Comments by "UzuMaki NaRuto" (@UzumakiNaruto_) on "The New Atlas" channel.

@blackbird309 Russia doesn’t need to use nukes. With a 10:1 advantage for Ukraine, progress has been very slow. This is just the last gasp of Ukraine before Russian mobilization kicks in. If the amount of land retaken over the past few weeks is considered 'little' and their progress is 'slow', then what do you consider the Russian offensive in the Donbas that took several months to make modest gains? Turtle pace I guess.
5
@brewsterly2927 There are more than 300,000 regular fully trained professional army troops all around Russia who will be reinforcements and the conscripted will replace these, there may be some exception where highly skilled troops are sent to the front where needed. Doesn't seem to be the case when there are more than a few reports of recruits getting little to no training and are being sent to Ukraine already. If Russia actually had 300,000 'fully trained' professional army troops in reserve they would've sent a portion or all of them in long ago to stop the Ukrainian advances that are taking back alot of territory. Makes no sense to have such a large reserve and not have them in Ukraine already unless such a 'fully trained' reserve doesn't exist which is why they're just pushing bodies to the frontlines in the hopes that they can help stop the bleeding and loss of territory.
5
@subtle_savage Funny you should mention logistics because if Russian logistics wasn't so utterly shit at the beginning of the war they would've taken much more territory at much less of a cost and perhaps things would be much different right now in Ukraine. On paper all of this tech looks impressive. Until you have to fix it which, as any army knows, is a constant headache with equipment in battlefield conditions. Most countries try to get around this by keeping their mechanized forces cohesive (ie not designing new ones every year) and attempting to standardize parts. Ukraine has a serious problem on its hands when--not if--their motley array of machines break down. The UA forces are still using alot of Soviet tanks, armored vehicles and other equipment including the stuff they captured from the Russians so fixing those things shouldn't be a problem. For western systems if they really require major repairs they can be shipped across the border to NATO countries to be fixed. The German PzH 2000 SPH that the Ukrainians are using are complex systems and Lithuania has already volunteered to take over doing maintenance for them. https://mil.in.ua/en/news/lithuania-will-be-repairing-ukrainian-pzh-2000-self-propelled-howitzers/ So there's no reason to believe for any other western weapon's system that Ukraine is using that when the time comes they can't simply send it to other NATO countries for repairs as well. I guess that's the good thing about having NATO being your buddy isn't it? Many nations that can provide the parts and expertise to keep weapons systems running for UA forces.
4
Well unlike the Somme the Ukrainians are making good progress in retaking their territory and in many places the Russians aren't putting up a fierce fight. If they were then there wouldn't be a second phase to this offensive that should've ended when the Russians retreated to the Oskil river. Instead the Ukrainian offensive that started weeks ago hasn't ended and now they're even making decent progress in the Kherson area where it was declared by pro-Russian hacks as a failed offensive.
4
Unfortunately the circumstances of the Ukrainian armed units don't favour individuals of a different skin colour. Which individuals and what skin color(s) are you referring to?
2
@Conserpov Sure dude. Russia is 'achieving their goals' by generously giving back large amounts of territory and important towns and cities to Ukraine as a 'goodwill gesture' I'm sure. Even territory that they just annexed a few days ago. So good of them to share. 😅🤣😂🤣😅😆😄
2
@Conserpov Maybe in your village it's considered "large", dunno. Important for whom? Lets just put it this way. Take all the events that have happened in the past few weeks and don't change a thing EXCEPT that its the Russians that were on the offensive and taking the exact same amount of land and towns/cities and it was the Ukrainians that were running and retreating quickly to prevent getting encircled. Would you be here telling me that the Russian advances are nice PR, but they have little strategic value and that they probably took this territory with heavy losses and that the Ukrainians are smartly giving up ground to settle in more defensible positions where they can recover and launch a counterattack to take back everything they lost? Or would you be here and be like the Duran would probably be doing and jizzing all over themselves in a continuous orgasm at how much territory the Russians have taken in such a relative short period of time and that it was signally the beginning of the end for the Ukrainian army? I'm betting you'd be falling into the latter category and joining the Duran and other pro-Russian hacks in celebrating such Russian success rather than playing it down.
