Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "Death of Prigozhin: Causes \u0026 Suspects; No Ind Day Victory; US Tells Ukr Give Up Bakhmut; BRICS Grows" video.

  1.  @SergeyMilitaryRankings  No, I think you're the one who's coping. I'm saying that the Russians left before they were physically forced out— hence, they retreated. You didn't even dispute the facts of what I said, you just went with " nuh uh youre wrong". And I'M the one coping?? If they had been bombed or shot out of a significant number of towns in Kharkhiv, I would say that it WAS a loss. They would have lost battles. But you can't really "lose" a battle if you don't even participate. They lost territory, sure. But to say they "lost IN Kharkhiv" or "PUSHED back by Ukraine" implies that they fought, met resistance, and then lost WITHIN Kharkhiv... which they didn't. Do you get it now? Or do I need to draw you a picture next time?
    2
  2. ​ @SergeyMilitaryRankings  I mean, the order of things matters. The Ukrainians didn't literally chase the Russians out— after a few initial harsh losses, the Russians did actually retreat from the rest of Kharkiv, leaving it mostly abandoned when the Ukrainians came back in. Now if they had stayed, fought, and lost due to high numbers KIA or left unable to continue fighting, and that were consistent across the region, then I would say they definitively lost.
    1
  3.  @SergeyMilitaryRankings  Lmao "this is copium to the highest degree" Even needing to speak in absolutes like that tells me you have no legs to stand on. Putting all your cards in with a bad hand. Truth is never that simple, and you spoke like a child who doesn't understand nuance or the actual, real details of a situation. Which is fitting for you. Even a cursory reading of Wikipedia will tell you I'm right. The Ukrainian strategy was to divert focus to Kherson, make the Russians thin out their northern forces, and then catch them by surprise in the south. In other words, get the Russians out before even attacking. From Taras Berezovets: "[they] thought [the counteroffensive] would be in the south… then, instead of the south, the offensive happened where they least expected, and this caused them to panic and flee." This is a Ukrainian military spokesman speaking. You want to tell me that Ukraine deliberately fought their way through dense fortifications? They themselves say the genius of their plan was making Russians leave before the attack, then forcing the rest to RETREAT INSTEAD OF FIGHTING. Literally like I said: a few initial big losses Verbivka, Volokhiv Yar, and by the time they reached Iziyum, the Russians decided to cut their losses. Or take a quote from none other than Zelenskiy: "The Russian army in these days is demonstrating the best that it can do — showing its back. And, of course, it's a good decision for them to run." Get the idea yet?? They didn't fight and lose every inch of the region. They left early on. How many more ways do I need to put this? You said that "they were pushed back" and then told me about Kupiansk. Dude... they got to Kupiansk 3 days after starting the offensive. Does that remind you of anything I may have said, about early victories BEFORE the decision to retreat?? "so if a country goes into battle and the other side just leaves" I don't know, that's what the US did in Vietnam, and to this day people are calling it a "tactical retreat". 1. Like I said before, Kupiansk and Iziyum were reached mere days after the start, after that point the Russians left Kozacha, Lopan, and Vovchansk, among others. Even local residents attest to the fact that they left so fast they left weapons behind. 2. "a tactical retreat is leaving an area to regroup and resupply and counter attack" ...Man. What is happening LITERALLY RIGHT NOW? What are the Russians doing in Kupiansk? You already told me. By your own definition, the Russians tactically retreated. They're back instead of leaving forever, so they, according to you, retreated. But it seems you weren't smart enough to notice your inconsistent line of reasoning. 3. A defeat in terms of what? I just said it's not strictly a defeat in Kharkhiv because they were never overpowered and forced to sign a treaty or something like that. If you wanna make sweeping claims like that you need to back it up. Explain why they were defeated in your eyes. What criteria are you basing that on?
    1