Why Ukraine Re-Taking Crimea Will Destroy Russia
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- For 60% off with HelloFresh PLUS free shipping, use code REALLIFELORE60 at bit.ly/3Ee8fCv!
Please Subscribe: / @reallifelore
RealLifeLore on Spotify: spoti.fi/47yMfzp
RealLifeLore on Facebook: / reallifelore
Select video clips courtesy of Getty Images
Select video clips courtesy of the AP Archive
Special thanks to MapTiler / OpenStreetMap Contributors and GEOlayers 3
www.maptiler.c...
www.openstreet...
aescripts.com/...
The war didn’t start in February 2022, it simply escalated
it started, war starts when it's declared.
@@NotShowingOff Yes, that began in 2014.
@@NotShowingOff no, in your logic then England and Ireland have been at war all this time, Germany and Poland, Hungary and Romania, Turkey Greece, etc... NO one thinks like you because you are wrong, if War was just hostile actions then the entire World is at war.
@@Real_SkyRipper Russia Invaded Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014. That's when the war began. Obviously you knew that. Is it really a war though or a special military operation?
@@RussiasSufferingInUkraineI don't remember there being a war in 2018 between Ukraine and Russia.
*edit (does not mean that i am denying the fact that it has been happening since then)
That white peace scenario is like something cooked up by 90s international optimism. The least likely scenario. Even if it were possible, the "independent" Crimea would quickly become a puppet state of someone.
Crimea had a referendum in 1991, it wanted to become an independent member of the New Union Treaty. I.e. separate from the Ukrainian SSR. 94.30% of the people voted yes. You literally can't have Crimea not be pro-Russian without somehow dealing with its population first.
Yes under Russia who wants the land to stop Ukraine from having a huge natural gas reserve
Agreed. Really good video, but weak choices for a conclusion. There will be no other ending than sending 1 million Russians to Russia. Gather them in a line and make them walk. If you refuse, you're 💀
@@thoughtsofapeer >there are no Nazis in Ukraine
>posts this
I do find many peoples opinions on Russia kind of hilarious. For example in the US the Democrats have been retroactively criticizing Trump for the positive statements he's made about Russia and Putin in the wake of the 2014 and 2022 invasions but ignore how Obama and Clinton weren't any better, and with the wars Russia's waged in places like Chechnya and Georgia it's not like nobody knew what kind of man Putin is or how Russia operates. Large parts of Europe werent much better with their blind optimism in the 90s and 2000s as they got blinded by cheap mineral and energy prices. They dont want to admit it but many politicians are eager to end the war at least somewhat in Russia's favor as that makes things easier for them to normalize relations and open trade back up to keep that cheap oil and gas coming.
I feel a better title would be "Why losing Crimea will destroy PUTIN", because Russia existed for 20 years without Crimea and was just fine. But Putin has tied himself so closely to Crimea that it's loss will ruin an credibility he still has.
Without putin russia could be destroyed
It seems overmanipulative in order to make people believe that Ukraine must not liberate it territory
Russia needs broken apart otherwise they will just threaten the world again and again. They are basically the 21st century Germany. They wont get the message to stop going on military adventures for the purpose of expansion until it is forced apart for several decades and only allowed to reunify once they understand how to function in the world.
With the now widely known fact that Russia was nothing more than a paper tiger, many peoples of the Russian federation will be looking to gain their independence from the imperialists in Moscow - so it would indeed be highly likely that Russia as we know it will fall as a continuation of the 1991 fall of communist Russia.
@@FuriousImp all russians are slaves of local lords, these lords must have private army to do something, but even then, it'll be complicated cause russia has more internal forces than their professional army before the full-scale invasion
All predictions proved wrong.
Ukraine never got crimea back.
@@kap1526its a stalemate
@@Adonis362 nope , not at all.
@@projectedone what do you mean no not at all no country has made gains
@@Adonis362 have you been watching the maps? Russia is pushing Ukraine on all fronts and they haven’t even started their spring offensive in earnest yet. Compare that with what Ukraine managed in their counter offensive. The deep strikes behind the lines of troop concentrations and ammo depos. The destruction of the energy systems and the reduction of Ukraines remaining air defence systems. Targets that directly affect Ukraine ability to do war. It’s over and the end result is going to be the same. For humanitarian reasons alone this war should be stopped. Ukraine losses are not the 30 000 odd that Zelenskyy is trying to sell to the dimmer of the gullible. Washington post itself are saying that 700 000 are missing. Their hospitals and grave yards over flowing. Stop the madness.
There are no tides in Syvash. It's almost entirely cut off from the Black Sea, except for a few narrow channels. Even if it weren't, the Black Sea tides themselves are nearly negligible. The water level of the Syvash decreases throughout the summer as it dries out. That part of your video is inaccurate.
I would love to see the Syvash one day. Can you swim there?
A quick search indicates the water level does vary because of the Azov sea's current pattern and the spring in flow from the rivers.
@@antonyapostolov8252 you can. But why, if the Black See is like 100m away? :)
@@TheErazar to try something different, simple as that. I already know the Black Sea because I'm Bulgarian.
Still a substantial choke point
4:23 - The Black Sea doesn't have any meaningful tides, so the levels in the Syvash will be more likely controlled by rainfall runoff from the surrounding land.
Surrounding lands is the Bassein of Don river. So at spring all melted snow and ice from the area size of France pass by there.
Crimea river
Correction: the attack on the Kerch Bridge knocked out one of the two rail lines as well as the road bridge. Russia has been forced to re-open the ferry service in the months since due to the massive reduction in logistic capabilities of the Kerch bridge.
Correct. They only very recently brought in the replacement rail section, made in russia and barged in. Might not even be tested and running with full capacity trains again.
And IF there are ATACMS in Ukraine - we will see the use of them and then the US will admit to having sent them. And I think a huge coordinated attack of all the drones and tech they have on the way - focused on Kerch - will drop that span for good.
@@bc-guy852 I agree it will be hit again. And possibly before any major ground offensive in southern Ukraine. I have no idea what will be used though. I have a feeling ATACMS really won't be provided as the cost and limited stock make the cost-benefit ratio too unfavourable. The use of JDAMs and GLSDBs is indirect evidence of that.
@@ktgs6723 re: ATACMs. The missiles aren't that much more expensive than a full pod of the smaller MLRS/HIMARS rockets. So cost isn't an issue. And availability/depletion of stocks ... that's an issue for every piece of equipment & munition getting sent. And while there are hundreds, if not thousands of targets that could be hit with ATACMs, there are only a handful that can only be hit by those missiles. A couple dozen for those really, really important strikes would probably be all that are needed. For most other things, JDAMs or other weapons would work just fine.
Correct. But both have already been fixed.
@@ktgs6723 Speaking of that sizing back Mariupol, would cut land bridge and allow fire to transport ships. As much knocking down Kerch Bridge entirely. I think the Ukrainian plan is rather to siege Crimea then directly assault it. Russia already could not effectively sustain area prior to war. As it has really poor agriculture.
This channel is q west propaganda channel. Nothing will convince me otherwise.
Imagine threatening everyone with nukes because your losing a war you started LOL
Putin is a coward. We know that he’d never use them first as it’d be game over for him.
Imagine relying on $100b+ aid
@@Lilhajxjk274 imaging not relying on it when ur defending against 15x larger and 5x stronger country
@@Lilhajxjk274 lol the same for russia and britain in WW2 LOL dont forget george washington the founder of the united states of america also asked for aid from europe and got it
@@Lilhajxjk274 lol stfu ruski troll 💩
07:44 Analysis of Gustav cannon on the Sevastopol fortress in WWII has shown it was effectively useless in this offensive. It was the wrong weapon for this kind of fortification.
Overall useless creation since they did not even try attacking through Maginot line
@@tmdwu5360 It's kind of crazy how many countries have tried the "insanely huge long range artillery piece" idea when with very few, very limited examples (giant cannon assembled to take out a wall at relatively close range) they've proven useless. Either they're so powerful they can only manage a few shots before something breaks in the gun, it's so long range it can barely even hit a city much less a specific target, or it's so huge it's rate of fire makes it useless which means people usually go back to the "as powerful as possible" idea and we go back to it breaking down every few shots and needing to be repaired which makes the rate of fire even slower. With the amount of resources they consume building, moving, assembling, sighting in, and actually firing it's often cheaper to just spend that fortune on outfitting a whole armored division and use that to punch a whole in the defenses.
Where the got materials to build that thing. Didn't Germany layed in ruins. Thanks for one man who believed in his nation
Schwerer Gustav was a useless weapon for anything. The same steel could make dozens of regular guns which would always be far more effective
A consistent problem with Hitler and his obsession with "my dick is bigger than yours" weapons.
30:40 You do realise that the military base lease in Sevastopol is exactly the asset that allowed Russia to meddle in Crimea in 1991-2014 and to finally seize it militarily? Why would Ukraine agree to restore that situation?
Rather, the Russian navy in Crimea was the reason why Russia went to confrontation with Ukraine in 2014, when a color revolution took place there. Then Russia got a chance to lose its fleet forever because of the pro-Western anti-Russian government of Ukraine. The authorities did not need Donbass.
