Comments by "Freedom Crusader" (@freedomfighter22222) on "Anders Puck Nielsen" channel.

  1. You do realize a nuclear accident in a nuclear power plant happens at the nuclear power plant right? not on a strategic or tactically beneficial location? An "accident" at a nuclear power plant isn't going to help Russia in any way, like, Crimea is immediately downstream from such an accident, just like half the warm water ports Russia has.
    3
  2. Very cool argument, Russia is still now in a nuclear conflict because the until then unbeatable Russian army wasn't able to deal with the already defeated and easily crushed NATO forces. I am sure nobody in the population or other people in power that could survive a post-Putin world would have any objections.
    3
  3. The problem was solved over a hundred years ago when the destroyer was made to deal with packs of torpedo boats. Destroyers are of course too large and not designed to deal with the drones Ukraine uses today but it is the same principle, to deal with swarms of small ships you need slightly larger purpose built small ships yourself. Small corvettes are perfect for the purpose of dealing with the types of drones Ukraine uses in the black sea today, think something like the Norwegian Skjold class.
    3
  4. "Yet, as Perun shared in one of his earlier vidéos, this doesn't mean the Russian economy is close to collapse" Of course, that also means it doesn't mean it isn't close to collapse, people just agree that it is headed towards disaster, but nobody has any idea if that happens in a month or 2 years.
    3
  5. Belarus has a relatively small and poorly equipped army, it is intended mainly to secure the President and there isn't popular support in the army or populace to conduct a war in Ukraine. The buildup is very likely posturing so Luka can tell Putin he is drawing some Ukrainian forces to the northern border, if Belarus does enter the war its capabilities wont be enopugh to take any significant territory as its army is just too small short term. Western response would very likely be more significant in favor of Ukraine than the Belarusian impact in favor of Russia would be.
    3
  6. Russia is a great bit bigger than 3 times the size of Ukraine, But you're applying that 3:1 standard in the entirely wrong way anyway, so the wrong size comprehension doesn't matter. It is entirely normal for the defender to lose more than the attacker and for an attacking force 5 times greater than the defender to be wiped out while doing almost no damage at all to the defender. The 3:1 ratio is a rule of thumb that says you should bring at least 3 times the force of the defender to be relatively comfortable that you will win, not that you will take 3 times higher casualties. While a 5:1 ratio is applied to be certain of victory(but that can of course still fail at times) It has nothing to do with losses, it also has little to do with manpower as 3 guys in a tank is worth a lot more combat power than 1 guy in a trench.
    3
  7. No, wars do not always end with negotiation, they also end with unconditional surrender or collapse of states, seriously, "wars always end with negotiation" is a dumb ass statement, unless you count the salt Rome threw on the ruins of Carthage negotiation.
    3
  8.  @802Garage  lopsided as in Russia has lost more materiale than Ukraine has had combined in the war?
    3
  9.  @chuhrov  Wanna bet? You think Russia leaves this war with Kherson and Zaporizhzhia? I'll bet you 1000 US bucks they don't. Or if you have any other funny delusional prospects of something concrete that can be proven wrong or right I am all ears, but it has to be specific since if Russia ends up losing Crimea you would just still say Russia reached its goals and does not need Crimea anymore.
    3
  10.  camencowogh8333  If the Russian losses weren't staggering they would still be in Kherson and Izium, reality doesn't check out if you think Russia both has had a much stronger military, far fewer losses and also lost a third of the territory they occupied at the height in 2022.
    3
  11.  @ttexastt  The fatality counts makes sense considering how many hundreds of thousands of men Russia has pushed into service without actually showing growth of the army for it, the size of the current Russian army just does not compute in a world where it only lost 100k men.
    3
  12.  @johns2262  "It is hard to argue about objective territory changes though", it is hard to include them in any argument due to how significant any movement has been since fall 2022, were you as sure Ukraine was winning when they advanced in equal amount during the 2023 summer offensive?
    3
  13.  @johns2262  I'll take that bet, What do you think the Ukrainian lines breaking will look like? or the Russian offensive stopping looks like? How do you think the war ends? which territories will Russia for sure leave the war with?(if you say Zaporizhzhia due to Putin including it in Russian territory i'll easily put 1000 US bucks on that not happening)
    3
  14.  @anaremelam5998  Already have friends in Russia, they all tell me Russia is obviously losing and the economy is now fucked for no gains.
    3
  15. What advantage does Russia have in a war of attrition? Both sides have more people coming of age each year than they are losing, Ukraine has a far larger industrial base backing it. The strategic depth of Ukraine at the rate of Russian advance means Ukraine has no problem just waiting out Russia for many years to come. Where is the Russian advantage? Currently the Russian demands for a ceasefire(Not peace, ceasefire to start discussing peace) are: Russia gets all of the 5 oblasts it says it has annexed Ukraine changes government Ukraine disbands its armed forces Russia invades the rest of Ukraine Personally I think those aren't terms it is worth entertaining. Except not really because Russia has said it no longer wants to negotiate. What negotiations are you suggesting? unconditional surrender?