2
If people read the history of the Eastern Front of WW2 they would understand these Ukrainian gains are not as significant, they have only at best tactical value in a single area. Where can they go from there? Have you looked at a map of Ukraine recently? Many of the towns and cities that Ukrainians have taken recently are important road and rail links which if you care to move your forces and supplies around you would try and take or defend. At this point I guess Russia is conceding that they don't care about gaining anymore territory and are hoping to hold onto what they've already taken. Also, the manner in which Russians are withdrawing. They are maintaining contact with Ukraine forces as they leave choosing to do so, not just up and go as they could have. I'm sure some units are retreating in decent order, but there's also plenty of videos around where troops ARE NOT leaving in an orderly manner or else they're getting caught and/or killed by Ukrainian forces. Dragging the enemy by retreat to where you want your enemy to go, pulling enemy away from where you do not want them to be is a tactic used in war. Is this what is happening? I do not know. Doesn't seem to be happening at all. Ukrainians are choosing where they want to launch their attacks and Russians have to react and other try and stay and fight or retreat.
2
The Kharkov region was clearly abandoned deliberately by Russia - although not obviously so. Right. They fought tooth and nail to gain that territory especially places like Izyum that is a vital road and rail hub and then they just give it back without a fight? Yeah sure dude. LOL Imagine if the reverse were true and it were the Ukrainians retreating fast and leaving equipment behind and giving up large amounts of territory and important cities to the Russians. Would you still be saying its a great move by Ukraine to do so the way you're saying it is for the Russians? Yeah I seriously doubt it.
2
@mac ilowiecki I believe, that we all agree that it is not Russia fighting Ukraine, but Russia fighting NATO. Ukrainians are just NATO proxy fighters. What happened? Even just a few weeks ago the narrative was that it doesn't matter if NATO supports Ukraine its just prolonging the inevitable. Now you're saying that NATO is so good that it can just supply a country who's people are able to learn and are eager to defend their nation and its enough to stop the great Russian bear? If that's the case then what hope would Russia ever have against NATO in a head to head fight? They would get utterly curb stomped and the Russians know it which is why they keep threatening to use nukes because that's all they got left to scare the west with.
2
@P. Cameron Whatever drugs you're taking you need to stop dude. Seriously if you cared about facts you wouldn't be saying delusional things like that.
2
If the Russians only wanted those 4 regions then why aren't they stopping the Ukrainians from taking back territory in those regions even as they declare those areas to be now Russian territories?
2
@Conserpov When Russians captured them, it was a huge blow to Ukrainian defenses in Donbass. That was back when Russia didn't touch railways. Now they are irrelevant, but this is why they make it sound like a great victory. Well the Ukrainians are still moving east and now making some headway in the Kherson area as well. At some point they're going to be taking territory that even you have to concede matters to the Russians that they can't lose if they don't to be cut off and be trapped.
1
@Asgardsteve1 They arent trained that well I have my sources in the Uk training and they are just about trained how to do up a boot lace lol If troops that aren't trained well can make such advances, then what does it say for Russian troops and their allies who can't even stop these supposed under trained Ukrainian troops from breaking their lines and continuing to move forward?
1
@meddy833 How the Russian army became the Russian Army that destroyed 80% of Germany's best Armored units. Most of the worst fighting was right where the fighting is right now. Russian against the Nazi' in the Ukraine 2.0. It WILL end the same way. The more things change the more that stay the same. Russians had much greater numbers of equipment and men than the Germans in WWII and destroyed them through brute force and throwing men away. The same is happening in Ukraine where the Russians have suffered great losses and are now calling up more up to throw into battle and hope sheer numbers can stop the Ukrainian advance.
1
@anceldesingano8687 they didn’t stop the advance because there undertrained but because there being outnumbered literally all the offensive that Ukraine did was with high numbers and equipment on their side just look at lyman for perfect example Well of course the UA forces would probably have the numbers before they started their offensive because it would be stupid not to. The thing is simply having numbers isn't enough for a successful and continuous offensive. You need well trained troops who are motivated and can fight well and have the logistics to keep those forces supplied and moving forward. If the Russians had that at the beginning of the war perhaps the situation in Ukraine might be significantly different by now.