Yep. At the end of the day, the only outcome i see for Crimea is Ukraine just kicking Russian military completely out, and telling the citizens to either stay and deal with it, or leave for Russia.
@@Fillipok 1. Russian state awards (medals) for seizing Crimea were coined in 2013. The invasion and partition of Ukraine was in Russia's plans since 2005 when Yushchenko became president anyway, despite a failed KGB assassination attempt.
2. The fleet was to leave anyway because the lease would run out and its prolongation was extremely unpopular.
@@johng6080 'telling the citizens to either stay and deal with it, or leave for Russia.'
Ah, the glory of ethnic cleansing.
@@Pandamasque "a failed KGB assassination attempt" ahahahahah. Its just acute pancreatitis.
Can you cover the Myanmar civil war? I'm very interested to learn more about ongoing conflicts other than Ukraine.
second this. Burmese civil war was really asymmetrical with the freedom fighter fighting with limited weaponry and even 3d printed gun
i wonder if the anti-junta forces are being logistically supported internationally since the junta likely posses a large percentage of the countries preexisting military supplies
It’s also be nice to get a video on Ethiopia. I imagine he’s probably not too familiar with those conflicts in comparison.
Right as I helped my classmates at my University build a student organization for Burmese students, the coup happened in the middle of the semester. A lot of their bank accounts got frozen. The stress they were going through was immense. And the stuff the Junta does to their people and ethnic minorities is unforgivable
Western backed foreign entities attempted to take over the country with influence operations, the Military said NOPE. Similar to a certain large European country I can think of circa 2013/14....
More castles fell to siege than ever fell to assault. Previous wars have been bloody sure, but previous wars didn't have drone and satellite reconnaissance and GPS-guided munitions with ranges so long that you don't even need to be IN Crimea to accurately hit targets there. As you mention, I expect them to destroy the bridge and rail connections, stop the fresh water, and launch precision rocket strikes any time the Russians try to dock a supply ship.
Да, а потом вы говорите что это не геноцид. Браво.
Что вы хотели сказать этим? Что надо убивать всех мирных в Крыму? Надо оставить их без еды и воды? Что за херь ты несёшь? О чем нахер идёт речь?
А потом задайтесь вопросами, зачем Путину это война?, против кого он ее ведёт? и для кого он ее ведёт? (Ответы: за безопасность страны, против таких как вы, для своего народа)
@@savik175 Speak English, since you understand it
@@MIchaelSybi Don't be rude.
Reading what Google translated hes kind of delusional.
saying that Putin is at war with Ukraine because of people like him who wants genocide or whatever.
Just trying to weigh in Well why should the civilians have to suffer to take back land.
say that they're going to kill all all the civilians and that's genocide and that's bad
They've had since 2014 to try that
@@MIchaelSybi It is human, you're just too ignorant too understand anything but English.
11:47 the other advantage of striking south from Zaporizhzhia to Melitopol is that Melitopol has the most active UA resistance movement within the occupied cities right now. The SBU could split the Russian occupied oblasts in two and there is *not* currently a strong russian troop presence along that route.
Strike south with what? 10 million Ukrainians fled the country, 250k were killed and another 250k were wounded. Their population is fucked permanently win or lose.
Do you even live on this planet!? We have the ongoing Ukrainian collapse in Bakhmut and Kremina, and you post this shit!
@@Swaggaccino strike south with the same thing that won them Kherson and Kharkiv durak.
@@AM-rb4ps They didn’t win Kherson or Kharkiv, khlopchyk. Russia withdraw voluntarily because they don’t have enough men to garrison entire cities with over 1 million population. Russia entered the war with only 200k soldiers. Ukraine mobilized over a million men and the only thing that’s accomplished is 20% loss in its territory. It took Ukraine 6 years to even raise an army against Donbas and they couldn’t even reclaim it from rebels. Cope.
@@Swaggaccino Moskva “voluntarily withdraws” into the sea.
Hows the copium going?
should ask you
whos coping? yeah russia aint destroyed but they DEF aint winning. and dont go with the "they arent trying" cuz we know NO military fucking holds back.
8:06 to be fair tho, the "Schwere Gustav" wasn't really effective, it had a low firing rate of only 1.45 shot every 1 hours (according to Wikipedia) and bombers or a lot of smaller artillery is probably more effective
Edit: had some numbers from Wikipedia switched up
Its not about the speed, but the punch being so strong that "artillery save" bunkers got destroyed by it
It was used to create fear more than anything.
its 1.45 shots per hour, still slow tho :)
Tell that to the maxim gorky 1 emplacement….
It was used to destroy deep storages. Bunkers. Important command centers that were either deep inside the earth, or behind meters of concrete. It did hit a Russian ammo storage in the beginning of Barbarossa, where it took out a castle. So it was quite precise.
Thank you for including your sponsors always in the end. I still watch it and on top fo that, is not interrupting the content, nor pushed into the beginning when one is thriving to dive into the lesson. It's very pleasant for viewers this way.
Me too! 💙💛
Crimea is not state of USA (sure zelen ready to sell for couple of lines to Washington DC) but hopefully it won’t happen 👍🏽❤️
I would be careful about calling these videos anything like a lesson. 80% of the video is opinion, 20% is carefully decontextualized historical points, woven together into an invented narrative which, without ever telling the viewer what to think, paints one side as evil, and the other as good.
Now which would you support, evil or good? Most people pat themselves on the back for being against evil, and pro good.
This is a 3 year old child's worldview. A well integrated adult who understands that all human beings are capable of evil, and understands what morality is...Will question all spoonfed narratives, and what motivations might be behind them.
@@SubvertTheState You are 100% right my friend. I always make my panoramic view based on facts, not opinions and always taking an ambiguous position since like you said good and bad guys are for children. Everybody is after their own interest and masking their true intent with convenient morals and so called common good. But when I said lessons I wasn't even speaking about this video. I was comparing it to other channels and since the most I visit in frequency are history channels ( not political ) I spoke of lessons with them on mind. But I concur in every single word you said. If people would take some time to study history, they wouldn't be manipulated so easily... But they just won't.
@@SubvertTheStateRussia is the attacker which means they are the bad guys it’s pretty simply there’s no justification for starting a war
things can always be put in good and bad if you know enough about them and don’t believe the propaganda of a dictatorship
"Russian naval power will take a massive, and irrevocable L" damn near finished me off 😂😂 20:21
This channel clearly hates russia
I do not get it. Would you mind explaining what the joke is?
It's just kids thinking that saying l instead of loss is some kind of comedic gold
@@ernesto-dev we wouldn't get it
@@tosehoed123 "comedic gold" in this situation is not how the guy said "l" instead of loss, but the fact that we were simply not expecting this to be used on such a professional channel like this.
Your maps and graphics are outstanding. Great work truly.
🇷🇺👎👎👎
IMHO the importance of crimea for Russia's access to the mediteranian sea is overstated, because Turkey (a NATO member) can block all military vessels from passing through the Bosporus.
The Russian naval port of Tartus(Syria) effectively eliminates this problem, though resupplying it during a conflict with NATO would be challenging.
I guess the scenario for the explanation is that Ukraine and russia remain hostile. In this case, Ukraine controlling Crimea would effectively block Russian access anywhere outside of the Black Sea by literally sinking the ships. If there is a peace, returning to pre-2014, Russia is still capable to use Black Sea unobstructed, albeit without the access to the Sevastopol, which is still a big hit.
The main reason why Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 was that Ukraine allowed the functioning of the Russian naval base in Sevastopol, making the invasion happen from within the county, not from the outside.
Turkey is warm to russian interests, at least under the current leadership - as such I wouldn't put any faith in turkey blocking russia presently.
As they have been doing for most of this war. Perhaps they Ukraine who has taken down 18 ships in the R U Black Sea fleet will finish the rest off once they get in their F16's
@@Caderynwolf lmao what , Turkey shot down a russian jet in syria in 2015 and the west didnt give us 1 bit of support so we bought s-400 s to ease up relations , its kitteraly the wests fault for the seemingly warm relations , btw turkey is almost the only nation in nato fighting against russia proxies , Libya , assad and armenia.
One big thing he brought up in another video is the value of the exclusive economic zone in the area. Essentially, if Ukraine can get it back then they have access to natural gas deposits that would supply Europe for decades and ensure financial prosperity while also undercutting Russia's market share. That's the big strategic issue at play as well as economic issue instead of the purely military aspect
I think 1 or 2 key differences regarding storming crimea:
A)while no naval superiority, ukraine can probably deny the russians theirs
B) with western intel and long range ammo, they can target the ferries with supplies as well as their exit and entry points.
C) with western intel, long range ammo, superirior weaponry it will be a lot harder for them to mount a succesfull defense and considering their quite apparant incompetence it migth just not be a good one in the 1st place.
What Western ammo? Reference what General Stoltenberg said last month. Deindustrialization is a bitch!
@@Mortablunt Stoltenberg said that we are using more than we are making, that's not the same as "we are out of ammo"
It will take years to recover from this war, but the West has a very very deep ammo pool to draw on.
@@Mortablunt Ground launched small diameter bombs for now
China?
Well said.
How's your crimea retaking going?
🤣🤣🤣 victims of their wishful thinking
Ukraine just surrendered boi.
