Comments by "UzuMaki NaRuto" (@UzumakiNaruto_) on "Alexander Mercouris" channel.

  1. @subtle_savage It has been a military tactic since recorded history to provide a strong enemy the chance to make great advances through an apparent weak sector, and then enfold such cauldrons at a later time. Folks keep finding new ways to cope with Russian defeats. Here's the things. If the exact opposite happened and you can't say the same things, then you know you're lying and are simply trying to put the best spin you can on a bad situation. If the Ukrainians were retreating with barely a fight and leaving behind large amounts of equipment and supplies and allowed the Russians to take large amounts of territory within in a few days would you be saying that Ukraine was leading the Russians into a 'cauldron' that will soon close and annihilate them? I seriously doubt it. I bet you'd be saying the Ukrainians are done for and are collapsing and they should sue for peace ASAP for their own good and so on. This attack by the Ukrainians can be viewed as nothing more than an absolute calamity in the making. They have effectively wasted significant resources in securing strategically inconsequential land and will soon pay the butchers bill for such foolishness. The resources they spent on this offensive have been partly offset by all the supplies, tanks and other weapons systems that the Russians left behind for the Ukrainians. Good on them for making such a nice donation.
    1
  2.  @subtle0savage  Regarding this current engagement, Ukraine has launched a series of major attacks with no discernable goal in mind (of military consequence). If they had succeeded, or nearly succeeded, in capturing/controlling an objective (as in Germanys advance in to the Ardennes during the 'Battle of the Bulge' to cut Allied ground forces in two and control the port of Antwerp), then this current assault could be labelled as a 'Penetration of the center'. Ukraine's goal seems primarily to gain significant stretches of land held by a weak enemy to boost moral, which has negligible strategic value and in point of fact demonstrates they are weak The overall Ukrainian goal is of course to take back all or as much land that they've lost in this war. The thing is I believe that they're flexible in going about doing that. This is just my own speculation, but I think when they announced the offensive on Kherson 1-2 months ago they wanted to see what the Russian reaction would be. The Ukrainians know that the Russians can't be strong everywhere along the front and so perhaps they were looking to see what the Russians would do. When the Russians saw that the Ukrainians were actually gathering to attack in the Kherson area they moved in reinforcements to help with repelling the attack. The thing is this became a pick your poison situation for the Russians. If they move troops to Kherson to reinforce that area, then those reserves won't be available for other parts of the front. If they don't move troops to Kherson then it will be an easier attack when the UA forces go on the offensive. The Russians chose to reinforce Kherson, the Ukrainians saw the opportunity to attack in the Kharkiv area when they saw that it wasn't heavily defended. So between good planning and good intelligence supplied by the west, they were able to take advantage of an opportunity that became available and because there were few reserves available, the breakthrough became much larger than if the Russians had any reserves to stop the offensive from moving so deep so fast. So while this successful attack and retaking of large areas of land is certainly a good morale booster, it also shows that the Ukrainians are capable of outsmarting the Russians as well as being capable of launching larger offensives and exploiting opportunities when they emerge. You'll ignore the some 80,000 Ukraine casualties to date. You'll look the other way when Russia demonstrates it can strike anywhere, anytime, clear across Ukraine, whenever it chooses. Can you provide a legitimate source that shows that the UA forces have taken 80,000 casualties? Also ever since the Kiev retreat, the Russians have barely attacked anywhere but the Donbas region because that was all they were capable of. Imagine starting off the war attacking on 3 fronts with armored forces rolling into Ukraine and then after being forced to retreat from Kiev, they lost so much armor that they no longer had the ability to launch any further large scale mobile operations since and its why they were reduced to fighting WWI style and moving forward in a slow crawl in their Donbas offensive. What took the Russians several months to gain they gave it back in a matter of days. And here's my prediction. The Russians aren't going to be launching any kind of major counterattack anytime soon and if they do eventually go back to the offensive its going to be another slow hard slog forward unless they throw much more men and equipment into the fight. PS: I give Alexander credit for being such a good spin artist that he could make such a bad situation sound like a minor setback. Putin should definitely give this man a big fat bonus check for defending every Russian mistake so hard and always trying to turn it into a positive.