1
@anceldesingano8687 when i meant high amount of numbers i meant literally high numbers of troops lyman was stated to be defended by 600 to 1000 troops while Ukraine attack it with 6k to 9k troops thats quite alot of numbers on there side and took them 2 to 3 weeks to capture that town Except the capture of Lyman happened with barely firing a shot because they were busy moving along the flanks and capturing other towns and territories and forcing the Russians to abandon Lyman or face encirclement. Also of course its best to have the numbers advantage when you're attacking and the more the better. Its no different than when Russia first invaded and had a huge equipment and large troop advantage against the UA forces who weren't fully organized to fight back and they were also under armed in comparison. Russia only problems are the numbers of troops they have in there territory they capture which is huge all things considered and the only ones that will have problem with logistics are the Ukrainians with there continued offensive and sustainment are going to be a problem for them if they keep it up Well with now having numerous reports of the Russians retreating from Norther Kherson area as well as continued gains in the east, it seems like Ukrainian logistics are holding up pretty well if they can support two major offensives and don't have to stop for very long to get resupplied before continuing their advance. Its like they know that pushing hard now while the Russians are still in disarray and aren't able to put up a solid defensive line is vital and that stopping would be a big mistake. If the Russians can't stabilize things soon, Kherson might fall much sooner than anyone could have predicted.
1
Just think how embarrassed NATO (US) will be when Kiev becomes part of Russia again. And Ukraine no longer exists. Unless NATO countries decide to suddenly stop supplying Ukraine with supplies and weapons, Russia will NEVER take all of Ukraine. They tried it at the beginning of the invasion and failed and that was their best chance. That Russia has a lack of manpower and shells etc etc etc. They had to call up 300.000 reservists as they had no army left. Well that is complete utter western Bull. The Russian regular Army has over 1.2 million men and there Equipment. Waiting for NATO, they are fully armed and ready. If the Russians were doing well in Ukraine and weren't suffering from a lack of manpower because of large losses then they wouldn't have needed to call for a partial mobilization to begin with would they? He doesn't effect his main Standing Army at all. His war effort and replenishment is in full production from his own natural resources he replaces what he uses every day. NATO has made a long term enemy who will make us pay dearly for the Deep State Decisions. NATO would curb stomp the Russians in a head to head fight without even trying and the only reason the west is scared of the Russians these days is because they have nukes. Take that away and no one in the west would be afraid of the Russians anymore.
1
@blackbird309 I think the whole changing weather conditions being such a huge factor is far overblown. If there's a big rainy season I could understand the slow down in military operations on both sides as its been stated numerous times that it can significantly restrict movement of forces, but what I don't get is why operations wouldn't pickup in the winter when the ground freezes up. Ukrainians are already starting to receive winter gear from western countries and are preparing for winter battle. There's no reason why the fight won't continue when its been done so often in numerous wars including massive cold weather operations during WWII. And who knows if the Russians are truly in a state of disarray, then weather may not matter if the Ukrainians are approaching and they decide to run rather than fight.
1
@blackbird309 Okay, but where are the encirclements? Russians preserving their forces in a successful retreat is not a desired outcome when Ukraine is unfortunately losing so much in this offensive, leaving them vulnerable when mobilization units come. In war its often difficult to complete a full encirclement where the enemy is completely cut off and surrounded, but if you can threaten encirclement and force the enemy to retreat that's effective as well. In Izyum and elsewhere the Russians left behind alot of supplies and equipment so even if you don't get enemy troops you can at least get some of their equipment. And with regards to the mobilizing troops, it remains to be seen how well they will do at the frontlines or if they're going to be used behind lines. Having more bodies isn't always a good thing unless they're well trained and equipped to fight and help, otherwise you simply increase the pressure on your logistics with relative little benefit other than having warm bodies to take a bullet for you. The Russians have already shown to have major difficulties supporting even a couple of hundred thousand troops and now during mobilization it doesn't even look like they have enough supplies to properly equip those new recruits. So lets see what happens in the coming weeks when they have 300,000 new men that they need to support in the field and how they will do it. Ukraine hasn't retaken much land either, 30km in Kherson is less than a 20 minute drive. The media talks big numbers, but if you pay attention, the military support they've been receiving is less and less. Are you kidding? The Ukrainians have taken back a fair amount of territory and more importantly taken back towns that have important road and rail networks which of course are vital to moving troops and supplies. Its funny how during the past several months with Russia's Donbas offensive when they were plodding their way forward making modest gains, the pro-Russian folks were saying the Russians were doing great. But somehow when the Ukrainians are taking back alot of what they lost in just a few weeks its seen as no big deal? OK. 🙄🙄🙄 Lets just put it this way. If it were the Russians who were making this amount of gains and it were the Ukrainians retreating and giving up all this territory, all the pro-Russian hacks like the Duran would be jumping for joy and jizzing all over themselves seeing the advances of Russian forces and would be saying the UA forces are on the verge of collapse and that it was nearing the end for them and so on. The offensive is not sustainable and will ultimately leave them vulnerable when mobilized units come? You make it sound like the Ukrainians also don't have more NATO trained and equipped reinforcements coming onto the battlefield in the coming weeks and months too. I'll take them over whatever reinforcements are bringing any day.
