Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "CNN"
channel.
-
71
-
15
-
14
-
At the begining of the war Russia has only about 400,000 infantrymen, paratroopers and marines, half of whom are conscripts who do not take part in the special operation. And of the contractors, only volunteers fought until September 21. Thus, Russia started the war on February 24, having about 120 thousand of its own contract soldiers and several tens of thousands of soldiers from the DPR and LPR. Ukraine at the beginning of the war had 220 thousand soldiers, and Ukraine also had 900 thousand reservists, and Ukraine began to mobilize on the first day of the war.
Unsurprisingly, the Russian army's offensive bogged down a month later. It's not enough that it's easier to defend than to attack, so besides, the defending Ukrainian side also has a numerical advantage. It is clear that the Russian offensive has bogged down and almost stopped. Nevertheless, during March 2022, Russian troops achieved tremendous success, given that the Russian army was advancing, being in a numerical minority. And do not forget that Ukraine has been preparing for war for 8 years and has been building fortifications in the southeast for 8 years.
The Russian army, being in a numerical minority, continued to advance, albeit slowly, gnawing through the Ukrainian defense throughout the spring and summer of 2022. What does this tell us? This tells us that the losses of the Ukrainian army are actually higher than the Russian losses. Because if the losses of the Russian army were higher than the Ukrainian ones, then Russia would not have conducted successful offensive operations throughout the spring and summer of 2022, being in a numerical minority. Thus, we can conclude that Russia fought for several months, until September 21, 2022, being in a numerical minority, and the Russian army used the tactics of artillery gnawing through the defense, while the Ukrainian army attacked the positions of Russian troops head-on with cannon fodder. Russia has superiority in artillery, aviation and technology.
Ukraine certainly has modern Western weapons and drones. But drones and fancy missiles, due to their numbers, cannot compensate for the amount of aviation, cruise missiles and artillery that Russia has. And in general, it is not surprising that Ukraine's losses are higher, given that 95% of losses in the war are the result of artillery and aviation, in which Russia has total superiority. So in my theory, everything is generally logical. 90% of losses in the war are the result of artillery action, and Russia has total superiority in this regard.
As for the technology and quality of weapons, Ukraine certainly has modern Western weapons, but a minority of the army is armed with them. And most of the soldiers of Ukraine are fighting mainly with old Soviet junk from the 1980s. At the same time, Russia is armed with modernized equipment, for example, T-72b3 tanks of 2016. The Russians took a Soviet tank, changed the engine, improved the armor, installed more modern equipment, upgraded this tank to NATO standards of the late noughties and early 2010s. While Ukraine, due to corruption and a weak economy, was unable to upgrade its old weapons to modern quality standards. Thus, Russian Soviet tanks are much better and more modern than Ukrainian Soviet tanks, because Russia has upgraded its Soviet equipment to modern standards, and the Ukrainian army is armed with museum expansions of the Soviet era.
Do not forget that in addition to the advantage in mobilization, Ukraine has an advantage in the form of supplies of Western weapons. Moreover, the supplies have such volumes that many NATO countries have already exhausted their weapons stocks. 20/30 NATO member states announced in mid-November 2022 that they could no longer support Ukraine. The United States stopped supplying grenade launchers to Ukraine in the summer, because they had exhausted a significant share of their reserves, and they still need reserves for Taiwan.
It is clear that thanks to the mobilization of the Ukrainian army, armed with NATO weapons, has accumulated a huge numerical advantage by August 2022. In August, the Russian offensive finally bogged down in Ukrainian numbers, and in September, the Ukrainian army launched a successful offensive, liberating Balakleya and cutting off Russian supplies in Izyum, after which Russian troops evacuated from the Kharkiv region.
And also, using American precision weapons, the Ukrainians destroyed bridges across the Dnieper and left Russian troops in Kherson without supplies, which forced the Russians to leave Kherson. By the way, there are advantages in this - the Dnieper is a wide river that no one ever forces, and therefore it is a magnificent defensive position that Ukrainians will never cross.