    1
  3.  @subtle0savage  Frankly my estimate of 80,000 was erring on the side of conservative caution. The number of casualties, given the amount of devastation observed of military formations, anecdotal comments by captured Ukrainian soldiers, the lethality of Russian weapons, is likely in the 120-150,000 range. I don't doubt that the Ukrainians have taken significant casualties during this war so far, but I doubt the 80,000 number let alone higher until you or anyone else can provide an official legitimate source that can prove this to be true. On the otherside I don't necessarily trust the super high Russian casualty estimates that have been put out there by some, but I don't doubt that they've definitely taken more casualties than the Ukrainians have. What we know for certain is that 40,000 soldiers would never, by any military around the world, be construed as enough to seize and hold a well-defended city the size of Kiev. Personally I think Russia was primarily attempting a bluff, a gamble that if it was pulled off, would save an enormous amount of deaths and cost. When will people give up this excuse and accept that Russia's attack towards Kiev was a failed assault and they paid for it dearly? Look at every single coup/overthrow attempt of a government and tell me when have you EVER needed to conquer the entire city and its population to successfully get rid of a government or leader and take control of the city and gain power? Look at one of the more recent coups in Myanmar in 2021 where the military there simply arrested all the politicians who were in charge at the time and then installed their own government in its place. Did the military need to send tens of thousands of soldiers out in the city to keep the capital's 900,000+ population under control? Not really and that same military government is still in charge today. So I don't get this insistence that you need tens of thousands of troops to take over a capital when all you really need to do is capture, kill or make the existing government flee and then take over important government and news media buildings and perhaps some military installations and that's about it. Personally I think Russia was primarily attempting a bluff, a gamble that if it was pulled off, would save an enormous amount of deaths and cost. Completely unnecessary. You could've just put those same 40k soldiers at the Belarus border and sat them there the whole time and accomplished the same objective of forcing the Ukrainians to put tens of thousands of troops to face you without losing a single soldier or tank. If the Russians did that, they would now have a large fresh armored reserve to work with instead of a badly beaten and depleted one that needed to be refitted. Regarding the goal of Ukraine being to take back all of the land it's lost... that is a pipe dream. It has been losing ground consistently since the beginning of the war--and that when it was strongest. Disagree. While the Ukrainians have lost some good units during the war, they're also gaining new ones who have now had combat experience and are getting better by the day. Also ever increasing amounts of UA soldiers are being trained by NATO advisors which means they'll come out being good troops unlike the untrained, substandard soldiers that Russia are increasingly turning to. And we didn't even talk about the Ukrainians getting massive equipment upgrades from western countries that they didn't have at the beginning of the invasion. Just the addition of HIMARS/MLRS systems have made a HUGE difference to the war with their ability to hit vital targets far behind Russian lines. If only they had them at the beginning of the war, things would be vastly different by now especially with that 40km column that HIMARS would've turned to dust. As an addendum, Russia has barely used its actual forces in Ukraine. Most of the fighting has been done by the Wagner group, the Donbass militias and the Chechens under Kadyrov. That's what Alexander told you and if you want to believe it that's up to you. He just doesn't want this debacle and embarrassment of a performance to be put on the Russian army so just blame it on the militia. If you can show me other sources that prove that Russian troops haven't been doing as much fighting as we know they are, then please post it here. Otherwise its just another 'fact' that Alexander has pulled out of his ass to try and explain away the losses and defeats as not being Russian army losses and defeats.
    1
  4. Alexander knows that Bakhmut will fall back into Ukrainian hands eventually so why bother calling it anything else?
    1
  5. Russians winterizing their troops?! They can't even properly train and equip all the newly mobilized recruits they just called up. Lets see in the coming weeks what happens, but I'm betting there won't be many Russian victories to speak about in the winter either.
    1
  6.  @fsaari  Powerful shells mean nothing if the majority of them are hitting empty ground. Also you should read up on the effectiveness of trenches that can protect troops from shells that hit close but not right on so that they can avoid getting hit by shrapnel. Also accuracy matters when you see a large number of Russian armored vehicles getting damaged and destroyed when they're not moving by accurate Ukrainian arty fire. I've haven't seen Russian artillery hitting Ukrainian vehicles nearly as often and recently its been Iranian drones that have been hitting Ukrainian equipment more because surprise surprise its a guided munition.
