipment and computer systems are producing in the West. Russia didn't put into massive production T-114 Armata tank due to the Americian embargo of computer and sights systems. Modern Russia also politically unstable, and there is big threat of Civil war. Modern Russia don't have any chance, if there would be the war, after mobilization and approach to the borders, NATO would take Moscow and Urals after 2 months...
11
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Russians had invaded Ukraine without numerical superiority, while Ukraine is the largest land millitary in Europe after Russia. Ukraine have far more tanks, than Germany, Poland, Britain or France. Russian and Ukrainian armies have the same level of training, logistics and equipment, but Ukraine have worser economy and life standarts, than Russia. So, Ukraine have lower ammount of economical resources per every soldier. If the quality of troops is equal, according to the law of millitary science attacking side is suffering more casualities. Ukraine isn't lesser corrupt than Russia, Ukrainian army isn't better trained, than Russian army.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed:
1) Russian soldiers aren't motivated to fight against brother Slavic people, a lot of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, probably some Russian soldiers have relarives in Ukraine, and war is totally unpopular in Russia. Russian soldiers are mentally and morally supressed, they don't want to fight against brother Slavic people. Opposite - Ukrainians have moral boom, they are fighting for their homeland.
2) Russian command probably believed in its own propaganda, and commanders in Kremlin were thinking, that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days without resistance, and Russian troops would be met with flowers. And Russian command simply didn't prepared for a war - Russians didn't planned, that they would face the resistance, they thought that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days, and this is why Russians at now have poor logistics and preparation.
Russia have a population of 146 million people, while Ukraine have the population of 40 million. The life standarts, economy, corruption, level of training in the army, logistics and millitary productions in the Russia and Ukraine are in the same level. But Ukrainians have the morale boom, while Russians are supressed, and Russians weren't prepared for the real war, they were thinking that they would be met with flowers by Ukrainians.
The comparison with Iraq is nonesence, because Iraq was technologically backward compared to the US, and Iraqish population had low morale and didn't wanted to fight for their government -, Iraqish soldiers were surrendering without a fight. US army was preparing for the invasion for a long time, and US had huge economical superiority. Also, Iraq geographically is a flat territory - the desert, very good for tanks and good for rocket weapons targeting. Also, Iraq didn't had suppourt from other countries, while Ukraine have such suppourt. And even in such conditions US took a MONTH to occupie Iraq.
Russian invasion at now goes in absolutely normal speed, just how it could be, when you fighting against the largest Europen country with 40 million population and 200 thousand troops.
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
Ukrainian army's logistics and training aren't better than Russian, while Ukrainian economy is much worser than Russian in terms of life standarts and effectivity of labor, so Ukraine have much lower economical resources per every soldier than Russia. So, if you think that Russia would be exhausted, so, Ukraine would be exhausted 3 times to the time while this would happen.
The war in Ukraine doesn't shows to us the real fighting capability of Russian army. Russian failure in Ukraine have two reasons: Russian soldiers aren't motivated to fight against brother people, and Russian command didn't prepared for a war - they were probably thinking, that they would take all of Ukraine without a fight in 3 days. And Russians didn't prepared for a war. Russians invaded Ukraine without numerical superiority and without preparing the logistics. Probably, Putin believed in his own propaganda about "n-zis in Ukraine that are supressing their own people" , and probably Putin was thinking, that Ukrainian people would meet Russian soldiers with flowers.
This war in Ukraine isn't showing to us the real fighting capability and real quality of Russian army. In reality, Russian army isn't lesser trained than Ukrainian and isn't lesser equipped.
At now Russia is supplying frontline by reinforcements, and with numerical superiority on the Russian side Ukraine wouldn't stand a chance.