After the defeats at the front, it became clear to the Russians that the numerical advantage on the side of the Ukrainian army is so great that Russia also needs to declare a response mobilization. On September 21, 2022, mobilization in Russia was announced. The Ukrainian army won all 7 months of the war only with numerical superiority, suffering more losses than the Russian army. Now that Russia has declared mobilization, we can forget about the successful Ukrainian offensives.
After the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge on October 8, 2022, Russia launched massive missile strikes on Ukraine's energy and infrastructure. And now let's imagine what would have happened if Russia had launched such missile strikes from the very beginning of the war? Ukraine would have capitulated long ago.
14
-
11
-
9
-
8
-
6
-
6
-
So you want to say that Russia blew up its own hydroelectric power plant? They bomb themselves, right?
The explosion of the Kakhovskaya HPP is not beneficial to anyone except Ukraine - the Ukrainian-controlled city of Kherson is located on the right bank of the Dnieper, there is a hill there, and settlements on the left, Russian bank of the Dnieper were mainly affected by flooding. After retreating from Kherson in November 2022, Russian troops for many months built defensive positions near the bank of the Dnieper, but due to the break of the dam, they were forced to withdraw from their defensive positions, which were built for a long time, and the Dnieper River upstream from the Kakhovskaya HPP will narrow, which will make it easier for Ukrainian troops to land across the river upstream, where The Russian command did not prepare a defense line due to the huge width of the reservoir, which Ukrainian troops on stationary boats would hardly dare to cross. But now the Russian defensive positions downstream of the reservoir are flooded, and upstream of the dam the reservoir will narrow, which will make it easier for Ukrainian troops to potentially land.
Russian troops were still on the right bank of the Dnieper and in Kherson in 2022, when Ukraine launched a rocket into the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station to cut the escape routes for the Russian army from Kherson. Ukraine bombed this dam with a rocket a few months ago, but the European clown Borrel in the morning, with a hangover, without even figuring it out, said that Russia was to blame.
Due to the undermining of the Kakhovskaya HPP, water problems may begin in the Crimea, and it will also be impossible to launch the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, which is controlled by Russia.
In total, we have that the explosion of the dam led to the flooding of settlements on the left bank of the Dnieper controlled by Russia, and the right bank of the river controlled by Ukraine is located on a hill. Russian army defensive positions were flooded, and higher up the river narrowed in the region where the Russian command did not even assume the possibility of a Ukrainian landing. In November 2022, Ukraine hit the dam with a HIMARS missile in an attempt to cut off the Russian troops' escape routes, which caused damage to the dam. And also because of the dam break, the Zaporozhye NPP and the Crimea will now be without water. But the Western media and the stupid Western population again blame Russia for everything.
The undermining of the Kakhovskaya HPP is in no way beneficial to Russia, Ukraine did it. Ukraine blew up the Kakhovskaya HPP, and it is Ukraine's fault that there is a flood there now.
6
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
Let's talk about Crimea. My main argument is that Crimea is ethnically Russian territory. In 2013, Russians made up 60% of the population in Crimea. 60%. At the same time Ukrainians made up 16% of the population. This is essentially a Russian territory, where the absolute majority of the population is Russian. Well, Crimea itself was originally legally Russian, until 1954. Until 1954, Crimea, a territory with a 60% Russian population, legally belonged to the Russian Soviet Republic. But in 1954, Russian territory was transferred to Ukraine. In 1991, we all together destroyed the USSR. Russia and the Russian people played a major role in this process. It was Boris Yeltsin, the head of Soviet Russia, who back in the 1980s actively advocated Russia's independence from the USSR. In 1989, Russia achieved autonomy from the USSR and the Soviet government. In 1991, Yeltsin defeated the Stalinists, who tried to stage a coup and arrested Gorbachev. After that, Yeltsin banned the Communist Party on the territory of the USSR, and then Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed the Belavezha Accords, according to which Russia, Ukraine and Belarus left the USSR. Ukraine was a very friendly country. In view of friendly relations, we were satisfied with the fact that Crimea was part of Ukraine. Because if we are friends, then we are satisfied with the fact that our territories are part of Ukraine. In 2014, everything changed. A coup d'etat took place in Ukraine, the pro-Russian elites were overthrown. Then our troops returned the Crimea to their native harbor. The Ukrainian army did not defend the Crimea. Because then they knew whose land it was. Ukrainian troops left the territory without a fight, shaking hands with our officers. The local population was also happy to be reunited with Russia. I myself communicated on social networks with many people from Crimea, and I can say that the local population was really happy about Crimea joining Russia. A small proportion of the Ukrainian population was not happy, but they are a minority there. And even Ukrainians who left Crimea admit that only residents of Crimea can decide in which country they will live.
