Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "'Rehearsal' for NATO conflict: Putin's ally says, 'Russia testing weapons in Ukraine'" video.

@sumedhsardar5867 Ukraine literally can't join NATO. NATO has a VERY public provision that no nation with territorial disputes can join the alliance specifically because it could drag everyone into a war for that dispute. This is why Russia invaded in 2014, to cause that issue, and nobody thought that Russia would do that either, let alone Ukraine -it was still very anti NATO and Western at that point. Sorry, but countries supplying arms to other countries doesn't make them responsible for that country. At all. It never has. Literally everyone supplies arms to everyone else.
4
@sumedhsardar5867 Mariupol was the only city it has recently captured, and it was being sieged down since the beginning of the war. Everywhere else Russia has been forced to withdraw.
3
@shreyangshumodak8923 Russia is using almost all of their prepared Brigades for this war. The "10%" number only counts if you consider the reserves that can be called in via a general mobilization. A general mobilization to crush UKRAINE of all countries, all while already having massive logistical issues just to maintain the troops they have. And God only knows how much of their tanks and other equipment are still functional. For all we know, this is literally all of the tanks Russia has available that can actually be used. They even sent in one of their "mythical" T-90s and it was destroyed relatively quickly. Nothing Russia has is special or particularly powerful, especially if they don't have the logistical prowess to support them. This has been a common trend in Russian and Soviet doctrine; a logistical nightmare. The ONLY time they did not have such issues...was when the US was helping them in WW2, ironically. You live in a fantasyland where Russia, for some reason, is letting 30k men die for some reason while they have all of this extra uber equipment and available means to fight. No, sorry, but this is it in this "special operation". Putler would need to call for an actual war declaration to do more, though it would only change the numbers, not the equipment.
2
@shreyangshumodak8923 "Manuever warfare" was something like the Operation Desert Storm where the US actually used good feints without losing thousands of men. Apparently the Russian version is to throw men at an objective, fail, and then claim it was a feint so its tools will swallow it up online. I did not, at any point, say that Russia did not have nukes. I literally said that the West is not scared of a conventional war with Russia, which is what you implied. I said that it's Russia that is scared of that since it threatens to nuke anyone that intervenes in Ukraine. Imagine if the US threatened to nuke anyone that intervened in Pakistan, how pathetic would that be?
2
@shreyangshumodak8923 Imagine being so sad as to hope for war just to get back at the West for not worshipping Putler like you do.
2
@isrealjohn3255 Bruh, what??? Russian S500 can't even stop a Ukrainian helicopter and you think it can stop US or NATO missiles??? More than that, where did you even get this info from, because at no point has Russia tested that or even wants to test that. For good reason, US and NATO overall is absurdly more powerful than Ukraine, and yet Russia has lost almost 30k men in 3 months. An absudity.
2
@sumedhsardar5867 Bruh what? Russia threatened to use nukes if anyone else jumped in to help Ukraine. It isn't the West or NATO that is afraid of fighting individually, they just don't want a madman destroying the world by calling his bluff.
2
@sumedhsardar5867 Wtf??? You can't act like the US has intentions of destroying Russia is a bad thing when Russian intention to destroy Ukraine is what caused that reaction to begin with, right? It isn't like the US did this out of nowhere. US also had major sanctions against Japan in WW2 for their actions in Nanking -it was a response to something terrible. Russian options for dialogue and diplomacy was there BEFORE this invasion. Now? I don't care, Russia made its bed, so its time to lie on it.
2
@ishitabhalla4462 1) No, the US did not kill "billions" of people. It would have to have killed more than 1/7 of the planet at some point. 2) That has nothing to do with what I said, or your initial statement.
2
@shreyangshumodak8923 >confirmed at LEAST 20k Russian dead w/ pictures >Russia kicked out of Kyiv and Kharkiv while Ukraine closing in Kherson >Russia JUST took Mariupol after encircling it at the beginning of the invasion Meanwhile I'm the one living in a fantasy world? Tell you what; tell your buddy Putler to withdraw the nuclear threats in regards to any nation intervening in Ukraine and we will see just how "scared" the US really is. Let alone NATO. Nobody in the West is taking Russia as anything more than a joke. Indian copism, on the other hand, is hilarious.
1
@shreyangshumodak8923 Western economies are mostly fine. The initial oil shock hurt consumers, but that's about it.
