Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "Putin's Armageddon Weapon" video.
-
15
-
9
-
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 (my opinion) if Ukrainian army is better trained than Russian, I don't think that the differense is huge. Probably the fighting capability of an Ukrainian is ~125% of Russian + the advantage of defensive side in casualities. Also, Ukrainians have drones and modern Western AT weapons.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed in first few weeks:
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. Also, civillian deaths would demoralize Russians and rise the morale of Ukrainians.
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. Russians were invading Ukraine by moving in columns, very dangerous for ambushes.
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.
After 3 weeks Russians had stopped their invasion, and at now they are reinforcing and forming the frontline, they made a pause.
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.
I think that casualities ratio between Russia and Ukraine is ~2 to 1 in favour of Ukraine.
The popular 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.
8
-
Nominal GDP doesn't show the standard of living because prices in different countries are different, but nominal GDP is set at the exchange rate, despite the fact that the price of a dollar is set the same as the price of any other commodity - depending on the magnitude of demand and its supply. Russian economy, roughly speaking, may be all right, but if the demand for the dollar in Russia increases, the price of the dollar will also increase, and as a result, statistics will show a decline in the Russian economy, which doesn't exist. This is exactly what happened in 2014 in Russia - there was almost no drop in production volumes and the production level in Russia, but GDP statistics fell by almost 2 times due to an increase in demand for the dollar among the population. Even if the economic decline was small, the population still wants to protect money from inflation, and wants to buy dollars, and N. GDP statistics are starting to lie.
The sanctions that are being imposed against Russia will not lead to a serious collapse of production, and even in case of isolation Russia is capable of producing everything itself, as in Soviet times, when Russians were able to produce televisions and vacuum cleaners. And of course Russia is able to produce her own nukes. Even USA are dependent on Russian nuclear fuel in their nuclear plants industry. Russia is a World leader in production of wheat. Russia is a World leader in production of huge lasers. Russia have production of presses for Toyota and Renault. Russia controls 20% of World oil market and Russia have production of gaz for Europe. Also Russia have a lot of resources. With such resources Russia would be able to live for the next few years, untill America would replace Russia from European market of oil and gaz. When Russia would lose a European oil and gaz market, that would be a collapse of Russian economy. Probably 2-5 years. Russia is dependent on Wetsern oil-production tech, and Russia at now are going out of oil fields, that Russia is capable to use. But in going 4 years Russia is still capable to do something.
Russia started to trade gaz for roubles, and at now dollar price in Russia stands on pre-war level, and it is still falling.
Russia at now have a Nominal GDP, that shows the ability of bying imports - 1.5 triillion $ (10th place in the World list) and GDP PPP, that shows the scales of production - 3.6 triillion dollars, 5th place in the World list. In terms of the scales of production Russian economy is 5th largest in the World, in terms of ability of bying imports Russian economy in 10th position. Life standarts are in 60th position in the World list from ~180.
Also, Russia have the Chinese big brother that would trade with Russia, and Russia would have a Chinese tech and computers, but this would be worser than competition of all producers. China would probably make Russia its colony.
2
-
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 (my opinion) if Ukrainian army is better trained than Russian, I don't think that the differense is huge. Probably the fighting capability of an Ukrainian is ~125% of Russian + the advantage of defensive side in casualities. Also, Ukrainians have drones and modern Western AT weapons.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed in first few weeks:
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. Also, civillian deaths would demoralize Russians and rise the morale of Ukrainians.
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. Russian forces were invading Ukraine by moving in columns, very dangerous for ambushes.
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 Russians made the progress in the first 3 weeks of war, but they exhauted their unprepared force, and at now Russians had stopped the invasion to reinforce the frontline, at least build a frontline, to prepare for the continulation.
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.
2
-
1
-
1
-
@boerekable Russia don't have 19th century villages - people have televisions and cheap cars, like in Ukraine. Ukrainian province isn't better. Life standarts in Russia before the war were higher than in Ukraine. I could believe to your worlds, that Ukrainian villages are a little reacher, than Russian, but this is not due to the governmental management, but due to the Ukraine have better and more fertile soils, than Russia have. The Ukrainian villages are a little bit reacher than Russian only because they have better climate and soils for agriculture. But de facto life standarts in the middle and provincial cities in Russia and Ukraine are same, while huge Russian cities are much better places to live than huge Ukrainian cities, including even Kyiv.
Ukraine have better potential of growth, than Russia, because the population density in Ukraine is higher, than in Russia. Population density is a main resource that you need for economic growth, because the economic growth is dependent on demand. You can produce some product, but you need to sell it, and you need a demand from a consumer. And the density of population is playing high role in the economic growth, because you need profitability of your production. And this is why you can't open your enterprise in small village with low population. Because these low population wouldn't be able to pay for your goods. And this is why Asian countries at now are showing such economic growth. They have huge population density. Do you know about McKinder Rimland and Heartland theory? Ukraine have better soils for agriculture and more population density, that Russia. This is why the social separation in Ukraine is lower, than in Russia. And Russia have resources, such as oil and gaz, and this is why Russia have much better life standarts in huge cities, than Ukraine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
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 (my opinion) if Ukrainian army is better trained than Russian, I don't think that the differense is huge. Probably the fighting capability of an Ukrainian is ~125% of Russian + the advantage of defensive side in casualities. Also, Ukrainians have drones and modern Western AT weapons.
The only 2 reasons, why Russian invasion had failed in first few weeks:
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. Also, civillian deaths would demoralize Russians and rise the morale of Ukrainians.
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. Russian forces were invading Ukraine by moving in columns, very dangerous for ambushes.
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 Russians made the progress in the first 3 weeks of war, but they exhauted their unprepared force, and at now Russians had stopped the invasion to reinforce the frontline, at least build a frontline, to prepare for the continulation.
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.
1