4
-
Let's talk about Crimea. My main argument is that Crimea is ethnically Russian territory. In 2013, Russians made up 60% of the population in Crimea. 60%. At the same time Ukrainians made up 16% of the population. This is essentially a Russian territory, where the absolute majority of the population is Russian. Well, Crimea itself was originally legally Russian, until 1954. Until 1954, Crimea, a territory with a 60% Russian population, legally belonged to the Russian Soviet Republic. But in 1954, Russian territory was transferred to Ukraine. In 1991, we all together destroyed the USSR. Russia and the Russian people played a major role in this process. It was Boris Yeltsin, the head of Soviet Russia, who back in the 1980s actively advocated Russia's independence from the USSR. In 1989, Russia achieved autonomy from the USSR and the Soviet government. In 1991, Yeltsin defeated the Stalinists, who tried to stage a coup and arrested Gorbachev. After that, Yeltsin banned the Communist Party on the territory of the USSR, and then Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed the Belavezha Accords, according to which Russia, Ukraine and Belarus left the USSR. Ukraine was a very friendly country. In view of friendly relations, we were satisfied with the fact that Crimea was part of Ukraine. Because if we are friends, then we are satisfied with the fact that our territories are part of Ukraine. In 2014, everything changed. A coup d'etat took place in Ukraine, the pro-Russian elites were overthrown. Then our troops returned the Crimea to their native harbor. The Ukrainian army did not defend the Crimea. Because then they knew whose land it was. Ukrainian troops left the territory without a fight, shaking hands with our officers. The local population was also happy to be reunited with Russia. I myself communicated on social networks with many people from Crimea, and I can say that the local population was really happy about Crimea joining Russia. A small proportion of the Ukrainian population was not happy, but they are a minority there. And even Ukrainians who left Crimea admit that only residents of Crimea can decide in which country they will live.
4
-
@ellebelle8515 the Auchan supermarket which was visited by Tucker can be found in most of Russian regions, with exception of Fat East, majority of Russian population lives in European part of Russia and logistics to Far East are coming not from Europe, but from Asia, and the Far East has the most developed small and medium businesses with no giant companies and corporations, at least in terms of supermarkets.
Tucker Carlson wanted to show that Russians are living the same lifestyle as people in the West by visiting groccery shop.
Russian prices are lower than American prices in dollars, but yes, average salaries in Russia are smaller. The problem is that Russian pro-Western liberals and Western media is simply comparing countries in salaries in dollars, not considering the difference in prices. Russia is much more poor than USA, but it is false to measure difference in life standarts by salaries in dollars, because prices in Russia are also lower, and they were 1.5-2 times lower before the war, sanctions and covid. 1.5-2 times, I say it as a Russian.
4
-
@Moraprecisionreloader 1) Russians at now are advancing towards Bakhmut.