    3
  16. lmao
    3
  17.  @luffebassen  My point exactly, congrats? What Ukraine did in Kursk isn't of territorial significance, just like what Russia has done combined in 2023 and 2024 isn't either, it isn't an amount of territory that changes anything. You're clearly delusional if you think Russia has been winning this war.
    3
  18. As someone from Northern Europe(considered western in your terms I assume), you were paranoid, Russia is not going to start marching into central Europe, Europe has a far larger military and is not at all in any kind of risk from a conventional attack by Russia. Not at all surprised Russia attacked Ukraine and not at all surprised Russia is failing so disastrously, because it doesn't have a large enough army to conquer and occupy a country with the population and size of Ukraine, then some people are paranoid Russia is a threat to an area with 10 times the size, population and even larger difference in economy? europe has spent 5 times more on its military than Russia has for the past 30 years(AT THE LOWEST), it has never had less than 50% more men in the military either, most of that time the differences were even larger. Europe isn't and never was in danger after the fall of the Soviet Union, only countries outside the EU/NATO are.
    3
  19. What I think people get wrong about Russian mobilization is thinking Russia has the weapons to equip another 300k men... Men are useless without weapons, there is nearly nothing to gain for Russia from mobilizing a few hundred thousand men compared to the economic and political repercussions.
    3
  20. The European economy? what about it? things have generally been working out fine for decades now, it is pretty chill actually, no huge economic depressions like Russia had in the 90's either.
    3
  21.  @michaelotieno6524  Bruh, Russia has been running a staggering deficit the past 3 years, that's not even taking into account the value of lost equipment.
    3
  22. There really isn't a question that those countries you mentioned would go to war with Russia over aggression like that, It is completely missguided to think otherwise. And those countries alone would so overwhelmingly tip the current war against Russia that it would immediately collapse. With all those countries involved already the rest of Europe isn't going to sit it out either, France and Germany isn't going to see an all out war in Northern Europe and decide to sit out a war that would be completely one-sided in their favor. It is ridiculous to question the strength of NATO in Europe, the European members are still vastly stronger than Russia regardless of American support and there are more than enough countries that we are certain would back up the Baltic countries and Finland that it would immediately cause a chain reaction that would get every country to join the war in fear of ending up outside the alliance that would dominate European military affairs.
    3
  23. Some area on the flanks of the Russian salient also falling as it becomes more difficult to sustain them, Then a new frontline settles in with new supply points. The long term strategic significance is somewhere between insignificant and irrelevant.
    3
  24. Let's go, commentary on the last few days funny.
    3
  25. What the fuck Romania? Just gun the drone down, how would that be a big deal? "drone entered out airspace, we shot it down" is not any way a bigger deal than "drone entered our airspace, we guided it back towards it target in Ukraine" Shooting down a drone is not something that can be made into a big deal.
    2
  26. Been fun saying the same for the past 2-3 years and seeing everyone else agree that Ukraine would be forced to immediately surrender if Trump took office. Nice to see people who understand that it is not something Trump can do if he would and that Trump also probably doesn't actually want to do.
    2
  27. Ukraine's future already depends on both, there's just no need to talk about Europe because we already know there is not chance it will stop supporting Ukraine. Ukraine would be in an even worse situation if Europe cancelled all aid than it is if USA does so, Europe just isn't going to do so.
    2
  28. I wish him good luck in telling the Republican party that their military factories in their home states are going to wind down production, But in a less silly note: Trump is not going to cut in the weapons shipment to Europe, only maybe change a bit in how it is presented.
    2
  29. Ukraine gets a say in that, USA offered Afghanistan to itself as well, too bad the taliban didn't consider what USA had said they should do. Europe will continue to support Ukraine and Ukraine will continue to fight in this war regardless what Trump or USA think about it.
    2
  30.  @mitchyoung93  One journalist? that is your source pool? And one that doesn't write anywhere that lines are collapsing, just that some positions might be lost. Do you just see a couple headlines and throw out the name of people in the hope that nobody bothers actually checking your source? That sure has to be the reason since you didn't manage to even provide a specific article just a guy that has written a few hundred or thousands of articles so you can be fairly sure nobody will be able to prove that he didn't write what you claim.
    2
  31. It does not, the war is not decided by land in Donbas, Russia does not have the capability to sustain the war long term but the Western aid to Ukraine is a rounding error in its budget.
    2
  32. We are prepared, without America in NATO the remaining countries are still by far the second largest military power in the world, Russia remains insignificant to NATO without the US in it. Compare Europe and Canada to Russia please instead of to America, makes no sense to compare the other country's military to the US military if you're trying to explain why Europe would not be able to handle Russia...