    1
  7.  @fsaari  What good is it for a bunch of Ukrainian soldiers to come out of their holes to see russian soldiers advancing with heavy equipment and all they have to respond with are portable weapons? Machine guns arent gonna cut it against advancing tanks and heavy weaponry. Dude were you asleep the first couple of months of the invasion last year??? Did you not remember seeing thousands of Russian tanks and other armored vehicles rolling across the Ukrainian border last February? Shouldn't they have crushed the Ukrainians long ago? Somehow though the lowly Ukrainian soldier armed with ATGMs stopped that seemingly impossible wall of Russian armor and here we are a year later. If Russian heavy equipment was so effective so much of it wouldn't be sitting on Ukrainian land as scrap metal right now. So yeah I don't think Ukrainian troops have much to worry about when it comes to Russian armor and its why the Russian advances have been so slow and have gained relatively little land ever since the beginning of the invasion. The Russians threw away so many of their armored vehicles at the beginning of the war that they haven't been able to launch a major armored offensive since the retreat from the Kiev front.
    1
  8.  @michaelhagley4762  If Alexander actually cared about the fallen from both sides he'd call for Putin to stop this war ASAP and fall back. Of course he won't do it and the only solution for Alexander is ALWAYS for the Ukrainians to 'stop this madness'.
    1
  9. "The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between, the leader is a servant." Well this certainly doesn't describe Putin because if he had faced reality he wouldn't have invaded Ukraine to begin with.
    1
  10. When we see units mounted in these vehicles we will know that the AFU has committed it's strategic reserve and that the real test for the Russian Army is at hand. If the Russian Army breaks this attack the AFU will be finished as an offensive force. It will be interesting to see what the Russians have left in the tank in men and especially in equipment. They've taken so many losses in Bakhmut that I wonder if the Ukrainians are able to break through the Russian frontline that they wouldn't perhaps have another Kharkiv like offensive where the Russian reserves sent to stop the advance won't be strong enough to do so and the Ukrainians will just keep on going.
    1
  11.  @CyrilSneer123  Dear lord man the Russians have thousands of tanks. Who have taken losses in Bahkmut? The PMC Wagner? That's the not the Russian army. Do you get it yet? Ukraine has been fighting a PMC not the Russian army. And I suspect the Chechens may replace them in the area and again they're not Russian army. You need to realise that fighting a war of attrition against Russia is doomed to fail. There's a difference between having tanks in storage and having tanks that actually function that you can take to the battlefield. If the Russians have plenty of tanks then why are they resorting using many T-62s, T-64s and even T-55s when at the beginning of the war they were using mostly T-72 and T-80 era tanks? Also ask yourself if they had so many armored vehicles in reserve then how come we've never seen them launch any major armored offensives in Ukraine since the Kiev retreat? Why have they been launching infantry heavy attacks that have resulted in massive casualties? Also yeah Wagner is 'not the Russian army', they just get their recruits from Russia and use Russian army equipment and supplies. So whether or not these soldiers are apart of the Russian army officially or apart of Wagner, all these thousands of men dying ARE Russians. Its just interesting to see where at the beginning of the war the Russians were measuring their advances in kilometers per day and now they're measuring their advances in meters per day and now the apparent capture of one small city is seen as a major victory. If THIS is what the Russians consider 'success' I hope they keep having many of these kinds of successes.
    1
  12.  @sarahbrown5073  Stalin was certainly the king of sending people to their deaths with no care for their well being as long as the mission was accomplished. Putin is the same although on a much smaller scale.
    1
  13. NATO troops aren't being sent in because Russia has nukes and no one wants to risk escalating the war to where nukes might actually be used. If Russia DID NOT have nukes, NATO would never be afraid of Russia ever. They probably would've entered the war from nearly the very beginning with at least a no-fly zone over Ukraine as Zelensky asked for. NATO airpower plus precision missile strikes would probably be enough to stop the Russian invasion because the Russian airforce would get annihilated easily and as we've seen Russian air defense isn't as good as we thought and it can also be defeated with anti-radar missiles. If it were really needed for NATO to put troops on the ground, their losses wouldn't be very high at all because NATO forces would completely curb stomp the Russians without even having to try all that hard. All this is being prevented simply because Russia has nukes that no one wants them to use and then have to retaliate with in kind. Heck if Ukraine didn't give up all its nukes and had kept a small stockpile for defense, Russia almost certainly wouldn't have invaded Ukraine now because the risk of getting nuked is there.
    1
  14. Alexander is definitely in a league of his own when it comes to turning Russian losses and setbacks into something positive. Putin himself should be writing fat bonus checks to him for all the hard work he's doing for trying to cover for him.
    1
  15. The answer is nothing. No matter how bad the situation is Alexander and the rest of the Duran crew and every other pro-Russian hack will find a way to minimize those Russian losses and setbacks while continuing to blow smoke up your ass that the Russians are fine and will ultimately prevail.