6
-
@fuzzydunlop7928 invasion of Iraq wasn't hypocritical - Iraq was an agressive state, that invaded its neighbours. Also, Saddam Husein was a dictator and founder of ISIS ideology, and genocides were happening in this country. In 1991 UN, by using mostly American forces, with suppourt of even Soviet Union (!!!), supressed Iraqish demands on invading the Kuwait. In 2003 US got the information about the nuke industry in Iraq, and UN, with suppourt of Russia (!!!) promised to invade Iraq. Despite the fact, that Russia suppourted US in this war, later Putin's propaganda started to make the positive vision of Iraq, Lybia, Syria and other dictatorships. The only allies of Russia are the dictators all across the World
5
-
@looinrims internet isn't blocked in Russia, but they (Kremlin) are trying to return death penality in Russia. Russia at now are returning into Stalinist type of a dictatorship. And I think, that Russian police would be using internet to supress people, who are talking against the government. The only hope for Russia at now is the future generations - Russian society is unable for protest or revolution against power, Russia always was a country of slaves with zero protest ability. And at now Putin is restoring the Soviet-style dictatorship.
But Russia have one positive thing - young people in Russia are mostly liberals, and 90% of young people aren't suppourting Putin. The old elites would physically die, and let's hope, that future generations of Russians would change everything. Putin completely devastated and destroyed country's economy and political system, Russia since this moment would be isolated millitarian ductatorship, but let's hope, that Russia would be free in the future, and this nightmare, that going in Russia since 1917, would someday end
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jsjsjsnsnjdjdjdjsj2327
* Sorry for my english, i don't talk on it, and don't have time to translate, bcs i wanna sleep
> Bureaucratism in USSR was in period of 1960-1991. Before this period in the USSR was death penality for corruption and politicial repressions against social-democrats and trotskists - bureaucrats.
> Before 1956 in USSR wasn't dictatorship. Confedeative form of power with autonomic in agriculture, low and middle enterprises, 1/3 part of enterprises were private with collective managment by workers with market prices and relations. Kchrushew destroyed soviet combined economic system, and banned all private enterprises in USSR, going over to ineffective planning economy.
> Stalin was only officially dictator, formally he hadn't power. He was economic theorist, who, as a result of a political war within the Russian Left Coalition (RSDRPr), killed his opponents, the bureaucrats, by carrying out massive repressions in the party. It was the right decision in an unstable country after the Civil War, when radical sentiments against the state still persist, on the eve of World War II, to eliminate bureaucrats, corrupt officials, and explicit anti-communists in the communist government. It was bloodly, hard, but right and neccesary decision.
It's like if in US government after Civil war were corrupted confederates, or during WW2 - fashists/nazis.
Stalin existed as an image of propaganda on a poster, and diplomat. And so he didn't even rule anything. He won the party struggle, developed along the way his economic model of socialism - combining private enterprises and local autonomy with a plan, and in fact didn't rule anything. He read an average of ~400 pages a day and wrote his scientific works. Even Stalin didn't control the repression. The execution lists were signed by the entire Politburo (Congress), more than 300 people. And raster lists, of which 373, have about 45 thousand cases, most fabricated by corrupt policemens. Three massive checks were carried out throughout the NKVD, as a result of which the mass fabrication of cases by the police for the sake of bonuses was uncovered, as well as the concealment of the number of those executed before the state more than 6 times. Afer the thruth was founded, the chief of soviet police (NKVD) and more than 20 thousands policemens, who were involved in the fabrication of cases were shot for their crimes.
> World famine in 1933 was caused by drought
5
-
5
-
@legatvsdecimvs3406 Vietnam lost 4 times more soldiers killed, than pro-US coalition. Veitnamese soldiers were supplied by Soviet weapons, equipment, anti-air, they were trained by Soviet officers and also few hundreed Soviet pilots fought on their side. During the Korean war Chinese and Korean army lost 5 times more, than S.Korean and US army. Chinese WW2 and civil war era army was comparable with Soviet army during WW2 - both Soviet and Chinese troops fought against Japanese with the same equal casuality ratio - 1 to 1, while US troops, due to the air suppourt and Japanese economic and technology backwardness fought with casuality ratio of 5 to 1. Gulf war, Iraq war. Or even WW2 - Germany lost due to the Allied air bombings 90% of its oil production, 15% of aviation production, 1/3 of all millitary productions during the war. 1/3 of all millitary economy. This is seriously damaged on German fighting capability in terms of quality and capability of every single soldier - German army became lesser capable to fight, and both Soviet and Allied armies simply smashed Germany in 1944-45. If you control the air, you can destroy your enemy economically - without bullets and millitary equipment enemy army would became much lesser capable to fight. And also this is damage to cities - communications and main economical centers. This is morale punch to enemy nation.