2) The Russians left Kherson because the Ukrainians had destroyed all the bridges across the Dnieper with the help of American precision weapons, and the Russian troops did not have normal supplies and reinforcements. Moreover, the Russians left this region in an organized manner, without a fight. Russian troops were not defeated on the battlefield near Kherson. As for the successes of Ukraine, it is important to understand that Russia, until the end of September, did not fight against Ukraine at full strength. Russia fought for 7 months without mobilization and without conscripts, using only volunteers. Ukraine, on the contrary, has been mobilizing since the first day of the war. It is clear that the Ukrainians have accumulated a numerical superiority, and were able to achieve success. However, after the Ukrainian successes, Russia announced mobilization - Putin did not want to announce mobilization for a long time because of the risks of revolution and unrest in the country. But when the Ukrainian army has a numerical superiority of one and a half to two times, they defeat us. Therefore, it is necessary to equalize the number of armies. Mobilized Russian troops are now arriving at the front, which means that the Ukrainian army will soon be unable to achieve any success at all. Because the population of Russia is 3.5 times larger. Russia can pull so many troops to the front that the Ukrainians will not achieve anything. This is where the war will end.
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
When Russia started the war, Russia has only about 400,000 infantrymen, paratroopers and marines, half of whom are conscripts who do not take part in the special operation. And of the contractors, only volunteers fought until September 21. Thus, Russia started the war on February 24, having about 120 thousand of its own contract soldiers and several tens of thousands of soldiers from the DPR and LPR. Ukraine at the beginning of the war had 220 thousand soldiers, and Ukraine also had 900 thousand reservists, and Ukraine began to mobilize on the first day of the war.
Unsurprisingly, the Russian army's offensive bogged down a month later. It's not enough that it's easier to defend than to attack, so besides, the defending Ukrainian side also has a numerical advantage. It is clear that the Russian offensive has bogged down and almost stopped. Nevertheless, during March 2022, Russian troops achieved tremendous success, given that the Russian army was advancing, being in a numerical minority. And do not forget that Ukraine has been preparing for war for 8 years and has been building fortifications in the southeast for 8 years.
The Russian army, being in a numerical minority, continued to advance, albeit slowly, gnawing through the Ukrainian defense throughout the spring and summer of 2022. What does this tell us? This tells us that the losses of the Ukrainian army are actually higher than the Russian losses. Because if the losses of the Russian army were higher than the Ukrainian ones, then Russia would not have conducted successful offensive operations throughout the spring and summer of 2022, being in a numerical minority. Thus, we can conclude that Russia fought for several months, until September 21, 2022, being in a numerical minority, and the Russian army used the tactics of artillery gnawing through the defense, while the Ukrainian army attacked the positions of Russian troops head-on with cannon fodder. Russia has superiority in artillery, aviation and technology.
Ukraine certainly has modern Western weapons and drones. But drones and fancy missiles, due to their numbers, cannot compensate for the amount of aviation, cruise missiles and artillery that Russia has. And in general, it is not surprising that Ukraine's losses are higher, given that 95% of losses in the war are the result of artillery and aviation, in which Russia has total superiority. So in my theory, everything is generally logical. 90% of losses in the war are the result of artillery action, and Russia has total superiority in this regard.
As for the technology and quality of weapons, Ukraine certainly has modern Western weapons, but a minority of the army is armed with them. And most of the soldiers of Ukraine are fighting mainly with old Soviet junk from the 1980s. At the same time, Russia is armed with modernized equipment, for example, T-72b3 tanks of 2016. The Russians took a Soviet tank, changed the engine, improved the armor, installed more modern equipment, upgraded this tank to NATO standards of the late noughties and early 2010s. While Ukraine, due to corruption and a weak economy, was unable to upgrade its old weapons to modern quality standards. Thus, Russian Soviet tanks are much better and more modern than Ukrainian Soviet tanks, because Russia has upgraded its Soviet equipment to modern standards, and the Ukrainian army is armed with museum expansions of the Soviet era.
Do not forget that in addition to the advantage in mobilization, Ukraine has an advantage in the form of supplies of Western weapons. Moreover, the supplies have such volumes that many NATO countries have already exhausted their weapons stocks. 20/30 NATO member states announced in mid-November 2022 that they could no longer support Ukraine. The United States stopped supplying grenade launchers to Ukraine in the summer, because they had exhausted a significant share of their reserves, and they still need reserves for Taiwan.