Oh, it‘s going fine. “ Budanov stated that a sufficient quantity of US-provided long-range ATACMS missiles could allow Ukrainian forces to strike the Russian-built Kerch Strait Bridge in occupied Crimea and sever an important Russian ground line of communication (GLOC) between occupied Crimea and Russia.“ - ISW, June 2024.
@@rcchin7897 good luck 😁
On a positive note Ukraine can cut off supply chains coming from Russia by targeting the bridge once again. Before any attack Ukraine would need to do something about the Russia fleet, then for the main invasion they would also need to be supported by an insane amount of artillery concentrated at front lines. They would not need to do anything with Sevastopol, they could surround it and bleed it out until it falls.
bleeding it out would still mean a hit on the population by the ukranian side. which would mean even if they would get back a not so happy region with lots of problems. because while donetsk and lugansk where in literal shit, crimea was somehow being used and developed. Only if russia crumbles to differents states then may be crimea will go without any kind of problem.
The Germans in ww2 took sevastopol and crimea in a little less than a month. So it's not as hard as he makes it seem
the bridge was repaired with brand new machines supplied by John Deere. you are being played like a fiddle.
@@UFCMania155 here you are really misleading - Sevastopol stand 8 months before was taken by Nazi. I lived in Sevastopol one year ago, I saw a lot of Russian troops. 50% of the city is military. This city will stay or be completely destroyed but Russia will do everything to keep control in Crimea. This is the real reason why Russia - from the side of the government will win and Russian civilians will lose this war. Crimea will be Russian at least a few decades if the ww3 won't start.
@@elegoz Germany also invaded first
2/4 road lanes were destroyed, a third heavily damaged and caused fire damage to at least 1 of the railroad lines by the blast and fires. I think they just recently replaced the section of the rail bridge.
Bridge has been fixed for a while now
They didn't tell you, but Russian strikes on power plants were strikes of revenge for damaging the bridge. Not at all a "sign of despair". And Ukraine won't that happening again. But even if Ukraine destroys bridge, Crimea will stay relatively stable and happy, just like it was from 2014 and till the bridge was finished.
@@player1GR from 2014 until the bridge was finished they didn't have to try to supply a military actively fighting. They didn't have their supply ships being targeted by missiles and drones. They also have increased the population of the peninsula by upwards of a million people. Trying to supply Crimea without a land connection or the kerch bridge would be extremely hard.
@@player1GR crimea will definitely NOT be happy and stable if Ukraine fully destroys that bridge. Will be a massive sign to Russian citizens occupying crimea that things are getting even worse. After the first bridge strike there was a massive flood of people leaving Crimea.
@@player1GR lol everything from Russia is a sign of despair. What an unimaginably weak, unintelligent adversary.
What a great presentation. None of us knows exactly how it will play out. But you covered so many angles
Absolutely. Fortunately/Unfortunately this "war" is turning into a game for the big brothers/elites. A game fought with the blood-tears-sweat of the little people; kind of like a version of "Hunger games".
As Sun Tzu says: 將聽吾計，用之必勝，留之；將不聽吾計，用之必敗，去之。
May there be mercy for the criminals 🙏
He covered it like NATO thoughts, scientific and unrealistic with the current situation.
this channel is Western propaganda bs, the Russians completed their objectives and secured the territories where majority Russians live so they pulled back they didn't got pushed back like he is claiming and they did that with 150k troops vs their 700k troops . And no Ukraine will never see any of these territories back, that's a pipe drream
@@dariomladenovski7047 lmao
@@BasicEnglish1o1 depends on which side of propaganda u believe in then ..
Aged like milk 😁
ukraine landed in crymea lol
@@thechlebek901
Oh boy I'm sure Russia will just give up now lol 😂😂
@@dark_mode what?
RLL ~ thank you for integrating the geography, history, military tactics, demographics and politics into this complicated and excellent comprehensive presentation, best wishes!!!
Honestly, I'm kinda surprised that the Russians didn't build a water pipeline as part of the Kerch Strait project. Sure, pipelining water in is not going to be as good as seizing the canal, but if you run an undersea pipeline in over a relatively short distance, it's a lot less vulnerable than a canal in freshly siezed territory. Probably not going to be enough to keep agriculture fully operational, but it'd be a critical lifeline in a siege scenario where the Russians are probably pumping as many troops as they can into Crimea - all of whom probably need at least 4L of water per day (and that's really intense water rationing - 2L drinking water and probably half a litre at least for cooking means 1.5L for hygiene...so, if we take a 5 minute shower at 9.4L/minute, that's....a hell of a long time between showers!). Crimea has a population of about 2 million, so that's about 8 million litres of water a day just so that the people can survive on hardcore water rationing. You're gonna need to get that from somewhere and if the Ukrainians are attacking over the Perekop, that's not gonna be the canal again.
I say this not really knowing the details of the water situation in the Kuban (that's the area on the Sea of Azov that's on the other side of the Kerch Strait from Crimea, for those wondering), but the Don runs through the Rostov Oblast (which is on the border of Ukraine just north of there), so assuming that water is potable, that's really not that much of a stretch for an emergency supply pipeline.
Of course, if the Ukranians can get bombs on the Kerch Strait Bridge, they can probably get bombs into some critical pumping station in Crimea where this hypothetical pipeline would be running water to Sevastopol and other Crimean cities...and pumping stations are definitely harder to replace than bridge segments.
Also, this is Russia we're talking about. Making sound strategic decisions to deal with the possibility of an enemy fighting back more successfully than expected in advance of the war is not really what Russians are known for.
I believe the depth of the strait was the issue. Essentially, the same reason there's no way to run a water pipeline from Los Angeles out to Catalina.
@@VisibilityFoggy Ahh right. Could still build one into the underside of the bridge, but that would be subject to the same vulnerability issues as the rest of the bridge.
"Ukraine sieging us, LMAO! We can take Kiev in 3 days if we want" -Russia in mid February 2022
"Also, this is Russia we're talking about. Making sound strategic decisions to deal with the possibility of an enemy fighting back more successfully than expected in advance of the war is not really what Russians are known for."
Well, they're still holding on to the actually important territory of their Ukrainian conquests for over a year now. And in some way, most of it this has been de facto under their control for 8 years now. So in terms of strategic warfare decisions and logistics, they must be doing something right, especially considering that they're not just fighting Ukraine here.
This line of thought is of course only valid if you're not one of those who claims that Russia's ultimate goal initially was a full and prolonged conquest of the entirety of Ukraine. In reality, this seems unlikely for so many reasons. I believe, after analysing the entire conflict up and down for a long time, that the end goal of this conquest (more or less since 2014) has been to establish Crimea, a landline to Crimea, and a landline to Moldova/Transnistria, as Russian territory. So a negotiated surrender (which is how modern wars end) where Russia annexed territory anywhere between (a line north of Kharkiv, Poltava, Krementsjuk, Kropyvnytskyj and westwards connecting to Moldova) AND (a line north of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizjzja/Dnipro and westward connecting to Moldova) would all be acceptable ends to this conflict for the big bear. If this presumption is correct, then Russia's objective has not been a total failure at this point. And going further, or negotiating a surrender which align more with the larger goal, might be hard, or even unlikely, but it's certainly not impossible.
At this point though, I think they would be perfectly happy with a negotiated surrender somewhere along the lines of the currently conquered territory. At least for the foreseeable future. Landlocking Ukraine and geographical connection to Transnistria might be a too enticing dream to fully give up on, but there's too many unknowns down the line.
Although, the "white peace"-scenario would be the best outcome for all parties (UKR, RUS and the rest of the world), it's unfortunately very unlikely. But it's more likely than Ukraine retaking Crimea without triggering M.A.D.
But I agree that it's weird that they haven't laid a pipeline along the Kerch strait, but I've always presumed it's due to a reason like the one Foggy pointed out. Building a pipe along the underside of the bridge is something I never thought about though, and despite the vulnerability issue you bring up, it's a really interesting idea. Is this something that has been done previously? I've heard of pipeline bridges, but not bridges combining traffic and pipelines.
@@official_alphabet_inc It's pretty common in germany to combine bridges and piplines but ususally only over rivers not whole stretches of sea...
7,29 млн подписчиков - хороший юмористический канал
Ну надо же им как-то оправдывать миллиардные вложения в коррумпированную страну), кстати, где эти миллиарды?
@@crimson90177they played a huge role. Russia was supposed to succeed in 7 days. Now nearly 2 years later they have no answer, despite attacking like hitler on Soviet Union.
@@kap1526 я немного не понял кто на кого напал, что ты имеешь ввиду. Россия на Украину или запад на Россию? Распиши подробнее
It’s fascinating to me that a destroyed bridge can cause so many issues in the 21sr century
Logistics Rules must be respected. You can't fight war without supplies.
Did we invent teleporters in the 21st century or something?
More likely invasion against ukraine can cause so many issues...
@@retsaminnavoig18 The Ukraine war is being fought like World War 1 for the most part because we're dealing with troop numbers that are way higher than modern western tactics are appropriate for, not to mention the outdated C&C structure of the Ukranian army. It's why the Ukranians are suffering extreme casualty numbers and still haven't accomplished much despite all the western tech they've been given - they don't know how to manage it, how to use it and their war isn't appropriate for its intended application.