5
-
5
-
5
-
@giftedtheos if Putin wanted to conquer entire Geogia, why he didn't did it in 2008? In august 2008 there was a very short small war between Russia and Georgia - this war happened because of Geogian agression - Georgia have invaded South Ossetia, and Russia conducted a peacekeeping operation. Even European Union recognised Georgia as an agressor after the war. European Union said that Georgia have started the war, not Russia, while Russian actions were the same as NATO in Kosovo. After 5 days of fighting Russian army achieved complete and total victory over Georgian army, Georgian forces were defeated after 5 days of war, and later there were negotiations between Russia and Georgia, and Russia pulled back its forced to pre war border, Russia didn't annexed, Russia didn't occupied even a square meter of Georgian soil. Russia and Georgia just negotiated and agreed to peace on pre-war border. Georgia is small country with population of 3 million and army of 20 thousand men, and Russian army achieved victory after 5 days of fighting, pulling Georgian forces out of South Ossetia, Russia had a chance to steamroll over Georgia in few weeks, even considering mountain terrain. But Putin have chosed peaceful solution, negotiations and Russian forces withdrew to pre-war border. After losing a war to Russia pro-Western party lost power in Georgia and at now Georgia in Russian sphere of influence, without conquering it, and previous Geogian president at now in prison, while current Georgian president is pro-Russian oligarch. We live in 21st century, at now you don't need to conquer state to control it. In 21st century there are such thing as "soft force" - great power can use its economy and prosperity to atract other nations. Belarus is in Russian sphere of influence as a result of Russian soft force. And Russia was succesfully defeating the West in soft force over Ukraine - Ukrainian president Yanukovich was elected in 2010, because he promised that Ukraine will join European Union. But Russia have gas discount to Ukraine and free money as a gift, as a result of which pro-Western Ukrainian president started to try to sit on two chairs between Russia and EU, and Yanukovich didn't approved deal with EU. As a result, Ukrainian oligarchs with help of CIA have organised massive protests and coup in Kyiv. Victoria Nuland was in Ukraine in december of 2013 and she was giving cookies to protesters, and in 2015 USA said that they spent on "development of Ukrainian democrasy" 5 billion dollars. Ukrainian economic elites, oligarchs, with help of CIA organised coup in Ukraine, because Western influence was defeated by Russian soft force - gas discounts and free money. West left Russia no other choise but to act more tough - if USA are conducting coups in Ukraine and if USA are changing Ukrainian government, why Russia don't have right to influence Ukraine too? Russia answered to this coup by annexing Crimea, a Russian region of Ukraine where Russians are 60% of population, while Ukrainians are minority - 20% of population. Crimea never belonged to Ukraine, it was a part of Russian Soviet Republic untill Nikita Khrushew gave this Russian land in 1954 to Ukraine to fix Soviet burecratic problems - Crimea didn't have land connection with Russia, so all gas and water supply to Crimea were from Ukrainian Soviet Repiblic, and there was a burecratic nightmare in Soviet Ukrainian government, they needed a telephone call to Moscow for every issue with Crimea, and in 1954 Krushew gave Russian core territory with majority of Russian population to other neighbouring state - Ukraine, but this is Russian people, Russian population and Russian land. After the collapse of USSR Russia respected Ukrainian territorial integrity for 23 years since 1991 to 2014, untill Ukraine waa at least neutral towards Russia. But after the anti-Russian coup in Ukraine with help of CIA, there would be no respect to territorial intrgrity of Russian territories inside Ukraine, and Russia liberated Crimea from Ukrainian occupation. I have talked with many people of Crimea, Russians from Crimea wanted to leave Ukraine since the collapse of USSR, they wanted and supported reunification with their homeland, their native harbor - Russia.