    1
  16.  @Papi1960R  You make broad sweeping claims, whose validity is tarnished by your constant use of terms such as "usually", "generally", "maybe" and "probably". Your lack of sources for any of your statements place your views squarely in the realm of promoting your own wishful thinking. If you want sources for the claims made by someone, then why don't you ask Alexander and the Duran for sources for all the claims that they've made that have mostly turned out to be utterly wrong? All you have to do is look at the early videos on the Duran channel and all the predictions they made about the Russians and the war back in March/April and see how grossly wrong they've been. Its all there for you to watch if you want and then come back and tell me how reliable the Duran is in providing accurate info that matches reality and what's really happening in this war.
    1
  17. If Russian advances were 'speeding up' then how come they're not using their tanks and other armored vehicles to speed up this advance even more? Large scale Russian armored attacks haven't happened much if any ever since the retreat from Kiev.
    1
  18.  @anncoffey8375  They retreated from Kiev in March to demonstrate good will when the negotiations in Instanbul were underway. You CAN'T BE SERIOUS to believe that lie right? No seriously you can't actually believe that to be true right????!? Just think it through logically and ask yourself why would the Russians launch an attack towards Ukraine's capital, come fairly close to their objective while taking thousands of casualties and losing hundreds of vehicles and then all of a sudden completely abandon that front and all that progress all as a 'good will gesture'? Does that logically make sense to you? Even if you believe it was apart of negotiations towards a ceasefire or stopping the war, why would you abandon all that progress BEFORE you have an agreement in place rather than AFTER you come to an agreement? How does it not make more sense for the Russians to hold their position with their army threatening Kiev and negotiate rather than completely pulling all Russian forces back from Kiev into Belarus and losing everything that you gained? Do you not think that the more logical reason for the Russians to give up so much territory is because they HAD NO CHOICE but to do so? Namely they didn't have enough supplies to continue to support the army heading for Kiev and they were taking heavy losses and the only reasonable choice was to pull back and give up that front rather than face having your army get destroyed. Don't you know that Nato was intent upon using Ukraine as its proxy to attack Russia? Again ask yourself logically how does that make sense?!?!! Russia will always have a large army with decent technology even if they're not the best. In what world can a much smaller Ukrainian army with much less advanced weaponry even with NATO help could they ever hope to attack Russia? Also ask yourself WHY would Ukraine ever want to attack Russian soil? What would have to gain from doing that? Can you answer that? It absolutely makes no sense for Ukraine to do so when all they've ever wanted was to keep their country and defend it.
    1
  19.  @mitchvanderben1000  you are a daydreamer, get back to reality pls, ever since NATO was formed the primary objective was to keep Russia in check and using Ukraine <ex USSR republic> as a springboard for possible war against Russia You said it yourself that Russia needs to be kept in check. Maybe if they weren't always being a threat to the rest of Europe and elsewhere all the time, NATO wouldn't need to have existed in the first place to keep the USSR and now Russia in check. This would be like a violent gang roaming a neighborhood and terrorizing and robbing them all the time and finally the people in that community decide to all join together and stand up to that gang and it works in stopping them and then all of a sudden the gang comes and cries and complains that they can't bully your community anymore. This is what's happening with Russia now. They don't like NATO because everyone who joins no longer has to fear getting attacked by Russia or being threatened militarily by them. They see NATO as being 'expansionist' because of all the nations who want to join and be free of Russian influence and threats and of course Russia doesn't like that.
    1
  20.  @olliefoxx7165  You slander this channel yet can't list your sources of "reliable" information. You can't even say what Alex has said that's not true. Go back to the Duran's early videos on this war from back in March to May and see what they had to say about the war and then see how many of those predictions actually came true. Then come back and tell us how 'reliable' Alexander he is. Look at the Bakhmut attacks happening right now where that offensive began since the Kharkiv offensive began and Alexander has been going on for weeks about how it was about to fall and now its still in Ukrainian hands. That's the kind of 'reliable information' you get from Alexander and the Duran.
    1
  21. Too bad men on both sides are being killed...it is not a competition as to how many are killed on either side. Even one death is too many. All this wouldn't have had to happen if Putin didn't invade Ukraine period. He made the decision to launch this invasion and now everyone has to pay for it. The Russians cannot accept less as it is existential. So the war will go on and the Russians will have to be prepared to pound Ukraine and take the war unfortunately to the limit. Considering how well the Ukrainians are doing against the Russians right now, it would be stupid for them to stop and negotiate a ceasefire that will reward Putin and his aggression instead of punishing. The only good solution is to kick the Russians completely out of Ukraine and maybe even Crimea and then join NATO. That's the only way that the Ukrainians will ever find long term peace and be protected from any future possible Russian attacks. The Baltic states were smart to join NATO as soon as they could and look at them now. Instead of facing the same fate as Ukraine and getting invaded and taken over by the Russians, those small nations are forever protected against Russian aggression and can live peacefully and free from the Russian threat.