Physics still work the same in 2000
So a late spring-early summer offensive to cut both the canal and the land bridge, if successful, would cripple Crimea's water supply while also driving Russian troops into Crimea, reducing available supplies further. If the bridge can be sabotaged again, that would completely cut Crimea off from all land-based supplies. A lot would need to go right for this to work, but it seems like the most likely plan.
The bridge will go at some point.
Then the question is will Russia retreat across the land bridge or try to hold on. I think they will try to hold on. Well really.. Putin will decide to hold on.
And the land bridge might go before the bridge does.
I think Russia's allies will push for "peace" where Russia keeps crimea. Personally, that's Ukraine's decision. It's their land.
Cutting off the canal is what triggered the current invasion. Cutting it again will lead to cutting off of road and rail links to Europe which Russia hasnt touched yet.
@Prabuddha Ghosh no it did not. That is straight up misinformation
@@prabuddhaghosh7022 Putin has been drooling over Crimea for YEARS before that even happened.
Of course there will be resistance, but honestly I think you got it. You have to create a situation that would make it stupid to stay, giving civilians ample time to flee to Russia. So really you can't take the bridge before refugee evacuations, otherwise their only option would be fleeing through a war-zone.
Anyone who remains would be considered guerrillas, and unofficially absorbed by the RGF, unfortunately becoming fair game. _That's_ when you bomb the bridges and cut their supply lines.
As for the offensive, if an attack can be planned during low-tide, then you would have a HUGE front line (in addition to using coastal landings and air strikes to break their defenses and scatter their focus). Also Putin would then have to fracture his mainland offensive even further in order to protect the peninsula, making Ukraine's resistance _there_ even easier.
It's sad none of us can help them with numbers, but the _actual_ state of the Russian Armed Forces is even more pathetic!💙💛
According to publications, the tide in the Black Sea is only about 20 cm (i.e. 8 inches). This doesn't really change much in crossing the Syvash; where I would expect that almost no tide exists. This is because it is part of a much smaler basin that is barely connected to the Black Sea. I would expect that water levels in the area change more due to wind forcing than due to the movement of the moon.
Yes, Soviets used this route when they captured Crimea (notably it was not Soviets, but Makhno).
I absolutely agree. Actually studies put it closer to 6cms. It is completely negligible. Why did they include this nonsense?
Just do a land reclamation, filling with dirt and rocks from nearby mountains
@@ssanonswu2010 how exactly are they gonna do that in the middle of an active war zone while being bombed?
@@ssanonswu2010 WHAT nearby mountains? The only mountains in Ukraine are in the far west along the borders with Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and in southern Crimea. That's why it's so easy for Russia to invade.
Just because unthinkable things happened, realism shouldn't be outdated. The return of Crimea could be more a result of Russia's economic and political rather than military collapse.
True enough. But that seems to be all that's needed. And it's on the way to happening
Could be both as the two are often very much linked. A collapsed economy is part of why Russia imploded in WW1. And the same thing would later happen to Germany on the Western Front.
@@saintjames1995 don't get deceived by msm
I don't think with Putin's iron fist on Russia that's gonna happen anytime soon with him in power
This channel is not a "real life lore", now it's more like a "wannabe world lore"
Video is titled "Destroy Russia", in actual video: even in the best scenario Crimea stays Russian or independent.
There is also one additional route into Crimea that is called Arabat spit. Also it would be great if you mentioned in this video how during as we call it “Liberation competitions” or known for others as “russian civil war” we Ukrainians fought for Crimea and it would be great if you mentioned “Crimean operation” led by Petro Bolbochan in 1918
Do you mean Chongar? Because Arabat leads nowhere, it is a thin strip of sand with no road or infrastructure on it.
Chongar is not an option of trespassing for the attacking side. It is practically a bridge upon the strait that is a part of Siyavush Marshes, or the Inner Sea of Crimea, mentioned in the video. It is highly vulnerable for the attackers because the bridge could be mined and blowed when the attack starts. Moreover, I'm confident that Russians will blow the bridge even before Ukrainian force would appear there, right after they hypothetically lose Genichesk (i.e. Black Sea Depression) and the Russian army flees the north toward Crimea. Therefore, attacking through Chongar is equal to attacking through Siyavush Sea.
there is that and another highway but it is easy to stop a convoy going through a narrow road.
@@rustemzholdybalin6210 yea, also there is Chongar, good mention. Even if it is difficult to make offensive from that side I think it would be nice to mention it
@@viktorm3840 EVEN if Siyavush dries off, and it is unlikely at all, it would convert into giant stinky mud with very humid soil, impassable for anything that weights more than 10 kilo)
You never fought for Crimea because it had anything to do with Ukraine, because didn’t. You fought for it because we used to be the same people living in the same country.
Whilst not currently capable of supporting large russian warships, it is important to mention that Russia also has the port of Tartus on the eastern med (in syria).
which would matter more if the Russians spent as much on their navy as they did on super yachts.
That's not a viable option. There's always a possibility the current Assadist regime falls at some point. You want a military base of that importance in a) a stable area where you're absolutely certain the political environment of the foreign country around it will always be ok with its presence or has absolutely no way of getting rid of it (Ramstein, Cyprus, various US bases in the Indo-Pacific region, etc*) or b) your own territory (Pearl Harbour, Murmanks, etc)
* Yes I'm aware Gitmo is a bit of an exception there.
That's also why the Russians felt compelled to act on Crimea, since their longterm lease with UA was about to run out and there being a fear of it not being renewed was, in my opinion, likely part of it. And I'm in no way looking for excuses for Russia's behaviour. If they'd just play nice, nobody would have given a fuck about their base there.
@@ryanjones2297 They are way too corrupt for that to ever happen!
@@Karlthegreat84
Russia was not about to lose the base, the lease had just been extended for another decade.
They just wanted to be sure it would be theirs forever, no lease.
As you said, had they not been greedy, Ukraine certainly would have continued to lease the base, even if they did join the EU. Hell, their biggest trading partner by far prior to 2014 was Russia!
Babe, Ukraine was gunning to join NATO asap. Do you really think Sevastopol would have remained Russian after that?
Кто зашёл сюда посмеяться?
Есть такие)
Я пзахаха
Русские боты
меня кто-то звал?🤖
авг американцы заходят сюда посмеяться с того, что россия все еще не победила украину и с того, какой уровень ввп она имеет, будучи самой большой страной в мире
A major new factor affecting Crimea's fate is OIL. The northern part of the peninsula and the shallow waters in the Sea of Azov and around the mouth of the Dnepro river have recently been found to contain large reserves of oil.
The demand for oil is going to collapse in the not too distant future. If we keep burning this stuff we are going to be screwed, especially our children. Oil deposits will become stranded assets.
Nailed it. Natural Gas as well.
High tech satellite coverage would reduce casualties and would permits to focus the HIMARS and ATACMS missiles to blow into Logistic nodes and Militar concentrations located in Crimea, the only actual needing for this is to recover Southern Ukraine steppe (Melitopol, lower Kherson, Mariupol, etc) to ensure a missile hostigation... coordinated with Mobile/Phone tracking and another techs for crushing Russians like in Makiivka's platoon concentration
By the time the bottlenecks would help to move the people away from Crimea (water or fuel, principally). Despite the maneuver difficulty, Ukraine should avoid to strike civilians in order to avoid retaliation feelings (the same feelings that generated Ukrainian resistance) and make the civilian retirement more viable
While you're not wrong, keep in mind that satellites are for searching, but they do not make good for tracking.
К этому времени начнется 3 мировая(((
@@savik175 Don't worry - nothing of the sort will happen. This video is based on fiction and is not rooted in reality. How the utterly depleted UAF could beat Russia's Deep Battle Doctrine is beyond anyones guess. This summer NATO will run out of ammunition and the war will be basically over in autumn.
What if we dropped missiles from space onto crimea
@@CharliMorganMusic that's right, satellite aren't a warranty
Usage should be coordinated with sophisticated internet/mobile tracking like in Makiivka's platoon strike
Damn, this video was absolutely incredible, man. You (or/and your team) are exceptionally good at explaining and describing complex topics.
They are not explaining anything, they are just repeating US propaganda. This conflict started 2008, and not in 2020, as these propagandizers claim
@andrespinto Since this video first appeared, so much has changed, unpredictedly. Sit back and watch: Time will tell. 🇺🇦
it really didn't age well though lol
5 months on and Ukraine has basically captured nothing.
They'll never get to Crimea, the video might as well be "why Ukraine taking Moscow will destroy Russia" for how likely it is to happen.
@@basedstreamingatcozy-dot-t7126 stormshadow and taurus time😂 russias defense will melt away
@@GayTruckDriver dude, that's massive cope.
How many times have we heard "this new piece of equipment will be a game changer!" and then nothing happens and Ukraine still fails?
Ukraine won’t give up the idea of getting Crimea back under its own flag, and one of your own earlier videos detailing “exclusive economic zones (EEZ)” explains why: the natural gas and oil resources beneath the floor of the Black Sea could go a long way toward Ukraine’s economic recovery, if not actually bringing long term economic prosperity (as long as the corruptocrats and oligarchs don’t monopolize it first).
