Comments by "UzuMaki NaRuto" (@UzumakiNaruto_) on "Ukraine. Military Summary And Analysis 24.01.2023" video.

@dejanatanackovic909 Don't even know why people still want to have Gonzalo on their shows when he's been wrong with just about everything connected to the war since day one.
3
@kathya1956 That would mean that Russia wants a peaceful end which clearly they don't. You can't negotiate with someone who wants to give up next to nothing and yet wants everything.
2
@cruiser6260 Gonzalo IS A JOKE. Since pretty much from day 1 of the invasion he's been prediction Russian victory and he's been wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME. Go back and watch some of the early videos on the Duran Channel when they had Gonzalo on and see what he said back then at the beginning and even after the Russian retreat from Kiev. Pretty much every single prediction or opinion he's had on the war has been wrong.
2
@cruiser6260 we don't know that theory of creating diversion is incorrect on the initial incursion. It's classic military strategy to dummy attack and draw forces. Actually advancing in is a bit different. Key points though, There was no battle for Kiev attempting to take the city and no sustained seige, which would be humanitarian disaster anyway. Did it in fact draw a lot of ukr forces to Kiev, if it did then it's not an unreasonable theory. Saying the Kiev front was a diversion is merely pro-Russian folks trying to explain away the disaster that was the drive to Kiev was. Diversionary attacks ARE NOT meant to destroy your own forces in the process and if that's what happens then you're doing it VERY wrong. I've said it before and I'll say it again, you don't throw significant numbers of your best troops flying in on helicopters supported by aircraft to try and capture two major airfields just outside of Kiev so that you can fly in thousands more men to open up a forward front and then having tens of thousands of troops racing to link up with them and do all that as a diversion. You do all that because you have the real intention of trying to take the capital of a nation because historically in war that's ALWAYS been an important objective. Just look at both Chechen wars where the Russians both times made Grozny their primary objective. The Russians did not expect major resistance from the Ukrainians which is why they believed they could occupy major government and military installations in Kiev quickly and take control of the city. People think you need hundreds of thousands of soldiers to take a major city yet all you have to do is look at Kherson where it was taken at the beginning of the war with barely a fight from the people living there. People who keep saying this attack was all a diversion are just trying to explain why the Russians took huge casualties and were then forced to retreat and why it was worth it rather than acknowledging the disaster that it really was. On NATO not wanting direct war with RUS, that's been true since about 1949. In a conventional war, the Pentagon's wargaming shows they can not win a war against Rus in Europe or in the Pacific against China, definitely not both. There may have been a time during the 1950s, 60s and 70s where the USSR was indeed very strong and NATO definitely didn't want to go to war with them, however that time has LONG PASSED. Even if the USSR existed today, NATO would be more than able to beat them in a head to head conventional war. With the breakup of the USSR there is ZERO CHANCE that Russia could ever beat NATO on its own. The US alone could destroy Russian forces completely in a land war. The only reason NATO doesn't want to go war with Russia now is because they don't want Russia potentially using nukes when they're getting their asses beat on the battlefield. If Russia didn't have nukes, almost 100% probably a no fly zone over Ukraine would've been implemented by NATO from the beginning of the invasion and perhaps even turns into attacking Russian ground forces if they cross a certain line and don't turn back. I'll say they're both right on the himars. Not enough have been supplied to make a decisive difference, but you can't say they haven't made any difference at all. On the last round table Dima was saying Rus has a system with the same capability just a lot more. He also suggested lira not underestimate ukr. Absolutely disagree. HIMARS and later on other MLRS systems have made a MASSIVE difference in this war. Before HIMARS arrived Russia was firing off huge amounts of artillery and missile barrages everyday. That has been drastically reduced now because HIMARS/MLRS systems have made it impossible for the Russians to place large amounts of ammunition close to the front without it getting destroyed quickly. How many videos of huge ammo dumps did we see go up in a big fireworks display before the Russians finally got their head out of their asses and pulled their dumps farther back and break them down into smaller ammo dumps so that a hit doesn't destroy huge amounts of ammo and supplies? HIMARS/MLRS would not be such a great strategic weapon with such a major impact if the rockets they were launching weren't so pinpoint accurate and had a decent range. If the Ukrainians were given ATACMS, you could kiss Russian logistics and command centers bye bye and they would be in even worse shape than they are now.
2
@marcgatto9675 Russia is like the giant hydraulic force that slowly slowly slowy applies pressure until even the strongest material eventually shatters. More like Russia keeps throwing massive amounts of men and equipment hoping that their enemy will finally break under their sheer numbers rather than being smart and using good strategies and tactics to minimize casualties and losses. Just look at the Russian performance during the Chechen wars and see how poorly they performed and then you have to wonder how in the hell did they not improve in the past 20 years so that they wouldn't repeat the same mistakes again.
2
@cruiser6260 It seems you are worse than him in the opposite direction though. If the war is not over or even going in Ukrainian favor, you can't say he's wrong predicting a Russian victory. Im not going to take hours to watch the Duran, when you could take a minute to tell me specifically what he's been wrong about. While I hope Ukraine ends up prevailing in this war, I'm not a blind cheerleader that ignores the facts and only chooses to believe stories that support 'my side'. Whether the Ukrainians are winning or losing, I care about the truth and what's actually happening on the battlefield unlike the guys at the Duran or Gonzalo or other pro-Russian folks who ignore reality and/or always find a way to positively spin a Russian defeat or failure. As for how Gonzalo is constantly wrong: - He predicted an easy victory for Russia when the invasion started. OK alot of people said the same so give him a pass - He said that the retreat from Kiev was a 'brilliant move' by the Russians because it tied down Ukrainian forces in the west so that the Russians could encircle and destroy Ukrainian forces in the east in a great 'cauldron battle'. - He said that NATO was weak and was no match for Russia in a head to head fight on the battlefield which is why the west wanted to avoid direct confrontation with them. LOL - He said that NATO sending support to Ukraine would not change the outcome of the invasion because Russia would be strong enough to overcome it. - He's stated at least several times that the Ukrainian forces were on the verge of collapse and that they were so desperate that they needed to press old men into the frontlines to fight - There was one time when Dima was a guest on the Duran livestream show during the time when HIMARS was just being sent to Ukraine and Gonzalo was also on that show. When Alexander asked Gonzalo about HIMARS he said that they wouldn't make much difference on the battlefield because they were too few in number to matter. Alexander then asked Dima what he thought about HIMARS being sent to Ukraine and he said that HIMARS was a very powerful system because each rocket it fired was extremely accurate like a sniper bullet. He then said that the Russians needed to make it a top priority to hunt down and destroy every HIMARS system ASAP before they did too much damage to the Russians. Upon hearing that both Alexander and Gonzalo thought he was exaggerating and overstated the effectiveness of HIMARS, but now we know who was right.
1