"Russia can't even conquer Ukraine." Russia has achieved the objectives they set out to do, they occupy the Russian speaking Donbas region. At the start of the conflict in Russia was on the outskirts of Kiev which brought Ukraine to the negotiating table and an peace agreement was on the verge of been signed but the US sent its lapdog Boris Johnson to Kiev to persuade Zelensky to walk away from the talks, which he did. Now the result is that Ukraine has lost hundreds of thousands of their young men.
Russia can’t take Ukraine right now. However, if The West abandons Ukraine, Russia will box it up and rebuild their military for another bigger attack.
It’s propaganda for the smooth brains. Last year Russia was on the brink of collapse now Russia has become the Soviet Union again and is able to conquer Europe.
On one hand they wanted us to believe Russia was losing the war against Ukraine.. And on the other hand they want us to believe Russia is about to take 4 other countries 😂😂
It's a fact. NATO weaponry is being destroyed by old Soviet-era equipment. Russia has rarely used its modern equipment due to there rarely being a need for it.
Americans need to start their industry, after their decision to move facilities to China. Now, to start a new production, they must clear market for their goods. Germany is competitor, now it's closing/relocating plants to USA/China. Win Win for USA and China.
We the people will not allow it. Bread and butter for US taxpayer is more important than Polaks fighting Russia. Kapish? This is why US Congress told F++you to Zelenski@@ZARuslan
The "funny thing" is that Russia is buying chips for rockets/boms from USA. Not only that, but from who all scared EU country's are buying military equipment from😅 USA is racking in big time
NATO equipment is meant to be combined with massive air power. Something Ukraine doesn't have much of. The destroyed rate would not equate to the same equipment being used by NATO forces.
I think it needs to be pointed out that NATO have only sent smaller arms to Ukraine as they don't want Ukraine using weapons to cross the Russian border. If people think we are sending our best weapons to Ukraine think again. We've sent our older weapons to Ukraine hence why people think that they are less effective.
How's this even a conspiracy? It's called realism. You're either lying to yourselves to comfort yourselves or are straight up naive. As much as we'd wish, Russia is not losing the war in Ukraine.
In Tuker Carlson’s interview with Putin he said Russia achieved its historical borders when the Russian Empire hit its peak. Still gives the same point but is really interesting that he is trying to push this on western viewers
They have to get creative when the US only seems to want to fund only one regional war at a time. They were hoping for a bumper year in 2024, with three wars, but now they are behind schedule.
Russia has no intention to attack Europe.... It's ridiculous. The Zelenskey regimen should have honoured the minsk accords and we wouldnt have a war now. Thanks to Boris and Angela
Unfortunately some people benefit from every war, war is an interest for a handful of people who don't fight it themselves... Russia has been slowly and steadily winning in Ukraine for some time now, Bakhmut fell, now Avdiivka is gonna fall for sure, and some smaller settlements, but we have to remember...Ukraine was the underdog from the start, Russia couldn't even capture Kyiv and was repelled, they couldn't hold their own against some counteroffensives in 2022, Khakrhiv, Kherson, Izium, Krasny Liman.... and people think they're gonna attack Poland? No way, Russia is overestimated hard, it can only make empty threats like against Finland joining NATO. We should stop China potentially attacking Taiwan, that's a bigger issue and China must be stopped and prevented.
is the Sulwaki gap still the game changer? I would think with Finland being a NATO member with Sweden's application pending the Baltic sea is open to supply the Baltic states. Is that wrong to assume?
What crap for last year plus all we heard is how uselss is Russia and how crappy they are and the pathetic Rusiian military hardware, training, soldiers are and now suddenly " they are a threat" So which is it, are they useless or are they powerful
They are powerful, especially with the backing of its eastern allies like Iran, North Korea, China, Syria, Hezbollah and Lebanon, many African nations, states of Latin America hating Yankees, Gulf states, you name them.
Will you continue laughing when Russia has the backing of North Korea, China and Iran as well? If Europe cannot count on US help, then it is a sitting duck.
But I will laugh every day it doesn't happen.Whats the point of conquering iradiated waste-land? If RU conquered Ukraine, would they repopulate Chernobyl?