"corruptocrats" is my new favorite term.
2 giant gas deposits worth $00T’s were discovered around 2010 and were sold to both Shell (Donetsk/Kharkiv) and Chevron (Lviv) in 2013. They both pulled the plug in 2017 as the Donbas War was still going on. In that scenario Ukraine would be swapping Russian gas with for their own gas but the profits go to the US/UK. I doubt they’d want to be dealing with Russia at all anymore now but they’re likely going to have even less control and autonomy over their resources after the war whether Russia achieve their territorial goals (imo is basically what they have now plus as more of Dontesk as they can get). I don’t think Putin is some lunatic who wants to recreate the Russian Empire but is a pretty typical geopolitical realist and capitalist imperialist. Secure Crimea and get its water back running; win some land rich with resources, mines and industry; stop Ukraine/US/EU disrupting their monopoly on Euro energy; stop/delay Ukr joining EU/NATO until they’ve done everything else.
The US’s and basically the UK’s goal is basically turn and keep European energy away from Russia and towards importing LNG from the US instead; increase defence spending and get other NATO members to do so; trap Ukraine in an unpayable debt so they can have a big asset & resource grab when its all over.
I hope Ukraine will defeat the invaders, but I find the idea that the US & UK (& Russia) have any moral high ground or are fighting for a just cause completely laughable.
this is also the reason that ukraine has already lost...
@@haplon33 that's quite a controversial opinion, given how absolutely pathetic Russia's performance has been.
@@benthomason3307 lol ya they only have all the natural gas and are securing new territories. thank goodness they were only fighting ukraine, huh? tho i guess if ukraine loses 100% of their cities they'll be in an even more perfect counterattack position, according to many brilliant youtube military minds
This video misses the fact that Ukraine has just been giving GMLRS with 150 km range. None of the previous Crimea attackers had that capability. UA is not going to just stream into a kill zone. They’re going to soften up defenses first at range.
Lol interesting fantasy.
This video also misses some common sense - its the war it self that will destroy russia, not the loss of Crimea.
That don't work due to russian jamming of GPS.
How is a couple of gmlrs ammo going to soften up defenses?have u seen battle of bakhmut and how much artillery is used on a single trench?there has to be hundreds of not a thousand blackened pockmarks in a single field.
First they need to cut to the azov sea.
That will cut the real resupply.
Then destroy the rail bridge, then half the road bridge and damage the last half.
At that point, the Russians can't resupply. The ukrainians can spend months killing Russians in static positions before piercing the line and flanking... as they did in kharkiv.
2:22 Thank you for using the word "plethora"; to me it means a lot.
😂
How did this make me laugh out loud?
What does plethora mean?
Plethora literally means a lot
@@rehany3401It means "a lot".
How casually the war trivializes deaths of thousands, just turned into numbers and statistics. This is all so hard to grasp.
I don't think it is the war that trivializes death, Putin does. But get your point and agree the staggering numbers dying so quickly numbs us.
Ukrainians,russians,american,europeans NO ONE WANTS WAR
Politicians want war
@@istantinoplebullconsta642 putin is just one guy
@@istantinoplebullconsta642 No, war trivializes death in general. How many do you think died in Iraq during the Gulf War? Any clue? Probably not. Just a number. You might have an idea how many _Americans_ were lost during the 20 years in Afghanistan (especially since its currently being compared to Russian losses in Ukraine all over the place) but do you have any idea about how many Afghanis died?
What it really comes down to is information overload. If one person gets murdered, its easy to write a story and describe them and find people to tell you how kind they were and all of the other platitudes we see when tragedy happens. But when its 10,000 people? You can maybe try to humanize a couple of them but there's just no way you can get through that many, and nobody would read your story if you tried.
At the end of the day, we humans can't really comprehend "thousands" or "millions" never mind "billions". We can use those terms in relation to each other to get a rough sense of scale, but we can't really comprehend them in the same way we can comprehend small numbers like 3 or 5. And that lack of comprehension applies to war and other tragedy as much as it does to counting jellybeans in a jar at the local fair.
Add to that the fact that it doesn't really impact the vast, vast majority of us in any tangible way and we're not so much "numb" to the statistics as we are just.. unaware. Not to the number, but to the meaning behind the number. That specific aspect isn't really anyone's fault. Humans just aren't good with big numbers, no matter the context.
@@altrag I can't fathom losing a close friend or family member, let alone being in a situation where you and everyone around you can die at a moments notice.
Enjoyed you going back to a maps based format of story telling. You could try to dive through some East Asian conflicts or for example feudal Japan period however I think I prefer your more modern coverage of incidents or expedition based coverage.
Over the past year this channel has become almost entirely focused on current events. Looking back at videos from 1+ year ago, you see a lot more videos on subjects not related to current events such as "Why Most Humans Live inside this small circle" or "Why Anchorage is Americas most OP city" etc.
It's too bad he's lying about this stuff, right?
@@heftyhugh9086 🙄
@@heftyhugh9086 why don't you provide a source then?
@@nooneimportant2591 open your eyes and look. It's not that complicated.
this didn't age well 😂😂😂😂
“Massive and irrevocable L” could not have said it better RealLifeLore👏👏👏
The water levels of Syvash are not tidal. From natures side, it's controlled by the seasons. However, the entire wetlands is dammed at Chohgar peninsula. Meaning that if Russian forces are wise enough to set up defences to make this part impenetrable, they have complete control of the viability of any crossings.
Russians will be bombed it is not sustainable for them.
Yours need to consider the fact that the Russians have had a difficult enough times, playing their forces by rail and land, and will most likely not be able to support the units. They have guarding Crimea as the bridge that connects Crimea to the rest of Russia has been destroyed or damaged showing that the troops may have a good position, but might run out of supplies before they can hold an affective defense
and with drones and smart precision weapons life would be very difficult in Crimea.
Yeah because you are some how am expert because you watch Fox News and cnn
@@MrMuaythai84 And you're an expert because? If the land bridge, sea bridge and air bridge is cut off, how would you resupply Crimea, or anywhere else for that matter? I'm all ears.
The Kerch bridge will definitely be destroyed, properly this time. The Russians in Crimea will just be isolated and will have to surrender.
@@ddr.5959 there is no such thing as "cutting off the sea bridge and air bridge". I know the common perception of modern military equipment is that every inch of space is monitored and nothing can break a blockade conducted by a military, but the reality is in the past throughout history as well as more recent examples, including in this very russia-ukraine war, there is no such thing as a fool proof blockade.
btw, Ukraine maybe has the capacity to force a permanent closure of the land bridge, but between Ukraine and Russia, it isn't Ukraine which is or ever will be in a position to enforce a sea and air blockade.
This morning I was like man real life lore hasn't posted in a min and here he is. One of my fav history/geography channels
Dude he posted 12 days ago...
one of my fav propaganda channels
he's the king of this shit. no one even comes close.
Well-researched and approachable information. it's very broad and simplified but palatable to the audience he caters to.
@@tavshedfjols you're gonna have to back that up with specific details if you're gonna make that kind of claim
Yes.
Interesting analysis 😎 Almost like on my channel also we made video about Japan military and US banks collapse. It should be noted that Crimea belongs to Ukraine. Recent months show the increased activity of strengthening the military resources of many countries. Including Japan and China, which, with aggression towards Taiwan, could cause a major conflict between Japan China and Russia
Yes, maps should show Ukraine with Crimea
@@liamnoah5055 Japan has huge army nowe
Moron !
Russia with Crimea on map. Big NO
You'd better ask Crimean people first before you speak
How did the "Re-take Crimea to destroy Russia operation" go? :D
According to the NAFO bots, the Ukrainian NATO backed army is at the doorstep of Moscow.
Both events have an improbability factor of a comparabe magnitude, on par with an allien invasion in Japan :)
Five months later, it‘s going well. “ Budanov stated that a sufficient quantity of US-provided long-range ATACMS missiles could allow Ukrainian forces to strike the Russian-built Kerch Strait Bridge in occupied Crimea and sever an important Russian ground line of communication (GLOC) between occupied Crimea and Russia.“ - Institute for the Study of War, June 24th, 2024
@@rcchin7897 Yet all they managed to strike with those ATACMS is a beach around Sevastopol. :D
@@eraserr83and like 7 s400s, saky air base etc, but ignore that Ivan
Gotta love how warm and deep Murmansk is. It’s important to extend your naval presence across the Arctic Ocean.
Good sir you are clearly mistaken. We all know that Russia NEEDS more warm water ports because it obviously doesn't have any outside the Black Sea (where their ships can be held hostage by Erdogan). They can't trade with anyone during the winter because ALL their ports are frozen over! :( I know this because many esteemed geopolitical experts have told me so.
@@alexanderstone9463 It was obviously a sarcastic remark made in the video. Of course Russia needs warm water ports. Murmansk is in the Arctic Circle. The Arctic Ocean is pretty much completely frozen over and impassable with a few exceptions increasing with Climate Change.
@@paulglenski7610 A sarcastic remark on top of what is actually a sarcastic remark but which I presumed to be sincere. Go figure.