    1
  22.  @fazilm1  he would not have invaded if the Ukrainiae was not killing Russian speaking eastern Ukrainians since 2014 and NATO was not heavily arming Ukraine for only one purpose. And the Ukrainians wouldn't be fighting the Donbas militia if the Russians didn't support them when they were about to lose and then bring in troops to fight and push back Ukrainian forces. So the Russians already invaded Ukrainian territory back in 2014 and they did it again in 2022 only on a much large scale. This time the Ukrainians were able to stand up and fight back and the Russians are paying for their miscalculation. Unfortunately the Ukrainians also have to pay for Putin's idiot decisions. Also you do realize that most of the people in the Donbas region might've wanted more autonomy and independence, but NOT to breakaway from Ukraine entirely right? And even fewer wanted the Donbas region to be apart of Russia. So even the people living in the Donbas didn't want to completely breakaway from Ukraine let alone have an intense desire to join Russia. Only a few very people did and Putin decided to back them and turn it into a wider and more destructive conflict and now 8 years later Putin again decided to turn this relative low intensity conflict into an all out war. So trying to say this wasn't Putin's fault is pure bullshit.
    1
  23.  @fazilm1  He said the separatists were armed by Russian speaking defectors from the Ukrainian armed forces, and it was the alarming defection rate that drove the Minsk agreements. Please link me to a legitimate source that shows this to be true. I'd really like to see it. I do not know where you get the notion that the Russian speaking people, who having endured years of atrocities did not want to join Russia. My own recollection is that they wanted greater autonomy and only turned to Russia after their demands resulted in the Ukrainian govt unleashing the ultranationalists on them. There were polls done that showed that most people in the Donbas wanted autonomy while REMAINING WITHIN Ukraine and not breaking away from them and very few wanted to actually join Russia. Find me a poll from 2014 to even more recently before the war that disproves this and post it here so I can read it if you're able to. And 100% almost no one but a few militants supported by the Russians wanted to breakaway by violent means. These relative few people who took up arms and rose up were quickly being put down by Ukrainian forces until the Russians intervened with their own troops and pushed Ukrainians forces back. If Russia didn't invade back then, the Donbas militia would've been dealt with and peace would've mostly been restored and there wouldn't have been 8 years of low intensity conflict leading up to the present day war.
    1
  24.  @fazilm1  Russian forces did not invade the Donbass until Feb 2022. Those breakaway republics wanted to join Russia since 2014 and Russia said no. Russia took back Crimea in 2014. Again all the info I looked up showed that NONE of those regions wanted to leave Ukraine let alone join Russia. The majority of people in the Donbas wanted more autonomy and independence for their areas and that's it and certainly the vast majority of people in the Donbas didn't want to leave by force. If you can show me proof that the majority of people in Donbas wanted to leave Ukraine even if it was by force then please post it here. I gave you the name of the NATO advisor who was in charge of training the Ukrainian army in 2014. Do your own research . Sounds like you made up your own poll in your response? Again if what you say is true then you should be able to find me more than one random source that supports what this supposed NATO advisor said.
    1
  25. Are you insane? If Russia was fighting the US almost every Russian artillery piece and missile system would be a smoking wreck when they get hit by long range air and ground launched precision missiles. Artillery is for poorer countries that can't afford modern aircraft and missiles that would wipe artillery off the map before they had a chance to make any difference on the battlefield.
    1
  26.  @KJ-md2wj  If Russia WERE fighting the US they would achieve early superiority as you suggest, but wars are won on the ground unless you want to go nuclear. If Russia were actually fighting the US their weak airforce would get completely destroyed in short order and after the US gains air superiority then the Russian army would get completely curb stomped very quickly. In a modern conventional war if you don't have control of the air then you're fighting with an impossible to overcome disadvantage when your enemy can destroy your army and logistics with ease. This is why Russia is having such a difficult time in Ukraine when their airforce is complete trash that it can't even beat a nation with barely an airforce to fightback with. Ground wars take longer and US/NATO strategic thinking hasn't thought about this even being possible. Ground wars don't take long at all when you have superior weapons systems and you saw that in both Iraq wars. After seeing how poorly they've performed in Ukraine, the Russian army would fair no better than the Iraqi army did against the US especially after they take complete control of the skies which is the final nail in any chance that the Russians ever had against the US armed forces.
