Comments by "Hyok Kim" (@hyokkim7726) on "Is the Ukraine War in a Stalemate or Checkmate?" video.

  1. 02:50 Reminds me of the beginning of the end of the Soviet encirclement of the German 6th Army in Stalingrad. 05:50 I used to agree till fairly recently. However, Russian MBTs are largely obsolete MBTs, with no APS. Israelis Merkava without APS had suffered huge loses for similar reasons during their incursion into Southern Lebanon, after APS, I hear no loss. So it's a bit premature for the fall of WW2 style MBT tactical doctrines, when MBTs with APS emerge. About the only Russian tank with APS is T-14. How many T-14s have been knocked out? 10:54 Equivalent to Ruhr Industrial region in Germany, WW2. Once lose Ruhr, the war was over, only mop offs. 12:38 No worries, Russia is paranoid of PRC ambition in the Russian Far East, why Russia wants close relationship with ROK, and prefer ROK to move in as a partner in the Russian Far East. 13:22 Thanks for your objectivity. 14:44 Any nation has the right to invade any other, provided enough power, and enough motive, just like U.S. had with the Native Americans, Hawaiians, and the Russia had had with the indigenous tribes in the Urals, and what would eventually become Russian Far East, and the UK had had with India, Japan had with Korea, Okinawa, and Hokkaido, and Korea had had with Jeju Islands, and parts of Manchuria, centuries earlier. Poles had had with the Ukraine, and Russia, etc. etc. 14:56 I have a more nuanced position on this one. Yes, I had opposed the invasion of Iraq from the getgo, not for 'moral' reasons, but strictly for pragmatic reasons. Yes, U.S. invasion of Iraq did make the pseudo-Islamic wannabee problems worse, but the problem had been there already, with or without U.S. The root of the problem is that the Arabs, more than anyone else out there, with the possible exception of Han Chinese, are prisoners of the past, long gone, proverbial slaves of dead culture/civilization, and engage in false analogy, that is, since at the height of their power in history, they were 'Muslims', and that's why they were the greatest, so all they have to do to reclaim that lost glory is to strengthen their 'Islamic' faith! Basically, their own version of proverbial 'Cargo Cult'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult 16:17 I call them contractors, but I don't think I am necessarily 'Pro', not necessarily 'Anti', either. I consider myself pragmatic on this issue. Before Westphalia, the use of 'free companies' was 'normal', with far worse conduct than today. Under certain conditions, the use of 'contractors' can keep the 'regular' military more effective and more efficient as well. The effective use of 'contractors' ala 'free companies' was shown during Goryeo dynasty in Korea, contrasted with later Joseon dynasty, roughly around the same geographic area. Under Goryeo dynasty, there were 3 different militaries, one the Central Royal Army, two, major warlord private armies, three minor warlords private armies. CRA was the single biggest military, but still smaller than the combined might of the Ma private armies, who, in turn, collectively, smaller than the combined might of the Mi private armies. Ma private armies were feuding with each other, if any single ambitious Ma private army decided to 'unite' the Ma private armies, the rest would join and gang up against the would be 'uniter'. If that was not enough to dissuade the 'uniter', then CRA would land hand to prevent the unification. So Ma private armies, if they wanted to grow, they had to go outside the 'Major League', to absorb the Mi private armies, one by one. So Mi private armies ended up forming an alliance with one another for mutual defense against Ma private armies, and also ask for CRA for help as well. This way, all three militaries kept each other in balance, and motivated each other to remain fighting effective, and since both Ma and Mi private armies' commanders were owners as well, they wanted to keep the cost under control, making them efficient, and little waste. Under later Joseon dynasty, the private armies became illegal, Only one single military, CRA, and no ownership, all the commanders were appointees, serving only a few years with one unit at a time. In theory, this made economy of scale, making military more efficient, and more effective as well, since one single unified tactical, operational, and strategic doctrine, and unified training. In practice, this made Joseon military both less effective, and less efficient. Since militaries were no longer fighting or ready to fight each other, had very little practical experience. Since so little experience, there was no way to test the unified training was really effective or not. Also, since commanders were no longer owners, and served only a few years with one unit, they no longer had the incentive and/or in depth knowledge to save the cost, they didn't have to pay out of their pocket, but just send the bill to the government, and also provided the bane of all militaries today, the opportunity for graft, by charging government, with non-existent soldiers. and the general overbilling, and pocketing the difference, 'kicking the can' down the road, for the next commander! also opportunity for favoritism, promoting political favorites, member of the old boy's club, gross injustice, by falsely blaming honest commanders, to protect their flunkies, 17:00 I agree. Just look at 'Winter War', and 'Khalkin Gol'. Despite the brilliant beginning, the Finns were doomed, and they had fought a lot better than the Ukrainians today. Btw. What eventually doomed the Finns were the lack of enough artillery shells in the later 'ground and pound' phase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War Again, notice how well the IJA had fought against the Red Army in the initial phase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Khalkhin_Gol 17:08 I think you worry too much about PRC. PRC today is like much feared, but dying/decaying Soviet Union in 70s. ''China's Crony Capitalism: The Dynamics of Regime Decay'' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minxin_Pei I find Pei to be the most objective, and informed expert on PRC today. Like I had said, ROK expects the collapse of PRC by 2050, and has a big plan post-PRC. 17:08 Oh, I wouldn't project that far. That's what some of the corrupt, self-serving powers that be (in U.S. 'West', and their flunkies) want us to believe. They want a long protracted war for Russia and Ukraine, so that they could profit from it, and use otherwise well-meaning people as their 'front'. I worry about ROC/Taiwan forming an alliance, with Japan, against ROK, post-PRC, since they both do not want ROK to succeed. What would/should U.S. do? Now, UK would not object with ROK's plan, and neither would Visegrad group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visegr%C3%A1d_Group EU/NATO might break apart by then, between anti-Turanian and pro-Turanian faction. UK, and Visegrad group would be partial to Turanian alliance, Tureky might object, since she has her own ambition of Pan-Turkist alliance, which would be encompassed by Turanian alliance. Russia might be forced to choose Turanian over Turkism as the lesser danger. Both AUKUS and QUAD are likely to break apart over the differences regarding Turanian alliance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Turkism 17:18 More than enough, do you remember the 2nd Chechen War, compared to the 1st? Chechnya was nothing compared to Ukraine today.
    1