Murmansk IS a warm water port, the Gulf Stream ensures that. Arctic sea ice does not reach the coast of far northern Europe (nowadays it doesn't even come remotely close) and the harbor itself does not freeze over. The port can receive cargo ships all year long, ergo it's a warm water port, no matter how far north it is. That's why the Russians founded the city in the first place and why it remains the largest city in the entire Arctic Circle. It's the reason why the Arctic Convoys of the Second World War could operate year round rather than only during the warmer months.
My comment, also sarcastic as you could no doubt tell, is related to the habit which Russia and its predecessor states have of constantly moving the goal posts on this issue. Russia has multiple warm water ports on the Black Sea (particularly if you count Crimea) and one on the Arctic Ocean, but that's not enough. Now if I had historical amnesia I might be persuaded to care a really tiny bit about this, since Russia is big and that list, while very much existent, is still short, though they are far from the only state in these circumstances. But they were complaining about this even during the days of the Russian Empire and the USSR, when they had even more ice free ports. For ages they've been using it as an excuse for expansionism and it never seems to stop after they acquire another port.
What a video. I already knew that taking Crimea would be tough and it might be better just to siege it. Your video explained in detail why. And suggested three possible outcomes, including one I did not think possible. Good job!
Totally. Yet for those who are familiar with Warfare 101, siege warfare is not a good strategy for Sun Wu has stated: 故上兵伐謀，其次伐交，其次伐兵，其下攻城。攻城之法，為不得已；修櫓轒轀，具器械，三月而後成；距闉，又三月而後已；將不勝其忿，而蟻附之，殺士卒三分之一，而城不拔者，此攻之災也。
May the pain & sufferings of the little people be limited 🙏
Crimea is part of russia now with russians living there, russia would love to make ukraine an example of why not to invade
I think could just go though Syvash during winter when it’s frozen.
9:30 the most similar situation today is mentioned just prior, the 2014 annex of crimea demonstrates exactly how it can be taken without massive losses by the attacker...
Russia took it easy because it has 87% of Russians who wanted them there--they will never let Ukraine in.....LOL.....
Yeah, all you need is for the defender to not actually defend it. Easy!
When Kyiv was in chaos after Yanukovych being booted for the second time. If Ukraine hadn't been determined to express its own sovereignty Putin wouldn't have had to annex its territory in lieu of its presidency.
Yes you just need to get all the Russians to decide they are really loyal Ukranians. Seems plausible.
@@aaronleverton4221 Putin didn’t “have” to annex anything.
The guy who does these videos is a frikin genius. I watch his stuff on real life lore and am blown away by the information-I love his stuff.
🤡
he’s actually an idiot who reads a few wiki articles and then spews baseless opinions that make for an interesting video. he has no idea what he’s talking about most of the time
😂😂😂😂
'he who controls Sevastopol controls the black sea'
So we're just forgetting about Istanbul than are we?
4:25 Sea of Azov has no appreciated tidal flow. -They do have winds that will raise/lower water levels. Also seasonal changes of water levels.
Someone mentioned that humongous railway gun. The problem with that thing is that it is a logistical nightmare. Counting all of the negative logistics and its effectiv usefulness is greatly reduced.. and very questionable. It tied up way too much troops and both support and crew members. Add the cost to build it both in time and money and it is pretty much a waste of war time resources.
You went in to depth on how/why Crimea is so defensible and history of invasions but I've still never heard, in more than just a simple sentence or two, how was Russia able to take it from Ukraine in 2014, if it is so easy to defend? Thanks for another great video. Very informative!
It was easy because Crimean people voted to be annexed and become Russians. That simple.
@@equilibriums7182 It was the Russians who agreed to become Russia. Everyone else was forced to.
It was a political coup which used covert force and a pretty masterful misinformation campaign, rather than a military operation. They propped up separatist movements, used unmarked soldiers to give muscle to a coup that put those separatists in power, and then held a sketchy referendum declaring crimea a part of russia
Ukraine was not defending it. Basically it was given away for free during the Yanukovich dethroning ruckus and re-elections (usurpation). Thanks to statewide chaos some russian troops got through and due to vast amount of ethnic russians the crimean based Ukrainian troopers were overwhelmed. There was no-one in Kyiv to issue army to defend the peninsula and special forces were powerless, hence furious
Excellent question. I guess his next video could be on the 2014 origin of the invasion.
This war feels like a tight chess match rather then what we usually imagine, just as are the politics behind it
Bradley's aren't armored personnel carriers, though they can carry a few troops. The Bradley is a Infantry Fighting Vehicle capable of taking out a tank.
☝️Congratulations you’ve been selected among my shortlisted winners, use the above name to send me a message 🎉🎁
Apple to oranges. The M-2/3 Bradley along with the M-109 Paladin is designed to support to the M-1 Abrams as a combined arms attacking force. The Russians use a different tactical doctrine that is more suited to poorly trained conscripts but is easier to execute, and also results in much higher casualties. But the Russians are not fighting well equipped and supplied US regulars who have air supremacy, they are fighting Ukrainians conscripts that are running out of everything except shovels and trenches.
I think the Bradley can carry anti-tank weaponry but it's mainly to support it's troop carrying. It's a very capable system.
Doesnt it really suck that all of this fighting isnt some kinda story being told. its not lore from a novel, or the results of matches from a video. Every casualty is the permanent destruction of a person. It sucks man...
Changing the demographic makeup of a place seems to be the go to strategy in the Russian handbook :) Stalin's favorite move!
Yep ethnic cleansing is a favorite of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes
@1:59 Gotta love that little car just running along in the midst of war with Tanks behind it ,😂
Zelenski also said: Bakhmut is the Heart of Ukraine, if we lose it then the war is over. Bro is lying whole time and yapping like maccaroni
it turns out Ukraine is without a heart
You know that RealLifeLore is doing well when the bots of girls’ vanity photos are in the comments. Godspeed, Mr. Lore.
When Justin Timberlake sang Crimea River, this is what he was talking about
Kudos to the author for knowing the actual history of Ukraine and seeing root causes of the conflict
80% of this video is wishful thinking at its best. if anything its basically said that this war was won in 2014.
@@connorf3517 yeah and other 20% could be russian propaganda, or simply wrong understanding of a conflict. Here it seems author actually talked with ukrainians about the war
Good observations. I am no specialist.
It seems to me that rather than expending its troops, Ukraine could simply down the Kerch bridge and block the canal by late spring. Russia could then have to operate an airbridge. This would probably last 12 months but Russia is running out of military resources.
This in effect would besiege the garrison. Much is made of the Russian fleet, but their ability to be operational remains to be proven. In the meantime, with many resources tied up, Russia would probably find it difficult to retain other locations in Ukraine.
That's literally what he says in the video.
@@arandombard1197 Thanks. It was rather too long...
By then Putin would have put every one in his army and all of his war materials in place, and would own it by Fiat. No No. The world cannot let Putin win anything here the world sees the danger of allowing Putin to have anything. He has already published his list of the next wars he wants to start. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Poland. Read your history. How did it turn out when Neville Chamberlain appeased Hitler.? Hitler instantly invaded Poland. You can't appease a Power Hungry Mad man. He smells weakness and attacks even more fiercely.
As you mentioned Russia is running out of military resources. Even in the beginning, several stories surfaced that, if true, Russia was totally unprepared for a long term fight. The list of resources is long. Soldiers, Putin got a lot of push back. The initial Exodus when there was talk of mobilization. The protests. The lack of training, helmets, boots, body armor, nvg's, medical kits, food & water, weapons & ammunition. Very de-motivating. The weaponry. A large number of antiquated tanks, munitions that failed to fire, troop transit vehicles, refuelers & chow wagons. Much which has become scrap metal, others, retrieved, repaired & returned as Ukrainian weaponry. The RF air force made some impact at first. Their activity of engagement has been scaled back and no one can say exactly why. The S400 missile system has been a positive, but what are their remaining numbers? What is RF's capability to produce more munitions' for the system? A little or a lot? The naval fleet started out a positive. Impact = effective. Since then, Ukrainians have quickly adjusted & adapted to make them targets. The fleet is keeping a low profile now knowing they are vulnerable. I see the battle for Crimea as a artillery contest. Who can last the longest? Who will run out of munitions'? & other supplies? Who will run out of will? Once Ukraine retakes Crimea they have to know they are now a concentrated target on this small peninsula. Glory to Ukraine
@@James-dr3fo What it comes down to is a Ukraine that will fight with everything it has to total destruction if necessary because they have literally no other choice, vs Russia which can retreat at anytime and has no reason to fight to the death on a territory grab.
Eventually Ukraine will be the victor for this reason alone.
Ukraine realistically would just need semi-aquatic battle vehicles. If you could modify something like a "Duck Boat" to cross over the tides in the Savash it would widen the attack angles for assualt. Even if you just had that vehicle for resupplyment only and transport a majority of your heavy duty Artillery during lowtide, you could then use the semi-aquatic vehicles on hide tide as a resupply line. Idk how possible that is but thats my idea.
The puppet Junta in Kiev realistically would just need a Death Star...
@@julianpetkov8320 LMFAO
My guess is there will be extremely large artillery exchange and then initially small army invasion but consistently growing in numbers. When there is an opening in the defense.