1
Americans are being told that Russia has no airpower over Ukraine and more bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. Don't you think that if the Russians had a good airforce that it would've showed itself by now? Why would you not use your airpower in a war in Ukraine where your troops are needing air support badly? Think of how many Russian lives would be saved and how badly the Ukrainian position would be if the Russians had gained air dominance over Ukraine from the very beginning?
1
@Turbo999be The balance of power is about to tilt aggressively in favor of Russia, they have sent so far their Soviet era stock of weapons now they are sending more modern ones while Ukraine has burned through their own soviet era stocks + NATO soviet era stocks and NATO is reluctant to send more modern NATO armored. LOLOLOLOL You keep believing that. Russia doesn't have a ton of T-90s to spare and I doubt that you'll be ever seeing hundreds of T-90s in Ukraine. Also their airforce is weak and haven't gained air superiority ever during this entire war and mobilization isn't going to change that.
1
@conormccue2871 He is suggesting that it is bonkers that Russia would wait to use its best weaponry until the Ukrainian forces were bled of everything worth a damn. That's just the same stupid excuse that was used at the beginning of the war when the Russian forces weren't doing very well and looked incompetent alot of the time. People couldn't believe what they were seeing and they had to rationalize it by saying surely the Russians aren't this bad and they were only sending in inferior troops to use as cannon fodder before they send in better troops. That's the same thing happening now where you believe there are tens of thousands of elite troops just waiting to be sent into battle armed with the latest Russian weapons that will crush the Ukrainians and throw them back. You go ahead and keep waiting for it because it will likely never come unless Russia decides to take men and equipment from other regular units in Russia and throw them into Ukraine.
1
@Conserpov That's the official government statement, but whether or not that actually happens is another matter.
1
@Conserpov Maybe not down to the last detail, but generally yes I do understand how the military works which is why its interesting to see how many pro-Russian hacks think getting an extra 300k recruits is a tide turning event. It might be, but with the way the Russians have been running things there's a better chance that it won't make as nearly a big difference as the Russians had hoped.
1
@James Butnz Another thing about the fact that the US won't send Abrams tanks to Ukraine is basically, how can they continue to sell them around the world ... to Poland 🇵🇱 soon... and other places when on Russian news Well we've already seen thousands of Russian tanks and other armored vehicles get destroyed in this war so far and I'm sure there will still be buyers for them if the Russians have any left to sell after this war. No reason to believe why western systems won't keep selling if western countries want to sell them.
1
@jamesbutnz7904 Russia 🇷🇺 has destroyed many tanks... Ukrainian manned tanks and weapons platforms, fix wing aircraft, Russia 🇷🇺 has also upgraded there equipment beyond what Ukraine 🇺🇦 had and what they destroyed. The vast majority of what Russia has destroyed is Russian equipment used by the Ukrainians. UA forces have received western equipment but its still in relatively small numbers which is why Ukraine is always asking for more to fight with. If NATO wasn't so slow to give Ukraine more western weapons they probably could've pushed back the Russians much further than they have now. Now, if you were the leader of a country and wanted to buy jets, let's say, would you order a 25 to 30 million dollar SU-75 Checkmate, that is improved technology, or s 60 million dollar F-16, that has been shot down over the skies of Ukraine Why are you mentioning a Russian aircraft that supposedly will have its first test flight in 2024? Really? LOL. The Russians don't even have the Su57 in widespread service let alone the Su75. Why would a country looking to buy aircraft wait for something that will take years if ever for delivery vs the F-16 which has a proven combat service record and is relatively cheap and is available now?
1
@Lomnjac007 Prove that bullshit that there are such reports? Even if it were some cases, what retraining does a medic need, or a spoter, or a scout, or a policeman... What crucial knowledge could they lost in 2-5-7yrs out of service that could not be refreshed in 1-2 weeks and not need a retraining of at least 2 months? The thing is many of the people who are now being called up for service are not medics or police or people with other skills. They're regular guys who were called to join the Russian forces and if their lucky they will receive at least some training before they head to Ukraine and if not then they'll get transported to Ukraine front and get thrown to the wolves. Who knows how widespread it is, but its clearly happening when we've seen videos of guys who have been called up who aren't soldiers who say that they're going to head to Ukraine in a week or two. Whether or not you believe this, we will see in a few weeks when new Russian troops start heading to the front and we can see how they perform. If they fight well then it means the Russians still have reserves of trained soldiers to fight with or they are able to train new guys to be at least decent enough soldiers. If they fight poorly then we will know the Russians aren't training their new troops well enough or that they don't have many trained troops that they can send to the front. With the Ukrainians maybe in the beginning they were desperate to get men into the fight to defend against the invasion even if they weren't well trained, but now they have time to send their volunteers to NATO countries to have them be properly trained and equipped before they return to Ukraine and be ready for battle. This is why they're able to now launch major offensives and to keep the attack going when pro-Russian hacks like the Duran were sure that the Ukraine offensive would be stopped and be counterattacked by the Russians and regain all the ground that they lost.