1
@shreyangshumodak8923 Ukraine won't move the army from Kyiv because it can still be attacked by Russia again, genius. It is braindead to move troops, meanwhile Russia can freely move troops since it was through Belarus that Ukraine was attacked from. "Ukrainian army is the 2nd best army in NATO after USA and the most motivated army too They had immense help from CIA, MI6 and NATO armies to prepare for this war" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Ukraine's army is one of the biggest to be sure, but it is considered one of the weakest armies in Europe. Poland's army is a lot stronger, let alone France's or the UK's. The US is in a league of its own. Seriously, this is just sad now. Bruh, what? There were no more than 4k Ukrainian troops in Mariupol. Russia was the one that had 15k troops occupied there. Are you mixing up the numbers? Seriously, where are you getting your numbers about the Ukrainian troops in Donbas? No official count has been discovered, or are you just getting it from cretins like Patrick Lancaster who is literally paid and supported by the Kremlin? As for a conventional war with Russia? Psht, its a joke. It isn't an equal to the likes of Poland, let alone the US; the only danger is the amount of damage they can do in an initial volley into cities in Poland and the likes. Meanwhile the West has to actually care enough to not burn down Russian cities in retaliation, while Russia gets to not care. This is the disgusting mentality of Russia atm; "we get to kill and butcher your citizens but if you do it to us we can threaten to nuke". Bruh, Russia has only ever faced goat herders and farmers since WW2 as well, genius. It's being trashed around by farmers as we speak. I just pity you. You're gonna need psychiatric help as Russia is forced to either call general mobilization and get more of their people killed or they are forced to withdraw. These are its only options. I'm content to watch Russian bodies fertilize Ukrainian lands, for now. Russia's cowardice knows no bounds, terrified of a Western intervention to stop this. As for your last bit, I was commenting that a country threatening something like that is a cowardly country. So you agree that Russia is a cowardly country that wants to see Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Perm, Volgograd, and Vladivostok get destroyed with mushroom clouds, right? Because it wasn't the US threatening nations with nukes for stepping into their wars. Sad.
1
US isn't even shooting in Ukraine, its just giving some weapons, old weapons to boot. By this logic the USSR was fighting the US in Korea and in Vietnam.
1
@debarunacharya7497 You're kinda ignoring the small nations using the big nations for their own interests as well. Ukraine, North Korea, and North Vietnam were all VERY willing.
1
@harrybriscoe7948 It is? It wasn't the US Dollar that collapsed and required massive amount of reserves to uphold.
1
>Russia invades neighboring democracy >"nato is gonna be the cause of bigger conflict" I guess if China invades Bangladesh, its India's fault for poking China, amirite?
1
@newslaunda3976 "no it's not go and watch neutral media you might understand why China feel threatened by Indian aggression" That's you, but with Ukraine, unironically
1
@newslaunda3976 Just because something was made for something else initially doesn't mean its usefulness stops after the fact, bruh. Fact is that most of Eastern Europe saw it as a shield to protect against a resurgent Russia and old feelings for NATO prevented people from disbanding it. A sort of "Why not?". I know defense and military knowledge, and sorry, but NATO was never a threat to Russia. The West has an obsession with looking pretty and with living. It would never argue for an invasion of Russia while they have nukes. Let alone justify the vast majority of their population to support such a thing. No, NATO is only a threat to Russia's ability to intimidate its neighbors for political goals, which is really what Russia wants; it wants the ability to bully the likes of Estonia and Poland to fall in line under Russia's sphere of influence. Bruh, the military installations near Russia only came near them AFTER the Russian invasion in 2014. And it was those neighboring states that DEMANDED them in the first place. Even then, they made up an extra 4k troops. Plus no nukes were moved eastward since the Cold War either, let alone talked about. Wanna know the reality NOW, though? Many Eastern European countries are NOW talking about placing nukes on their territories specifically due to the 2022 invasion. And MORE nations who once believed they were safe with neutrality are joining NATO. As for Cuba, again, it was the actual placing of nukes that had the US act out; not that it had the right to. But if the US placed nukes in Ukraine, then the Russian invasion would at least be more understandable. But this isn't that. At all. The Solomon Islands have the right to ally with China, but that doesn't mean the US has to encourage it. It will discourage it, which is its right, but that does NOT mean it has the right to invade. Nobody disputes Russia's right to complain about things, just its right to conquer Ukraine, genius.
1
@sumedhsardar5867 Even assuming Russia has hypersonic missiles (still not tested or proven), them being launched at all at any NATO member state will get an immediate response. Unless Russia wants to start nuclear Armageddon, it won't use nukes, and India will also get caught in the nuclear fallout. Everybody will, looney toons. It's really pathetic how some Indians are so eager to suckle Russia that it will unironically trash talk about destroying the planet. This is why people tried to stop these countries from getting nukes; because they have a tendency to threaten the entire planet with them.
1
@sumedhsardar5867 How does the US "maintain peace" with an empire trying to expand by force, exactly? There can be no peace without acknowledging Ukraine's right to exist without its territories stolen; war is preferable to a dishonorable peace. Would YOU accept peace if China offered it after stealing Indian territory, hmm? Russian failures have ruined their military reputation. India halted its helicopter deal with Russia last month. It's incredible how hypocritical some people are. "US must bring peace by forcing Ukraine to be torn apart by Russia" - written by an Indian that likely would fight to the death if done to them.
1
Except Russia has done nothing but lie, and its demonstration has been one of the biggest jokes in the 21st century.
1
USA and the West hasn't even sent much Western tech to Ukraine to begin with. The Howitzers are typical US stuff, and they only JUST started sending that. Before it was almost entirely Soviet-era stuff and some drones.
1
@nathanielrubin3392 Bruh, the only way the US could have stopped this invasion would be to place troops in Ukraine. Ukraine itself would not allow itself to fall to Russia even without the US helping out.
1