    1
  27.  @patb5266  Imagine if social media existed during WWII. All you idiots would've declared Germany and Japan to be winners of the war and that it was time for other nations to put down their weapons and sign a peace agreement. Why have the USSR continue the fight with all the massive losses they took in men, equipment and territory in the first few months of the invasion by Germany? Just give up already its hopeless!
    1
  28.  @Ceyla99  Just go any number of subreddits that are covering the war and posting new footage daily or go to the many Telegram channels that are out there and see for yourself how the Russians are doing vs the Ukrainians. Why do you think the Russians are clamping down on Russian supporters who are reporting on the war? I'm sure its partly because of security reasons, but mostly its because they don't want Russian bloggers complaining and criticising the Russian army and high command for their incompetence and poor performance during this war and showing all the mistakes they've made and the losses they've taken. Do you think the Russians would be taking these steps if they were doing great during this war? That they wouldn't want to show all the videos of the Russian army destroying the Ukrainians and kicking their asses? Cmon now.
    1
  29. That will never happen. Ukraine after this war will be free from Russian influence and meddling.
    1
  30. @odin Biflindi Listening to some western outlets my own country Ireland in particular you would think Ukraine are steamrolling towards the gates of Moscow as we speak, the detachment from reality is quite something. Listening to pro-Russian hacks like Alexander you'd think that everything was still going according to plan and that everything is fine and that all these 'minor setbacks' don't mean anything and that Russia will ultimately prevail in the long run. I really wish Alexander and all the other pro-Russian folks would be FORCED to go to the frontlines and see how the Russian army is REALLY doing and then see if they can comeback and still believe in all the bullshit they keep spewing.
    1
  31. T-90s are still far inferior to any modern western tank. As we've already seen, destroying them isn't very difficult at all.
    1
  32.  @MatoVuc  you remember that the two best western MBTs, M1 and Leopard2, were destroyed just as if not easier in Syria and Yemen by much inferior opponents? First the M1s and Leo 2s that were destroyed weren't used properly by their crews who were poorly trained. I mean we're talking about Saudis here. I'm pretty sure Ukrainian tank crews being trained by western trainers will do significantly better. Second we're talking very few losses here. We're not talking about hundreds or even probably dozens of western tanks lost. We're talking about very few western tanks that were outright destroyed even with poor handling. Compare that to THOUSANDS of Russian tanks being destroyed on both sides. No one is saying that western tanks are impossible to knockout. There will be losses, but if used properly they will be far fewer than how many Russian tanks have been lost and also Ukrainian crews will have a much higher chance of survival than they ever would in a Russian tank.
    1
  33.  @thememe986  War is about more than territorial gains. If you go all out for a small territorial gain all you're really doing is wasting valuable resources. All these supposed 'small territorial gains' has added up to being alot of ground and towns/cities being taken back. If it were the Russians taking the exact amount of territory and it were the Ukrainians that were running away Alexander would be having neverending orgasms at all the gains his cherished Russians were making in just a little over a month. And also war is about beating your enemy and making them run and the Ukrainians are doing plenty of that the past month or so.
    1
  34.  @rosszografov614  Of course it could be a trap, but more likely it isn't. Many pro-Russian hacks thought that the Kharkiv offensive that took so much ground so quickly was a Russian trap as well and that there would be an eventual Russian counter attack that would destroy the Ukrainian forces the same way that the Germans were destroyed at the Battle of the Bulge. Anyways we'll find out soon enough when the Ukrainians arrive at Kherson and see if they meet any resistance or find any traps or they simply find a city empty of Russian forces who have indeed left in a hurry and had given the city back without a fight.