1
@QualityPen Most Russian troops are held in reserve to be ready to respond to anything NATO tries. You have to be kidding me. No NATO country will ever attack Russia unless they were attacked first. If Russia really wanted to have better relations with the west they could easily have it by simply not attacking other countries or threatening them with military force.
1
@agricolaurbanus6209 1. These recruits are not "sent to Ukraine immediately". They are sent to training grounds in LDPR, which are sovereign states from russian legal perspective. There are videos of at least some new recruits that have said that they will be sent to Ukraine to fight shortly so they're definitely not being trained well before being sent to the frontlines. Also many recruits aren't even getting properly equipped. Who knows maybe many of them will be sent to do behind the lines work or something I guess we'll see. 2. Russia is not technically at war with Ukraine. The SMO is legally an operation to assist allied states that are under attack by Ukraine. There are legal restraints about how and how many troops can be deployed in that case. Doesn't matter what Russia calls this invasion, they still went in hard at the beginning and it was definitely mostly if not all Russian soldiers leading the way. Go back through all the videos and data in the first few weeks of the war and tell me where did you hear Donbas militia units doing any significant amounts of fighting on the offense? The answer is relatively little. Didn't ever hear about militia units fighting on the Kiev front or in the south. Only time I started hearing about them more is when the actual Donbas offensive began. 3. You can't just, from a strategic viewpoint, strip all russian military districts from 300k personnel. You have to keep all districts functional. Because there are other possible vectors of enemy attacks, or areas where Russia must be ready to engage. For example Armenia, Kasachstan, Georgia. Russia has obligations from mutual collective defense agreements with other countries. I agree. Russia is a big country that needs forces all over to keep the country secure which is why the narrative that Russia is fighting not with all their full potential to be only partially true. They brought probably as much of their forces to attack Ukraine without taking too many forces from other parts of their country and without mobilization and when that failed they're now reduced to doing what they're doing now which is mobilizing within Russia, hiring more mercenaries and recruiting as much militia as they can in the Donbas and elsewhere. All these people who claim Russian forces having taken significant casualties are lying to themselves otherwise they wouldn't be taking these drastic measures to get more men into the fight like they are right now. Also its questionable as to how effective these new callups will be when they will likely be receiving basic training at best and likely not be very well equipped before being sent to Ukraine. On the otherhand more time is allowing new Ukrainian recruits to spend more time being trained by NATO instructors and be properly equipped by them. I've seen so many videos these days of Ukrainian troops and most seem to be decently if not very well equipped compared to the Russians and militia they're fighting.
1
@User-jr7vf I read that if Luka orders his army to go into Ukraine, he is risking a military coup that might overtrow him. The we should hope Luka is crazy enough to send his men into Ukraine and see if that comes true.
1
If the Ukrainians can continually attack in places where the Russians are absent then they must have very good intelligence that allows them to attack Russian weakpoints and take back alot of territory for relative little loss. Meanwhile all the land that took much of the war for the Russians to take with so many losses is now being given back with relative little resistance.
1
@wilhallman2890 Russia is just positioning themselves for the winter. Ukraine won't make it through the winter. How the heck do you not know that the Ukrainians live in the same climate as Russians do? How would they suffer anymore than the Russians?
1
@E Walker The division of the Soviet Union had a strong western influence, especially the U.S.. As results citizens of the Soviet Union had no say in their desire to remain part of Russia. Who the HELL in their right mind would ever want to remain with Russia? That's like choosing to remain with your rapist instead of fleeing at the first chance possible.
1
@darianvergof2508 it was an honest mistake. Maybe or maybe he like the Duran and all the other pro-Russian hacks are still overestimating Russian capabilities and expected a counterattack when they had little ability to do so. I give him credit for at least admitting he was wrong unlike the Duran who constantly sweep their wrong predictions under the rug over and over.
1