The same thing as in Georgia Putin wanted to do in Ukraine - all invasion was conducted after failed negotiations with NATO - Russia was trying to achieve its goals by peaceful means, but negotiations with NATO failed, and when diplomats stop talking, the cannons start talking for them. All Russian invasion in the start was a bluff to simply force Ukraine to negotiation table and peace on Russian terms, but I think Putin had few possible scenarios and plans for war, so scenario with capture of Kyiv and establishing puppet regime also was on Putin's table. But Russia didn't achieved capture of Kyiv and in march of 2022 there were negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. In december 2023 Arachamia, leader of Zelensky's parlament party, who was head of Ukrainian delegation at these negotiations, told the truth about what happened. This in not "Kremlin propaganda", this is words of Arachamia, head of Ukrainian diplomacy group during negotiations with Russia and head of Zelensky's party - Russia didn't wanted to annex territories at least at the start of the war, Russia wanted Ukraine to become neutral non-NATO member with censorship of nationalist media and reduction of military, and Russia was ready to pull back forces to pre-war border. But then Boris Johnson showed up and promised military aid to Ukraine, and Ukraine tricked Russia - Ukraine asked Russia to give a signal that Russia is ready to respect terms and then Ukraine will ratiphy agreement - there are already was Ukrainian and Russian signatures on these agreements. Russia showed its readiness by withdrawing forces from Northern Ukraine and Kyiv, and then Ukraine leaved negotiation process, and at now we are in the third year of war.
If Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine entirely, Putin had a good oportunity when Ukraine was weak - in 2014, 2015 and 2016, and probably 2017. But Russia didn't started full scale invasion in those years, but opposite - Russia gave to Ukraine 8 years to prepare for war. Ukrainian army was weak and simply didn't existed in 2014, if Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine, he could have simply do this in 2015, but Russia was doing opposite - when there was a war in the Donbass between Ukrainian army and Russian separatists from Donetsk and Luhansk, who wanted to join Russia, there were negotiations between Russia, EU and Ukraine, negotiations in Minsk, and Russia was trying to give this land to Ukraine. Russia made a peace project, according to which Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republic would disarm and re join Ukraine, if Ukraine would respect Russian minority and language, and will give them a veto right in the parlament, but BOTH Ukraine and DPR and LPR refused to this peace project. Russia was trying to help Ukraine and Russia was trying to reunify Ukraine with territories of Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics, and in 2015 Russian separatists saw it as a betrayal from Russia.
4
-
Russians had invaded Ukraine without numerical superiority, while Ukraine is the largest land millitary in Europe after Russia. Ukraine have far more tanks, than Germany, Poland, Britain or France. Russian and Ukrainian armies have the same level of training, logistics and equipment, but Ukraine have worser economy and equal life standarts, than Russia. So, Ukraine have lower ammount of economical resources per every soldier, having lesser soldiers, than Russia. Even after sanctions Russian economy is still more effective. If the quality of troops is equal, according to the law of millitary science attacking side is suffering more casualities. Ukraine isn't lesser corrupt than Russia, Ukrainian army isn't really better trained, than Russian army, despite the fact that Ukrainians were trained by NATO officers - Ukraine don't had economical resources to organize millitary exercizes, and if Ukrainian army is better trained than Russian, the differense isn't huge.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed:
1) Russian soldiers aren't motivated to fight against brother Slavic people, a lot of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, probably some Russian soldiers have relarives in Ukraine, and war is totally unpopular in Russia. Russian soldiers are mentally and morally supressed, they don't want to fight against brother Slavic people. Opposite - Ukrainians have moral boom, they are fighting for their homeland.
2) Russian command probably believed in its own propaganda, and commanders in Kremlin were thinking, that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days without resistance, and Russian troops would be met with flowers. And Russian command simply didn't prepared for a war - Russians didn't planned, that they would face the resistance, they thought that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days, and this is why Russians at now have poor logistics and preparation.
Russia have a population of 146 million people, while Ukraine have the population of 40 million. The life standarts, economy, corruption, level of training in the army, logistics and millitary productions in the Russia and Ukraine are in the same level. But Ukrainians have the morale boom, while Russians are supressed, and Russians weren't prepared for the real war, they were thinking that they would be met with flowers by Ukrainians.
I think that the corruption isn't the real reason of Russian failure, because Ukraine is also very corrupt country. Before the war Ukraine was economically more poor than Russia (in terms of currensy and international trade, but life standarts were +- equal) and Ukrainian government isn't lesser corrupt, than Russian. So, the corruption couldn't be the reason of Russian failure, because Ukrainian millitary also was very corrupt before the war.