    1
  35.  @rosszografov614  It isn't Kherson. That's the province name. It's Kherson city they talk about so misleadingly in western media. Furthermore, it isn't even the city proper, just the left bank, which would be of no military help to Zelensky..as his troops will be stuck exposed there in the open, with all bridges destroyed and in a heavily mined area I guess we'll find out in the coming days just how much the Russians have given back to the Ukrainians in their retreat and what they'll be doing afterwards. Liman was taken back 5-6 weeks ago..but as it's usual to expect, western media hasn't reported on the Russian gaining back the Northern East.. except a small captions on some western news services, saying: Liman under Russian control. Please show me a legitimate news source says that Lyman was retaken by the Russians? If you have a link please post it here. Western media is full of propaganda and misinformation, and the Russian side doesn't comment much, as a traditional rule by the military.. all that, leaves knowledge in a state of confusion. Are you saying Russian media is 100% accurate and honest in what it reports? 😂🤣😅😂😂🤣 Look even if you don't trust either side's media, you can still do your own research on the internet and also see what's actually happening on the battlefield to get at least a half decent accurate picture. Like for example many pro-Russian hacks like Alexander still push the lie that the Russians haven't taken high casualties and yet if you look at the actions of the Russian government where they've called for mobilization as well as finding as many troops as they can from everywhere that they can, it certainly doesn't seem like the Russians have taken only light casualties going by the measures they've taken. This isn't very different than the Russian invasion of Chechnya where they launched a poorly planned and poorly executed assault into that country and took significant casualties and tried to cover it up. Then mostly by being a vastly larger army with much more equipment did the Russians finally win through brute force. The same is happening now in this war except that Ukrainian being a much larger country with a much bigger population is able to fight back effectively with western help. This time around Putin had bitten off more than he could chew and he's paying for it bigtime now. It's clearer to us, that with each day Zelensky's troops have run out of steam, weapons and energy. We can't see any advances..it all looks grey, cold and gloomy on the Zelensky's side Again if what you say is true then we'll soon see it on the battlefield where the Ukrainians will have taken so many casualties that they will be unable to launch further major offensives against the Russians. So far that hasn't proven to be true when people like Alexander kept insisting that the Russians were winning with their small advances in the Donbas. Then when the Ukrainian offensives began he said they were minor gains and that the Russians would hold and probably take back what they lost with counterattacks. Then when that didn't happen and the Ukrainians kept moving forward, he claimed that they were taking heavy casualties for their advances and said that the Kherson offensive was still a failure. Then when the Ukrainians started making advances in the Kherson front he said they were minor gains at heavy cost and that the Russians would hold. And now we see that was false too and that the Russians chose to retreat now rather have another Kharkiv happen where the Russians ran and retreated in disarray. So we'll see in the next few weeks and longer as to what will happen and then see if Alexander, you and all the other pro-Russian hacks will be right or will you all be wrong once again like almost every other time.
    1
  36.  @rosszografov614  You actually ask me to go back weeks ago to look for information and then serve it you, on a plate..?? In a discussion when someone asks you for your sources for the statements you make its usually up to the person making the statements to provide those sources. Unless you're just pulling shit out of your ass or you don't have any confidence that your sources are reliable then you should have no trouble providing proof and facts to backup your statements instead of trying to make someone else do it for you to disprove you. I mean how hard is it for you to post a link to the source you used so that other people can read it themselves? Not hard at all unless you were bullshitting or you used a source that wasn't really reliable.
    1
  37. @Peter Azlac Ukraine has occupied a small part of what Russia calls the crumple zone or that area they retreat from to invite Ukraine forces into a fire kill zone which is why it keeps changing hands! I remember Alexander saying something similar during the Kharkiv offensive when he kept saying that the Russians were luring the Ukrainians into a trap before they would launch a counterattack to smash UA forces who had overstretched themselves and then it never happened and he had to make excuses for the Russians. What Ukraine has definitely demonstrated over the past week is that neither the Western weapons nor the training its new brigades have received are game changes as claimed by the Western media and neither will F-16s be. The offensive just started so it remains to be seen if western training and armored vehicles still won't make a significant difference on the battlefield. Judging an offensive based on a few days of data would be as dumb as saying the D-Day landings were a failure because the allies took thousands of casualties in the first day of landings and made less than expected progress. The real purpose of the mines and defense lines is to stall any advance so it can be defeated by air, drone, and missile power, which is the specialty of Suravikin and he has hundreds of aircraft and helicopters plus it was recently stated some 20,000 kamikaze drones. Mines are a problem, but they can be overcome otherwise mines would've stopped every offensive in the history of war which obviously it hasn't. I guess we'll see how effective Russian aircraft, artillery and missiles will be in stalling the offensive and eventually stopping it or maybe the Ukrainians instead find a way through without taking too many casualties and they eventually push to the Azov sea as they probably planned to do.
    1
  38.  @trevorcrook5753  Under the circumstances they are doing well . Certainly better than the Americans in Afghanistan and Vietnam The Russians have lost more men in about 9 months of war with Ukraine than the US has lost in 30 YEARS of war in both Afghanistan and Vietnam COMBINED. Russians are certainly doing well. 😂😅😆🤣😂😆
    1
  39. @Amaze-2savage The west IS SUPERIOR in military technology which is why they're able to keep human casualties down. The Russians don't give a damn about losses which is why they care more about simplicity and large numbers to overcome their enemies. Too bad for them its failed miserably in Ukraine.