It is clear that thanks to the mobilization of the Ukrainian army, armed with NATO weapons, has accumulated a huge numerical advantage by August 2022. In August, the Russian offensive finally bogged down in Ukrainian numbers, and in September, the Ukrainian army launched a successful offensive, liberating Balakleya and cutting off Russian supplies in Izyum, after which Russian troops evacuated from the Kharkiv region.
And also, using American precision weapons, the Ukrainians destroyed bridges across the Dnieper and left Russian troops in Kherson without supplies, which forced the Russians to leave Kherson. By the way, there are advantages in this - the Dnieper is a wide river that no one ever forces, and therefore it is a magnificent defensive position that Ukrainians will never cross.
After the defeats at the front, it became clear to the Russians that the numerical advantage on the side of the Ukrainian army is so great that Russia also needs to declare a response mobilization. On September 21, 2022, mobilization in Russia was announced. The Ukrainian army won all 7 months of the war only with numerical superiority, suffering more losses than the Russian army. Now that Russia has declared mobilization, we can forget about the successful Ukrainian offensives.
After the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge on October 8, 2022, Russia launched massive missile strikes on Ukraine's energy and infrastructure. And now let's imagine what would have happened if Russia had launched such missile strikes from the very beginning of the war? Ukraine would have capitulated long ago.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bloodgout you can't tell me anything argumented, because my words are proven by statistics and facts, and your words are based on your fantasies. Russian army is very strong, but Russia fought not in full strength, while Ukraine already mobilized more than a million men, and at now Ukraine is preparing to mobilize women and invalid persons, and aslo Ukraine had the largest military in Europe with more tanks than Germany, Poland, Britain and France combined and largest territory, while Russia used just 150 thousand troops against superior in numbers Ukrainian army. During WW2 all sides had armies of millions of men. Germany in 1939 had 3 million soldiers, France in 1940 had 3 million soldiers, USSR in 1945 had 7.4 million soldiers, USA had 5 million soldiers in all frontlines, not considering US navy and airforce. During WW2 there were large armies with millions of men, and this is why in WW2 territories and regions had been capturing by these large armies very fast, but it is impossible to capture entire 40 million Ukraine, largest country in Europe, having only 150 thousand troops.
But Russia, unlike Ukraine, is fighting without total mobilization. Ukraine already mobilized more than a million men, and Ukraine is preparing to mobilize women and invalids, while Russia made only one wave of mobilization in fall 2022 when situation got critical because of Ukrainian numerical superiority - in early september 2022 for every one Russian soldier in the frontlines there were 2-3 Ukrainian soldiers, Ukrainian fall 2022 counteroffensive succeded only because Ukrainian command mobilized a lot of cannon fodder and Ukrainian casualities were higher. And Russia was forced to make mobilization in order to equalize strength on the frontlines. And when Russian army have the same numerical strength as Ukrainian, Ukraine is unable to defeat Russia and unable to succesfully advance, and Ukrainian 2023 summer offensive proved this. And this is not because Ukrainian army is weak. And Russian army isn't weak. This is because of technology, we live in 2024, in the era of FPV drones and internet and at now means of intelligence are on the peak. It is impossible for BOTH Russia and Ukraine to conduct an offensives because of FPV drones and intelligence. This is the same situation as in WW1, when machine guns appeared and defensive technology was superior over offensive technology, and both German and French armies during WW1 were unable to conduct offensives. But German, French and British armies in WW1 weren't weak, this was just a specific era in military history, when new military technology appeared, and military command simply didn't knew what to do with this new technology. Only after WW1, when tanks and combat avation appeared, radio technology and radars appeared, wars became much faster and in WW2 there were no stalemates like in WW1, but opposite - rapid advances of all armies. Modern Russian army isn't weak, we just living in such technological era that because of FPV drones and modern technologies it is impossible for ANY army in the World to conduct offensive, Ukrainian army also is unable to captute territories if Ukrainians don't have 2-3 times more men than Russians, like it was in fall 2022, when 400 thousand Ukrainian troops in the frontlines fought against 150 thousand Russian troops, and Ukrainians advanced near Kharkiv and Kherson. And don't forget about 200 billion $ military and financial aid to Ukraine.
