Comments by "Sedna063" (@Sedna063) on "Hindustan Times" channel.

  1. Yeah - I wonder when the OIC will condemn this as a hate crime. They were quick to denounce Sweden and demanded tolerance. Let's hear from Saudi Arabia about tolerance :DDD
    15
  2. In return, Sweden should forbid all visa, immigration from Iraq into Sweden.
    8
  3. Don't forget that Ukrainians have the same experience.
    6
  4.  @KW-oc3se  I fully don't. They are extremely selective when demanding tolerance.
    4
  5. They can't do shit about it. Any strike on European territory would result in a counterstrike.
    4
  6. That's really not how to conduct wars...
    3
  7. Potentially a few; there might have been Muslim embassy staff
    2
  8. Finally an Iraqi who speaks out against this! Well done.
    2
  9. Zelebsky did not decide. That was putin
    2
  10. And why?
    2
  11.  @Rajath_2001  It is a war… read the definition. Organised fighting characterised generally by extreme violence and destruction. And no, civilians typically are not the prime target although armies love nothing else to destroy the enemy civilians later on. So Russia attacks Ukraine, sends thousands of missiles onto Ukrainian soil but it is the West and Ukraine that is to blame? Jesus Christ, Indians, did the recent heat wave affect the ability to think logically?
    2
  12.  @blizz3621  Yep. I served. Obviously you guys did not because you would otherwise agree with me. Going soft in the opening stages of a war is insane. You risk unnecessary losses of soldiers and equipment, give the enemy time to entrench and replenish, to train new soldiers and get international help. And it also costs you your soldiers morale if you waste their lives. Sorry for shattering illusions.
    2
  13.  @J.M.254  Times have changed, the nature of warfare has adapted but general principles did not. You don’t give the enemy any soft strikes that he can adapt to. And you don’t waste your soldiers lives in outdated equipment
    2
  14.  @Rajath_2001  Whatever the Russians call it, it is still a war. Obviously they don't wanna say this but I picked two definitions. "Armed fighting between two or more countries or groups" "the desired territorial, economic, military or other benefits expected following successful conclusion of a war" This conflict is a war no matter whether you like it or not. Yes, it is a way to crush morale. 1. Ukraine is not in NATO nor is Minsk treaty a treaty where Ukraine agreed to forego the possibility to join NATO. Neither did Ukraine formally started negotiations to join NATO. Make sure you know what you talk about! Anyway, shouldn't countries be sovereign in their decisions to join alliances anyway? 2. Why should NATO have dissolved? It was and is a useful way of defence for many European countries. Having the US and an entire continent in your back is surely nice. 3. Dude, just check out the trade volume between Russia and the EU (most of which are also NATO member states). In 2021, the trade volume was 257 billion Euros, with an additional 29 billion Euros in services. Europe had 311 billion in investments in Russia. This is hardly isolationist. Germany was about to start the Northstream II pipeline with them. 4. Russia was not isolated. They have lost former countries and parts of the USSR to the west though but that was through those countries own decisions. Love it or hate it, Eastern Europe is very much not pro-Russia and they remember what they did during the 20th century with them. However, Russia was not disqualified from trade, investments, other security alliances with partners everywhere... 5. NATO did not launch those wars. At least not all of those. Afghanistan was UN legitimised and NATO was tasked to give protection to the new Afghani government. And the other war would be Libya, again with UN legitimisation. I don't care who you support or not. But please, get your facts straight. That much should be expected from anyone. Oh, and the irony when you support Russia which is doing exactly that on Ukraine - terror. But then Indians like Russia so they make excuses. So, excuse away.
    2
  15.  @Rajath_2001  1. Russia annexed Ukrainian territory, funds separatists and then some and now the Ukrainians are the baddies? 2. Find me the treaty where Ukraine agreed not to join NATO! Please. Concrete evidence. I can provide evidence where Russia guarantees the inviolability of the Ukrainian borders. 3. NATO was not involved in Iraq! This was an American-British war. NATO didn’t do anything. Check your facts. 4. Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who gassed the kurds… just saying. I disagree with the Iraq war by the way. 5. Why are we talking about the US now having ridiculous gun laws? They vote for this shit. Can‘t understand it either. 6. Have you been to Russia? 7. The US have regular elections which are largely characterised as free and fair. Just look who comes up in politics. You can criticise the President, US etc…
    2
  16.  @losfromla1480  It might not make me a strategist but at least I seem to know a lot more about warfare than some of those commentators here. If they are commanders, I'd pity their underlings. What are they showing us? That they are not a world power?