English?
no they wouldnt
Historically speaking, Russia always looks tougher than they actually are. None of this surprised. It wouldn't surprise me if the Russian navy wasn't effective enough to prevent an amphibious assault. It wouldn't surprise me if they were incapable of mounting an effective air defense. It wouldn't surprise me if they were incapable of mounting an effective land defense despite the choke point. This is just what Russia does.
Agreed. Russia typically just presents a big show, and puffs up their feathers. But when they get punched in the mouth, they tend to panic pretty quickly. Literally the only thing that makes anyone think about more direct help, are the nukes. Militarily, NATO would roll the Russians. Include the US (even if it's only US logistics), and they've got no chance in hell of standing their ground. So, we're going to continue getting threats of nukes from Russia, because they have no other way to keep outsiders from getting directly involved.
Your history info is based on Ukrainian documents or something?
Read the history of the Crimean War, or what the Russians did in WW1. Ineptitude is the grandest tradition of the Russian army.
@@dedster3164 Russia just isn't good at war which is why they had by far the largest military losses of WW2 like shit the Germans invaded in winter which everyone should have known not to do by then and yet the soviets still lost 30-40 million people, the only country that lost a higher percent of it's total population is Poland and that's only cause they have so much smaller of a population, they only lost like 5 million
@@noodlelynoodle. right, "shit army", hell, if Russians has shit army, i wonder how bad is US army, if they couldn't even won in Vietnam and Afghanistan
This video aged like milk
Trivia: originally at least, the Victorian Cross (the VC), a Commonwealth highest soldier order, was made from Crimean gun metal. Most awardees do not survive their awarded action is the order of the award.
it still is
Except Crimea has 0 iron deposits so there is no such thing as Crimean metal.
@@Lemosa3414 Indeed. They are referring to two Russian cannons which were captured by the British during the Crimean War, and turned into metal for the Victoria Cross. That is why they said it was Crimean metal. The Victoria Cross would continue to be made out of "gun metal" for a while, mostly from sources in the opium wars and eventually the Boxer Rebellion.
@@Lemosa3414 read. They did not say “crimean metal”.
@@connormcgee4711I didn't know that. That's a really depressing and dishonorable place to get that metal... The colonization attempt against China and Opium Wars are some of the most evil things Britain ever did...
I think that regaining Crimea isn't as difficult for Ukraine as you pointed out. XXI century isn't the first half of XX century. Lets say ukraine will regain the land bridge- Melitopol, Mariupol. They have two key adventages against Russia- longer ranged artillery pieces and ofc himars. Firstly they can destroy Crimea bridge. Secondly, narrow point for offensive into Crimea means not only attackers need to cramp but Defenders will be cramped out too. So Ukraine can use artillery especially with excalibur ammunition to slowly grind defenders until ukraine will reach broader front line and then it's up to normal offensive like they did in Cherson region. Sevastopol most likely would be blokaded with antiship missiles and land forces cutting off all supply lines. I think that there's a way for ukraine to regain Crimea but it comes to wheter russia will or won't use nuclear weapons.
P.S. what's ironic is that in possible usage of tactical nuclear weapon Russia would need to strike it's own territory to do anything meaningfull at least accordingly to their anexation of crimea and cherson oblasts.
Any time you have to group military hardware in a defined space it is very vulnerable. I do not think the Ukrainians can take Crimea with acceptable causalities. And no, Russia will not go nuclear. China and NATO wouldn't allow it.
@@richardbayer5702 yeah but russian defensive lines would be cramped too. In fact Ukraine can easily turn first 20km of Crimea peninsula into Moon's surface and after it their offensive forces can go through terrain more similar to cherson because everything what was defending this narrow entrance point will be pushed out by artillery shelling. Remember, now ukraine is fighting over huge front line to push russians, they don't have enough ammunition to just shell the shit out of russians with each 1 meter of advance, but as Crimea is so narrow they will have enough ammunition to do it.
@@Pentagram666mar It's much much easier to defend than attack though. All russia has to do is bombard that narrow strip of land until Ukraine backs off. If Ukraine can shell Russians, Russia can shell Ukraines.
😂
@@Pentagram666mar well good thing you aren’t commanding the UA, you’d destroy it.
That said.... There is NO WAY Putin would let go of Crimea, ever. One must be realistic in this. If it really came down to it, he WOULD use tactical nukes on Ukraine at that point... and then, Ukraine would loose without a single doubt. No regular army can go up against 1200 nuclear warheads. In fact, if one is realistic: 2 or 3 would already be enough to make Ukraine unconditionally surrender, just like Japan did to the US during WW2.
Nukes are off the table. Russia’s only friend China would not stand for it
Did I miss something I did not see how retaking Crimea would destroy Russia?
The phrase "Bradley armored personnel carrier" is the most sacrilegious thing I've heard in awhile
For context the M113 we've been sending Ukraine since the start of the invasion is an APC. An APC is generally little more than an armored box on wheels whose only job is to drop of troops and then get out of there asap.
The Bradley is better described as an infantry fighting vehicle. They have less ability to transport troops compared to an APC but make up for that by having much better weapons. After dismounting troops they hang around, supporting the dismounted troops with weapons that are very lethal towards enemy troops, lightly armored vehicles, and sometimes even MBTs
I said the exact same thing. I heard him call the Bradley an APC and instantly wanted to slam my head against my desk.
I was a Bradley Gunner, I take offense as well. Amazing turret, terrible hull lol.
those TOW missiles could definitely fuck up a soviet era tank
Sooooo an APC but with more armor and guns
@@nasraliproductions2571 A tank is a car with armor and a gun
Ukraine will not re take Crimea, it doesn’t have the ability to do so, not my an enormous margin.
An attempt to re take the land would result in catastrophic destruction and huge losses on both sides, the attack would also certainly end in failure.
I think more than likely they'll cut off the land bridge, force them to retreat across the Syvash, and bombard the Kerch Bridge into oblivion. Work hard to keep Crimea unsupplied, and work to bring the soldiers down psychologically. It'd take VERY long, but I'm convinced they can do it.
How is that retaking Crimea working out?
Glad to hear they're making progress, no matter long it takes ☺
This will be a key turning point!
I have never even considered that sieging Crimea was an option, that's insane
A few hundred days of siege and the people are getting so hungry they will just leave
Actually, it’s by far the smartest strategy, and Ukraine has shown itself to be the kind of wily, relentless, and creative adversary to pull it off.
Ukraine will receive GLSDB in the near future, as well as long range weapons from the UK, so a siege in Crimea is not that unreal.
I can't imagine the casualties judging by the performance in Bahkmut.
Thats kind of what they've been doing since the annexation wasnt it
While difficult, it's very possible to capture Crimea. A barrage of artillery to squeeze out defenders, units of drones to pick out supply lines. Having drones pick out targets for artillery and air assets. Drops of key supplies to known insurgents. Parachute key drops of heavier supplies or light mobile artillery to bolster both amphibious and air drops of heavy infantry. move air mobile Mine laying shells ahead to solidify a pocket of defendable zones for your mobile hq and logistical teams (along side your trauma and medical units). Not simple as operations change but can be done.
Only in your wet dreams.
Yeah it’s possible to Capture Crimea , by the US army 😂
Looks like Putin proved you wrong 😂😂😂
Unless I missed it, you didn't mention how Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine without asking how the population felt about it.
Lol, it was reparations for the millions of us you and Stalin starved to death 20 years prior.
@@kyle-ld2gh He did the same to the Russians and he was a Georgian so that doesn't make much sense.
@@hejla4524 lol, no he didn't do the same to the ruzzians. Ruzzians didn't suffer nearly as much as we did. All of our grain went to feeding the rest of Muscovy. And he was ruling in the Kremlin and considered himself ruzzian, just as Hitler considered himself German. Yire essentially saying Germany had no hand in The Holocaust because Hitler was Austrian. You're obviously to simple to have this conversation.
@@hejla4524 russians will never acknowledge their complicity in The Holodomor, because to you all. It was a Georgian who did it. You people will never change. What amazes me is you still try to interact with the outside you claim is evil. Why can't you just stay on your own land and be happy? You've got enough of it? My true wish is at the end of this. You are isolated from the world like North Korea. And we can go on forgetting about you like before 2014.
@@kyle-ld2gh I think Russians suffered plenty under Stalin.
You should've considered that Ukraine is already in a process of getting west aircrafts, and in a few months it will be in Ukraine. Which is probably the time when Ukraine would want to advance into Crimea.
That's very optimistic scenario if not more. No consensus on western jets delivery as of 10th Ramstein. Even with tanks, decision was made 3 month before actual delivery started and personnel was trained. Jets will take at least a year after decision is made... And even getting jets is not a turning point. The turning point is what weapons and its quantity for jets.
@@ruslankoniaiev5773 they having been training for a year already, they will come to the "consensus" very soon. it was always planned, they just dont make it public. thats why the abrams will be there in time for the counter offensive, not a year like publicized.
@The Rogue Empire will see, but 30 Abrams won't make huge difference
@@ruslankoniaiev5773 Ukraine will receive over 300 tanks including at least 50 leopard 2 tanks, 31 Abrams, 14 Challenger 2 tanks (UK), and many more of other types of tanks. Add in that Poland has said they likely will be sending fighter jets and other allies seem to be moving in that direction, Ukraine will likely have at least dozens of more fighter jets.