The comparison with Iraq is nonesense, because Iraq was technologically backward compared to the US, and Iraqish population had low morale and didn't wanted to fight for their government - Iraqish soldiers were surrendering without a fight. US army was preparing for the invasion for a long time, and US had huge economical superiority. Also, Iraq geographically is a flat territory - the desert, very good for tanks and good for rocket weapons targeting. Also, Iraq didn't had suppourt from other countries, while Ukraine have such suppourt. And even in such conditions US took a MONTH to occupie Iraq. Also, US had economical superiority over isolated in 1991 Iraq by DOZENS of times.
Russian invasion at now goes in absolutely normal speed, just how it could be, when you are fighting against the largest Europen country with 40 million population and army of 200 thousand troops.
4
-
Russians had invaded Ukraine without numerical superiority, while Ukraine is the largest land millitary in Europe after Russia. Ukraine have far more tanks, than Germany, Poland, Britain or France. Russian and Ukrainian armies have the same level of training, logistics and equipment, but Ukraine have worser economy and equal life standarts, than Russia. So, Ukraine have lower ammount of economical resources per every soldier, having lesser soldiers, than Russia. Even after sanctions Russian economy is still more effective. If the quality of troops is equal, according to the law of millitary science attacking side is suffering more casualities. Ukraine isn't lesser corrupt than Russia, Ukrainian army isn't really better trained, than Russian army, despite the fact that Ukrainians were trained by NATO officers - Ukraine don't had economical resources to organize millitary exercizes, and if Ukrainian army is better trained than Russian, the differense isn't huge.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed:
1) Russian soldiers aren't motivated to fight against brother Slavic people, a lot of Russians have relatives in Ukraine, probably some Russian soldiers have relarives in Ukraine, and war is totally unpopular in Russia. Russian soldiers are mentally and morally supressed, they don't want to fight against brother Slavic people. Opposite - Ukrainians have moral boom, they are fighting for their homeland.
2) Russian command probably believed in its own propaganda, and commanders in Kremlin were thinking, that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days without resistance, and Russian troops would be met with flowers. And Russian command simply didn't prepared for a war - Russians didn't planned, that they would face the resistance, they thought that they would take all of Ukraine in 3 days, and this is why Russians at now have poor logistics and preparation.
Russia have a population of 146 million people, while Ukraine have the population of 40 million. The life standarts, economy, corruption, level of training in the army, logistics and millitary productions in the Russia and Ukraine are in the same level. But Ukrainians have the morale boom, while Russians are supressed, and Russians weren't prepared for the real war, they were thinking that they would be met with flowers by Ukrainians.
I think that the corruption isn't the real reason of Russian failure, because Ukraine is also very corrupt country. Before the war Ukraine was economically more poor than Russia (in terms of currensy and international trade, but life standarts were +- equal) and Ukrainian government isn't lesser corrupt, than Russian. So, the corruption couldn't be the reason of Russian failure, because Ukrainian millitary also was very corrupt before the war.
The comparison with Iraq is nonesense, because Iraq was technologically backward compared to the US, and Iraqish population had low morale and didn't wanted to fight for their government - Iraqish soldiers were surrendering without a fight. US army was preparing for the invasion for a long time, and US had huge economical superiority. Also, Iraq geographically is a flat territory - the desert, very good for tanks and good for rocket weapons targeting. Also, Iraq didn't had suppourt from other countries, while Ukraine have such suppourt. And even in such conditions US took a MONTH to occupie Iraq. Also, US had economical superiority over isolated in 1991 Iraq by DOZENS of times.