    2
  33. Europe is the second largest exporter of weapons in the world after USA, yes, of course it can supply itself. Not that switching quickly is necessary, Europe has a larger military than Russia and a far larger civilian pool to mobilize in the case of war, Russia wouldn't be a conventional threat to Europe, notice when people talk about Russian attacks on Europe they talk about Russia attacking the baltics and the rest of Europe potentially choosing not to intervene, also notice that the "Europe must spend more" crowd always compare European spending to US spending, not to the actual potential enemy of Europe, which is by the way because if you compare Europe to Russia it becomes very difficult to maintain the story that Europe doesn't pay for its own defence, it obviously does spend more than enough to deal with Russia.
    2
  34. The war will still last years and the economic might on the scales with the west supporting Ukraine is like USA vs Japan in ww2, Russia's capabilities to sustain this war is entirely non-existent long term. You shouldn't need any youtube blog tell you that the larger economies always win long wars. This war will go the way ww1 went, but instead of Germany pretending it is doing fine before a sudden economic collapse it will be Russia doing that.
    2
  35. It is not hindsight at all to say a military plan that relies on the enemy to "give up" as soon as you show at the border is retarded, that was the entirety of the Russian plan and the only backup plan(that they hadn't considered but are going for now) is the only thing they can do, shut their eyes, put their hands over the ears and hope Ukraine and/or the West just doesn't want to anymore after a while.
    2
  36. The vast majority of aid to Ukraine is given. not loaned, What is loaned is in vast majority also free money as they are the classic "totally a loan we aren't giving away money" that politicians use to get necessary expenses through the morons blocking it, interest rates far below inflation and frozen payments with no interest increments for the first 10 years. Once the war ends Ukraine will very rapidly grow its economy and the West will throw more money at it while deferring a bunch of the loans. Ukraine is not at all owned by foreign creditors, it has been countries giving "loans" with good intentions that has supported Ukraine and will continue to do so, the "burdened by loans" narrative isn't real, it is a tankie and Russian talking point they can use because people don't know how money works.
    2
  37. Russia started taking loans a couple years ago, very fucking bad ones with horrible conditions because nobody wants to lend money to it as it is obvious it will not be able to pay back. Russia has also run with large deficit(not counting the value of lost material), energy money isn't remotely close to cover the cost of the war and sanctions.
    2
  38. ​ @MrZlocktar  15% in 2.5 years is really one of the worst ramp ups in military history, the Ukrainian military is already 300% bigger than it was pre-war and even that isn't particularly impressive when it comes to military mobilisation at the outset of war. 15% really shows how much Russia is struggling to keep up with loses.
    2
  39. Answering that question was the entire video... By increasing support to whatever level necessary to make sure that nuclear bomb did not help Russia win the war and properly telegraphed to the entire world taht nuclear weapons for offensive wars will not be tolerated.
    2
  40. When are you going to stop claiming that the Ukrainian military is broken and next week Russia will take Kyiv?
    2
  41. Ok, but I would hardly use Mearsheimer as an example of an expert :P The only thing Mearsheimer is good at is being an example of someone that is wrong. Edit: ok, my bad, I wrote that before the follow up section that said the same thing about him :D
    2
  42. For a section of the eastern front* that section will see the frontline move a bit and then settle in a new position as Russian forces outpace their own logistics hubs. Bakhmut was also an important position like Pokrovsk and Kramatorsk is, the fall of Pokrovsk(sometime next year at best for Russia) wont be much more significant than Bakhmut was when it fell over a year ago and every moron was out saying that its fall would leave to the collapse of the frontline...
    2
  43.  @dingbobgasama8224  "open door" lol, that's what they said about Sievierodonetsk, Bakhmut and Avdiivka as well. You think the Russians are going to be able to rush to Pavlohrad or something once Pokrovsk falls? The Ukrainian army still counts over a million men, a few hundred thousands of which are spread along the active frontline.
    2
  44.  @bigmoe9856  In the vastly larger economies backing it up that are scaling production much faster than Russia?
    2
  45.  @yellowtunes2756  The West is terribly outgunning Russia, you just have to use your brain to realize that the ramp up in production in the West will inevitably lead to a Ukrainian victory.
    2
  46.  @luffebassen  I had a feeling i was speaking to a child. Now its confirmed 👍 Quickly copy/paste this too, so we can have a double confirmation!! You are probably better off just sticking to those video games and other similar things you probably know something about.
    2
  47.  @luffebassen  Thanks, means a lot coming from you.
    2
  48. Who is going to force Ukraine to stop fighting? Trump doesn't have the power to do so even if he wanted and Europe is clear that it will continue support regardless how long it takes.
    2
  49.  @luffebassen  Now you just lie as well? everyone in here knows you would lose if you fight a child.
    2
  50.  @AEH-df7ho  Countries don't sign deals like the one Russia is offering, giving up Ukrainian territory is not on the table.
    2