U know, Crimea are Russian people right? 90% n Russian speakers?
Been going so well so far.
lol
Logistics is the key,keep hammering the supply lines gut of the water cannot fight without ammo food and water it will be a slow process,but in time it will crumble. This is wat is always done throughout history.
There lots of ways the russians can keep their supply lines open, they can do it by land air and sea.
@@jaylu7021 If Ukraine takes Melitopol, they are sure to bomb the Kerch bridge again, and then the land option is out of question. At that point they can put a couple of their Neptune missiles that took down the Moskva on the Azov Sea coast to prevent the sea option, and by air Ruzzia will hardly be able to bring in enough supplies for 2.5 million people+defense, especially if water is one of those supplies. Not to mention that probably only half of those planes will make it through, because they will be actively targeted by air defense.
This is absolutely a Master Class in Crimea's LONG & complicated history over the last 2 centuries! It was an educational & sobering piece of work. REALLY....the best analysis of the conflict on YT!
A question I have is after the collapse of the USSR didn't Yeltsin choose to not reclaim Crimea after Ukraine became a sovereign country? I thought G.W. Bush & Yeltsin guaranteed Ukraine's independence & Crimea would be returned on the condition UKR gave up their nukes. The US & RU made commitments to give UKR certain security provisions once UKR gave up their nukes. It wasn't until putin sowed discontent w/ Crimea's Russian-heritage population that opened the door to the invasion of the "little green men" (Wagner) & separating the eastern portions of Crimea w/ the most Russian speaking population. This turned them into a de facto Oblast of Russia. Am I missing something?
Да, самое важное, военный переворот организованный западом руками ультраправыми, пришедшие к власти нелегитимным правительством развязанную войну на востоке для подавления восстания, постоянными посылами принятия Украины в НАТО, возможность овладения Украиной грязной ядерной бомбой, в итоге создания у границ России крайне враждебного государства. P.s. я не гражданин России, я не смотрю телевизор, удачи)
@@Parliament811 How many rubbles do you make an hour vomiting up that ruZZian bile, Pavel? Word for word off of ruZZia today. I'll pay you a dollar to go on vacation. Isn't that like a million rubbles to you, Boris? I mean Pavlov?
Thank u so much RLL for one more amazing vid 👍🙏
I seconded this.
For a channel that talks so much about geography, it's funny how you ignored the inner working of Crimea, past the Perekop and Syvash.
Northern and Central Crimea is steppe, much like the adjacent Kherson Oblast in the mainland.
The Crimean Mountains separate the steppe from the thin strip of beach cities along the southern coast of Crimea- the famed "YU.B.K." that became the favourite vacation spot for the Russian imperialists since Tzarist conquest.
If the ZSU was to break past the Syvash (which Ukrainians did twice in 1918-1920- first when the Ukrainian People's Republic took Crimea from the Bolshevik Reds who overthrew the local Tatar government and were conducting their favourite Red Terror, and later when Makhno's Black Army smashed Wrangel's Whites), then they'd have largely free roam up to the mountain foothills-- which start just south of the Taurida highway connecting the Kerch Peninsula to the capital at Simferopol. Disproportionate majority of the Russian population reside on the southern coast, where Soviet functionaries used to retire. In flat lands, artillery rules, and Ukraine would have much easier time keeping their guns and MRLS systems supplied.
Naturally, I would like to see Ukraine's territorial integrity restored. But if the bunker idiot truly starts clutching the button once ZSU breaks into central Crimea, I can see a realpolitic solution that would create another enclave (a la Kalinigrad) in the triangle Sevastopol-Simferopol- Alushta. Ukraine would be pressured into formally ceding the territory, in exchange for fast-track NATO acceptance as teh only ironclar guarantee that the Muscovites won't try to 'restore hirorical justice" some other time. With Sevastopol harbor in range of conventional artillery, the base would not be that much of a threat--with Ukraine controlling Crimean ports in Yevpatoria, Sudak, Feodosiya and Kerch itself to the E and W of the enclave. With modern anti-ship systems reaching from Kerch to Novorossiys'k, Russia wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful with the enclave and its Black Sea Fleet would become a placeholder.. You'd also see a North and South Crimea effect, where there'd be direct comparisons between standards of living in the 2 parts of the peninsula, which may lead to eventual reunification, should the Russian Federation not deal with the loss of the war and eventually become unstable- especially if Ukraine manages to get into the EU by then. Having population dissatisfied with Ukrainian liberation move to the Russia-occupied southern coast(and from there probably to the mainland, due to scarcity of land) would also offer a more humane solution to the problem of disloyal population.
Of course, all of this is contingent on crushing the occupiers in the South. Within the next 4-6 months we will likely know whether the ZSU are able to punch through to the Azov Sea and tip the scales decisively in Ukraine's favour. Otherwise, the discussions will be about different topics.
I don't like how previous invasions are taken to comparison that insistently. Every single case is very very different with massively different capabilities and circumstances. It can go absolutely against all expectations as well, it cannot be predicted that well.
It cannot be predicted that well I agree but change will be coming and what time frame cannot be said my opinion 10 years.
Previous invasions had far more troops, air superiority and navel superiority and still failed or took over 6 months with 5-10x more losses, and you think we cant predict that Ukraine with less manpower, no navel or air superiority can invade it better?
He is comparing the geographic and power capabilities of each siege attempt. Seemed like a very good summary and comparison to me. He's not saying they are the same but inherently they are all facing the same geographic problem.
6 months have passed since u published the reel. What has changed, is it Ukranian now?
Ich wollte schon immer mal einen Amerikaner "Schwerer Gustav" sagen hören.
31:19 Most wars aren't fought because of a failure of diplomacy, but a selfish act against a sovereign nation. One country wants what the other country has. No amount of diplomacy has ever stopped this kind of scenario. The country that initiates this action didn't try to negotiate in the first place. This is the basic human condition. There isn't a hope to eliminate this in the schemes of governments or political alignments.
Agreed. As Clausewitz observed, War is merely the continuation of politics by other means.
selfishness is why every government is corrupt
Força Ucrânia vitoriosa.,muita força..💙💛🤜🤛👍🙏🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🌻
Finalmente, um irmão latino que não eh russki,
A quantidade de gente que eu vi apoiando a tentativa de genocídio russo com único argumento "estadus unidos eh malvado"
@@matheussanthiago9685 Ukrainians are not Latin, they are slavs
UkraNaziLand is as good as DEAD!
"Independent Crimea" wouldn't be independent for long. Russia has proven to be untrustworthy. It would just invade again after licking its wounds. Crippling it might be more painful in short term, but way safer long term.
Really good geographical analysis. I now feel like Ukraine is just over the state line. (Move over Jersey. )
However, you did miss one possibility on the public relations angle. Since the Soviets have been planting people there, they are settlers the same way that the Israelis are sending settlers to the Westbank. If this became common knowledge, it would make a huge difference.
Also, Ukraine could offer Russian settlers a one-way ticket to a neutral country--if any neutral country would have them.
Most of the Ethnic Russians and even Ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea would prefer an independent state if that would bring peace and security. Keep in mind that the majority of Ethnic Russians in Ukraine would rather not be part of Russia Federation given how little their lives mean to Moscow...]
[ The same was true with the population of Northern Ireland, as the majority of the Irish Catholics and Scottish & English Protestants would prefer to be an independent state in the EU, as that would help guarenty that peace lasts more than a few decades...]
The Russians were there for many 100s of years. And got it back from the Ottomans in 1783.
@@davidotness6199 they gave it to Ukraine
If Ukraine can manage to cut off the water to Crimea, the Russian settlers will end up leaving on their own.
@@starlight0313 Nikita Khrushchev in 1953 did it for geographical continuity of oblasts, a bureaucratic streamlining move. And of course, in the throes of a folly that the USSR would last throughout time. Wrong! But Russia was willing to live with those borders as long as the sanctity of the bases at Sevastopol were never an issue. In fact a new 30 year lease was just concluded prior to the U.S. fomented and financed Maidan Coup. What the Russian leadership knew was that NATO (U.S. & UK) had their eyes on the prize---the military bases that Russia cannot do without. The US Navy had contracts out already for modernizing those bases to their standards and that was. not. going. to. fly. As I said in my other comment: "Nawgunnahappen."
Hello to everyone from Ukraine. By chance I came across this video and wondered how the world thinks about our war.
чего не участвуешь в контрнахрюке?
не хочу твоего отца трогать@@ТимурШайдуллин-т7ю
жаль людей, которые воюют. хотя всем и так очевидно что украина проебет
почему очевидно? Пока за нами США и другие@@гогованесса
One thing though, in WW1 Germany easily conquered Crimea. It was an extremely quick operation. ( April 13th to April 25th 1918 ). Germany suffered almost no casualties.
Because the Soviets were in a running retreat the whole time. It's similar to what happened in 2014. Crimea is only an impenetrable fortress if it is DEFENDED. Which is why the Ukes will almost certainly siege rather than just assault the peninsula. Which they can do very effectively.