German army in WW1 wasn't weak, French army in WW1 wasn't weak, and modern Russian army also isn't weak, we just live in specific era of military technology, where due to the FPV drones combat is simillar to WW1 style trench warfare. And of course it is impossible to conduct a WW2 style rapid advances without having a few MILLIONS of soldiers in your army, like it was in WW2. At the begining of 2022 Russia had just 240 thousand contract infantry troops, there are no armies with millions of men like in WW2, when France had 3 million soldiers, Germany had 3 million and USSR had 5.4 million in 1941.
2
-
2
-
@ashleylittle6776 The annexation of Crimea is not recognized in the UN, because firstly, the states of the World are forced to bend under the United States - the United States is the leading superpower in the World, and therefore almost all countries in the UN pretend to agree with the position of the United States. Secondly, most countries of the world simply do not care about some kind of Crimea, Russia and Ukraine. Do you think at least one country that voted in the UN conducted a serious historical study in order to cast a correct vote? No one understood there. Thirdly, Russia has never made claims to Crimea in the UN, because until 2014, Russia and Ukraine were friendly countries that actively traded. On May 9, the Ukrainian military marched on Red Square as allies of Russia. And in 2014, an anti-Russian revolution took place in Ukraine. Until 2014, Russia did not make claims to Crimea, and therefore no one understood the annexation of Crimea, and as I have already written, no one in the World except Russia and Ukraine cared about it. Politicians in the Philippines, China, Australia, Brazil or South Africa are not interested in this, they did not delve into history and statistics before voting. In addition, the annexation of Crimea really took place with violations of international law. The troops invaded the territory of Crimea long before it was incorporated into Russia, and voting in Crimea was already under the supervision of the Russian military. The vote itself was fake, there was a fake turnout of 84% and 4% of the votes "against". The real turnout is estimated at 40%, but in this case about 10% of the votes are "against". Russian sociologists believe that the majority of the Russian population of Crimea came to the vote and voted "for", and the Ukrainian and non-Russian share of the population simply ignored this vote. But in general, the vote was fake, although even without falsifications there would have been 90% of the votes "for" with a low turnout.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@xvi1128 I know who the Tatars are. I will even say more - my grandfather is a Tatar. As for the Crimean Tatars, since when have Stalin's repressions and Stalin's crimes been the fault of the Russians? Russian Russians, especially modern Russians, have anything to do with Stalin's crimes? Especially considering how many Russians were shot or died of starvation during his reign. Stalin did deport Crimean Tatars after 1945, but what does the Russians have to do with it?
As for Russia, I want to tell you that the English language has some shortcomings regarding Russia. Look - there is a difference between the concept of "nation" and "people". The people is an identity that is based on genetics and race. And a nation is an identity that is based on ideology and worldview. From the point of view of genetics, there is no Soviet people. There is no Soviet genetics. But once there was a Soviet nation, which included Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and many other peoples. Also a good example is the Anglo-Saxons. How do the British, Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders and Americans differ from each other from the point of view of genetics? Nothing. Genetically, they are one people. Australians, Canadians and Americans are descendants of English immigrants from Britain. But these are different nations that respect their independence and statehood. There is a difference between the concept of "nation" and "people". Americans, Australians and Canadians are genetically English, and the British nation includes the English, Scots and Wales.