    2
  17. And they ask why people fear Islam…
    2
  18. Sweden does tolerate all religions and it also allows others to voice their opinions on religion. It’s nothing sacred and protected in Sweden.
    2
  19. Nah, just vandalism.
    2
  20. Actually Zelenski does a much better job
    2
  21. We all know they lost most of their strength already and get pounded harder than a girl by Jonny Sins.
    1
  22. France will nuke right back...
    1
  23. How is burning down an embassy a peaceful expression of free speech?
    1
  24. You don’t know much about airliners do you?
    1
  25. Do you honestly think this is good 😅? And people like you probably complain about Islamophobia
    1
  26. How so?
    1
  27.  @truthalwayswins3078  Satellites aren't perfect for that. They have limited exposure time, artillery positions from that high up are hardly visual and are equally fast to disappear before the reconnaissance can be acted upon.
    1
  28. Obviously Trump fans would love nothing more than Putin winning.
    1
  29.  @kuralovien5524  And why would Airbus or Boeing agree with this? Setting up a production line in India would cost billions and cost them profits - they don't need such a manufacturing line either. So they would just turn this down. Airbus would also not give away the technology in a 51/49 joint venture...
    1
  30.  @kuralovien5524  It doesn’t take them long from Europe to India. And setting this up will cost a huge amount of money.
    1
  31.  @kuralovien5524  Why would they need to set up a line in India? Their suppliers are in Europe, their experts are in Europe. Setting up production in India would cost them a lot of money and they can sell them there without issue. So why do it?
    1
  32. This is a deal between two private companies
    1
  33.  @vivekkhanna9729  no, realist
    1
  34. All you need is the army not taking sides…
    1
  35.  @احمدحسن-س1ز1ع  Yes, obviously. Because a bible is a book that can be reprinted over and over again. If you burn a bible, you only burn your own property. Torching an embassy with people inside risks their lifes. And it is not their property. Just vandalism.
    1
  36. There are peace talks. But neither side is willing to make or can make the concessions the other side wants.
    1
  37. How are we humiliating ourselves here?
    1
  38. Lol…
    1
  39. Wait and see
    1
  40. 1. Satellites are not stationary and only show a momentary picture. It is therefore not all that easy - neither are satellites real time intelligence. A moving weapon convoy will be out of harms way. 2. It's not rocket science. They get introduction and a course. Anyone can learn it. They teach this to experienced troops - those will school the newbies. Combat action will be additional training. 3. While true, they are being propped up by EU and US. They have enough food, oil and energy.
    1
  41.  @yohanmaduranga  That one seems close to be buried as neither side agrees on the business model
    1
  42.  @yohanmaduranga  Haven't you read what I wrote? The CR929 as currently planned won't commence as Russia and China have fundamentally different ideas about the plane. The Russians want everything done by Russia and China, whereas China wants to have an open system where western companies can compete to deliver components as well. They are split over workshare agreements and who will pay...
    1
  43. Nothing kind, nothing that would warrant this destruction…
    1
  44. You can't sell such things, didn't happen.
    1
  45. 1. This is a deal between two private companies. Obviously Airbus cannot offer a UNSC seat... 2. Airbus and Boeing will not give away their hard-earned technology for the measly 500 planes - they make that many each year and sell thousands... Imagine if every country wanted such a line and technology transfer.
    1
  46. Security guarantees are also important for Ukraine. And Russia is a nuclear power. Ukraine is not
    1
  47. We should built a big wall around the Middle East and Pakistan...
    1
  48. Actually it is. The calibre of a gun is negligible if you want effectiveness.
    1
  49.  @alice_agogo  Russia doesn't want to retreat though. Ukraine penetrates their lines.
    1
  50.  @J.M.254  Russia will want much more than just that.
    1