Russian invasion at now goes in absolutely normal speed, just how it could be, when you are fighting against the largest Europen country with 40 million population and army of 200 thousand troops.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
China isn't Russian friend - Chinese economy depends on the Western property rights - Chinese economy was built as a labor market for Western companies. China have more trade with US, than with Russia, and Chinese students and immigrants in US at now are normal thing. The US is main investor of Chinese economy. This is a lie, that China and USA are enemies - the government needs the picture of foreign enemy for propaganda, to unite people in the country and distract people from social problems. China and US aren't enemies - de facto Chinese economy depends on Western World as a labor market. The Chinese aren't able to build something by their numerical brains and hands. Their economy was build by Western World. And Western World, which is controlling exchange rates, depends on cheap products from China. But both Chinese and American governments are lying to their people, by picturing this "enemy". In reality China isn't suppourting Russia - China is using the moment to supress Russia in Chinese-Russian economic deals. There is no secret, that Russian-Chinese economic deals aren't equal. Russia suffering more and gaining lesser from trading with China. For example, in 2014, when Russia invaded Crimea, Russia isolated herself from the West, the West sanctioned Russia for annexation of Crimea in 2014. But Russia depends on oil and gaz trade and import of technologies. And Russia had no choise, but to build gaz pepeline to China. This peoject was very expensive to Russia, and China in 2015 simply used the situation - China was bying Russian gaz by much lower prices than Global average. China also cuts down Russian forests in Siberia for low prices, destroying the Russian ecology and beauties of Siberia. Chinese are making the building materials from Russian wood, but Chinese are selling to Russians the lowest-quality building materials, that were made from sawdust, while normal-quality materials Chinese are holding for themselves. Russia have a status of a resource colony in Russo-Chinese economic relations. And at now China would also use the situation by colonizing Russia more - Samsung and Apple already leaved Russian market, and Chinese companies would take it. Europe at now started the programm of removal from dependence from Russian gaz and oil. Russian economy is totally dependent on oil and gaz. Putin, like street bagger would run to China for economic deal. And Chinese wouldn't made this deal equal with Russians. Putin before the 2022 was an independent president, but after this war he would simply the executer of orders from Bejing.
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@sectero9450 you are talking nonesence - Ukraine is just as same corrupt as Russia. Ukrainian officials and oligarchs also spent money on yachts.
For example Ukrainian president Poroshenko, who was an oligatch before he became president, have a business in Russia - a factory that produces chocolate candies "Roshen". Also, during the war in the Donbass In 2015, there was a scandal when coal from the territory of Donbass, controlled by pro-Russian rebels, was exported from this territory to Russia, and then from Russia was exported to Ukraine. And the corruption connections of the President of Ukraine with this coal traffic were found. Can you imagine - thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are dying at the front, and at the same time, the President of Ukraine has a business in Russia, and coal from the territories of the rebels is brought to Ukraine through Russia, and the President of Ukraine receives kickbacks from this? Or Zelensky, who worked as a comedian on Russian television in the 2000s. In 2008, a Russian comedy show had a number dedicated to Russia's victory in the war with Georgia in the five-day war in August 2008. In this humorous number, Zelensky played the role of Georgian President Saakashvili, and there were two other actors who played the role of the President of the United States and Ukraine. This humorous issue ridiculed the entire foreign policy of Ukraine, Georgia and the United States, and it turns out that in 2008 Zelensky on Russian television ridiculed his own country. Zelensky is just a talking head on TV, he is an actor, he has no political power. In Russia, the police state - power is in the hands of the police and special services, and the state is above business. In Ukraine, on the contrary - in Ukraine, the oligarchs rule the country, and the oligarchs in Ukraine are above the state. President Poroshenko was himself an oligarch. And Zelensky is a famous actor, and therefore the Ukrainian oligarchs decided to appoint him as a talking head on TV. But he does not make any decisions, he has no power. Ukrainian oligarchs are accustomed to cooperating with Russia - an example of this is the permanent agreements on gas discounts and the fact that the gas pipes that consistently supplied gas to Europe right during the war in the last year and a half have not been touched or bombed.
This is a capitalist war, and both Russian and Ukrainian elites are not saint. Both Ukrainian and Russian elites benefit from this war. Even Western media said few times that Ukrainian generals and military officials are corrupted. Israel recently refused to transfer weapons to Ukraine because, according to Israel's prime minister, "Ukraine is reselling weapons to terrorists in Syria."
Ukrainian oligarchs are ready to cede a small piece of territory to Russia, Russia will definitely squeeze, and then there will be a decrease in the intensity of hostilities and a freeze of the conflict without negotiations.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3