So, in English, in matters concerning Russia, there is no such difference. Two Russian words - "Russkiy" and "Rossiyanin" are translated into English as "Russian". Although "Russian" is about genetics, and "Rossiyanin" is a nation. So, our nation is completely independent of genetics. You can be of any blood, even a Turk, even a Chinese, even a German. But you can consider yourself Rossiyanin if you want. Again, just like the Scots are part of the British nation. There is absolutely no separatism in Russia and no desire to separate from Russia. Therefore, Russia will not collapse in the same way as the USSR, in which all republics, including Russia itself, wanted independence from the Communist Party. It's stupid to think that the USSR and Russia are the same thing. It was Boris Yeltsin, the head of the Russian Soviet Republic, who publicly tore off the CPSU badge at a meeting of the CPSU. It was Yeltsin who achieved Russia's autonomy from the USSR in 1990. It was Russia that made a key contribution to the collapse of the USSR in 1991. So again, I don't understand why Russians should answer to Crimean Tatars for the crimes of the Communist Party and Stalin. Boris Yeltsin, when he was still sober, simply trampled on the Communists and made Russia, and with it other republics, independent. In Russia, all peoples live as a friendly family. Russia is a secular state with freedom of religion. Small nations have the right to learn their own language. What can not be said about Ukraine, where the Russian language has been systematically oppressed over the past 30 years. And Crimean Tatars associate themselves more with Russia, not with Ukraine. Crimean Tatars in 2014, even if they did not consider themselves citizens of Russia, but at least treated them neutrally.
2
-
@johnarnold893 Ukrainians speak Russian because the Soviet communists, who dreamed of a world revolution, wanted to create some kind of international language. That is why the communists changed the Russian language beyond recognition, but forgot to rename it. In 1917, Russian was almost indistinguishable from Ukrainian. However, the communists changed the Russian language very much, removing a few letters from the alphabet, radically changing the grammar and adding a bunch of foreign words. But the communists forgot to rename this new language, which continued to be called Russian. Therefore, this language is 100% spoken by the inhabitants of Russia, but other nations of the USSR could not be convinced to speak completely Russian.
2
-
Ukraine has been mobilizing since February 24, and the number of the Ukrainian army is growing every day, while Russia is fighting with a limited contingent of contract volunteers. Regardless of the losses of the Russian and Ukrainian sides, there is such a situation that Ukraine has accumulated a serious numerical advantage, and as a result, the Russian offensive in the Donbas has stopped and for 3 months now there have been battles for Bakhmut, Soledar and Disputed. And the Ukrainian army is successfully advancing in the Kherson region, and recently they very quickly liberated the Kharkiv region. Therefore, Putin, in the seventh month of the war, decided to begin mobilizing reservists in order to at least equalize the number of the two warring armies. Because when the Ukrainian army has a numerical advantage of one and a half or two times over the Russian one, military actions are not in favor of Russia. In general, it would be better if the military operations on February 24 did not even begin
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Spectre11B Germany didn't actually have such a strong army in the 1930s. Even by 1939, after several years of hard training, the German army was far behind the French or British army. I'm not talking about training, I'm talking about military equipment, I'm talking about the supply of troops and military production, I'm talking about logistics. The Germans had almost no oil, they were forced to process coal into fuel. In 1939, almost the entire German army traveled on horseback. In the British, French, Soviet and American armies, the mechanization of troops was much higher. Germany, due to lack of fuel, had ability to produce very few tanks per month. The Soviet Union in 1939 had about 20,000 tanks. France has about 3,000. Britain had about fifteen hundred. Germany had about 2,000 tanks. At the same time, German tanks were not better in terms of technical characteristics than French, Soviet or English. And the early German tanks were generally human-sized machine-gun tankettes. German aviation was inferior to the British, the British also had good self-propelled guns that hit any German tank. The German army in 1939 was inferior to the French in everything except education, training and command. With regards to the reasons for the construction of the army. First, any state has the right to protect its borders. Britain and France forbade Germany to have an army. But who are they? Germany revived its army.
Secondly, because of these unfriendly countries, because of the Soviet threat (the USSR sought to spread the World Revolution), Germany needed an army, at least somewhat comparable to the French one. In 1939, the German army was worse armed and manned than the French.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2