    1
  40.  @roki5941  Sadly it might be a disaster for us in Europe, but I suppose that we get what we deserve by not standing up against the insanity. Only insanity happening is one country invading another and now is getting its ass kicked and is so desperate that they have to continually threaten the use of nukes and annex territory that they don't even control in the hopes of gaining something out of this disaster of an invasion.
    1
  41.  @patb5266  ok clown, Russia's WW1 fighting style that doesn't exist except in the fake media, throwing waves of troops at the Brave Heroic Ukrainians. The Russians are firing tons of artillery at Ukrainian lines before sending in mostly infantry to attack with relatively little armored vehicle support. If that's not WWI style fighting I don't know what is. What happened to earlier in the war when you saw huge columns of Russian armored vehicles and trucks advances kilometers per day? Now you barely see any large number of Russian tanks and IFVs and they're advancing mostly with troops at such a slow rate and at high cost. Please explain what happened to all those tanks and armored vehicles and why we haven't seen them being used in large scale attacks since the beginning of the war?
    1
  42.  @va3403  If that's the case then I'm sure we'll see reports of a massive Ukrainian retreat from that area in the coming days then.
    1
  43.  @va3403  Not sure about that. Russia is happy to keep poundering the Ukrainians from the air and ground until there is not a single soldier left in there. So, technically, they may not retreat, as its a long way back through an open area where they'll be like targets for the Russian army to practice. Looks like the Russians are playing 4D chess in letting the Ukrainians take back Kupyansk and possibly even Izyum with relative little fight. Guess they're really looking to lure the UA forces deep before letting loose and bombarding them to death right?
    1
  44.  @antipropo461  The Russians aren't 'retreating', they're just advancing in a different direction like they've been doing for the past almost 2 months now. 😉
    1
  45. Relax I seriously doubt there's ever going to be any missile fired from the Ukrainians that will get anywhere close to Moscow. This just gives the Ukrainians more range to strike almost anything within their own borders which will make Russia's life that much more miserable and difficult. Will be interesting to see what goes up in flames with these new longer range weapons.
    1
  46.  @enshk79  If the Russians were truly fighting the west they would've gotten curb stomped into the ground within a month or two.
    1
  47. @Geri Snoke Its funny how Alexander keeps talking about Bakhmut as if its some huge and extremely important military objective and then when people try to look for it on the map you can barely find it. However because that's mostly the only place where the Russians are making any kind of headway right now, Alexander has to turn that tiny place to being the most important place in Ukraine right now where winning that city would be a great victory. Alexander has legitimately become the new Baghdad Bob of this war.
    1
  48. If Putin ACTUALLY ran a tight ship his armies would've been much better trained and organized and his equipment would've been in much better condition and the Ukrainians would've probably been beaten by now or at least lost much more territory than it had. Luckily for Ukraine the Russians were as disorganized, incompetent and stupid as ever and they were as about as ineffective as one could hope for.
    1
  49.  @ArgentPure  Anyone who bothered to follow the war closely themselves and look at the facts could easily see the reality of what's really happening on the battlefield rather than listening to some Russian nuthugger like Alexander who only says what the pro-Russian crowd wants to hear.
    1
  50.  @JA-nq7xf  The logistics game resets when Ukraine loses electric generation and distribution capacity. That affects the civilian population far more than the military who can switch to fuel to generate electricity if they haven't been doing so all along. Also the logistics problems goes both ways when the Russians can't get enough supplies to their troops in Kherson. Manufacturing of all kinds of materiel comes to a halt without power, traveling at night becomes very arduous, staying alive in freezing weather becomes more difficult, and even something as simple as the industrial scale bagging of fresh vegetables becomes impossible. Well good thing when it comes to military supplies the Ukrainians can get them from NATO so manufacturing becomes less of an issue. Also several MILLION Ukrainians served in the Soviet army in WWII so I'm pretty sure they'll be fine fighting in the winter especially when NATO countries have already been donating winter equipment to the UA forces ahead of the winter weather. Lets see how the Russians deal with the winter and if anything they'll suffer far more on the frontlines than the Ukrainians will and if I were them I'd keep the offensives going throughout the cold weather and see if the Russians don't crack especially the newly mobilized troops.
    1