@@Ballz961 ya know, that’s exactly what Americans were saying in the 30’s--and then oops… Japan attacked us, and then, oops… we went to World War. Read a book, you dummy.
Exactly, I thought that was weird when they said "western weapons were less powerful than expected" A 155mm shell is a 155mm shell, it's just as powerful as you would expect. Giving Ukraine a few hundred vehicles and half a million shells won't win the war for them.
Additionally, US/Western equipment is meant to be used as part of a larger military force that assumes far more air support than Ukraine can manage. If Russia were to try and invade Europe (even without US backing) that wouldn't be the case there. Ukraine has done a great job at limiting the air operations of Russia, but doesn't have what it needs to project force the way European forces would.
And lack of the right type of equipment. Even the F-16s they shall be getting too late, are the older models from European oeprators, not more modern ones the US has plenty of in storage.
The idea that the weaponry sent to Ukraine represent well what NATO would use is quite wrong. NATO would use its aviation and integrate weapons in different strategies that Ukraine cannot implement, and it makes a huge difference.
But would NATO be able to sustain losses in ammunition and units though? The logistical and supply demands would be huge and I'm not so sure we could sustain this for too long. Even certain NATO commentators stated that the US would struggle to pull off the style of combined arms/manoeuvre warfare that was unrealistically demanded of Ukraine this year.
By NATO, you mean USA. Europe is not capable of running an air campaign. Their army would prove as incompetent and useless as Russia has proven in the beginning of the invasion.
Untrue if that were the case Putin would never have had Prigozhin assassinated the head of the Wagner group. Russia is very clearly struggling in this conflict or else it would have ended. @@icjorii
Well not for ww1 annnnnd ww2. The US, it seems to let people get attacked, then come in saying here’s some weapons but in turn you will owe us for the 80 years 😂
That IS funny. What's even funnier is all the Americans that died fighting for your country. But the funniest of all is that you never paid for the 80 years😂😂😂😂😂😂
In November, the Americans will almost certainly elect a criminal and Russian agent to be their president again, and that president has and will actively continue to support Russian attacks on Europe. The obese, stupid Americans are not friends with any Europeans. Each European nation is on its own, and must arm and prepare
@@ClarkyMalarky Lend Lease to the UK, Canada and other allies was free! You are moaning about a post war reconstruction loan at ludicrously low interest rates. You also forgot to mention the $70billion Marshall Plan gift that the UK and others received. Whingeing Pom!
NATO would be correct to assume the US won't be around to help out forever. Isolationism is creeping back as a policy by lots of US politicians. It's just that the US will find it will have vastly reduced leverage after doing so. US Diplomats will start getting the middle finger from all sorts of countries that previously bowed to US demands. Europe best get real about removing the bureaucracy that's hamstringing their weapons manufacturing, and the US better start ramping up for China.
bang on mate.. and guess usa would be the first to come to europe to ask for help when china and usa start over tiawan but turning ya back on europe is wrong idea from them
It should be mindset of all europeans, not only poles and baltic states citizens, if you are rich somebody will envy and come for your riches. Easy to grasp
@@jenifferschmitz8618 Apart from Russians. Sting wrote a song many years ago. If the Russians love their children too. There are many families in Russia that have lost their children the last 2 years.
Yes. The truth is that Russia stands no chance against NATO. Russia would be attacked and got "democracy" installed if they had no nukes. Beside that they have oil and gas, they have other valuable resources. Russia cannot deal with Ukraine properly, that is spoon feed weapons by the west. Poland would be a much harder opponent than Ukraine. Even if Russia is successful, it is silly to believe that US will not get involved or that nukes will be used. The only countries that are in risk are Baltic countries - Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Finland, though Fins are a menace when engaged in war.
It is true that better gear is no guarantee of victory, but in large part the poor success of the Ukrainian counteroffensive was due to other factors. 1) shortages of modern equipment, 2) inadequate training, 3) being postponed too long allowing the Russians to build the fortifications that proved impossible to break through, and last, but not least 4) lack of air support and air supremacy, or even air superiority as the opposite was true with the Russians having it instead.
GOP Blocked it as they did in 1941 when the Nazis threatened Britain & GOP Turned down Churchills please, so she on the right will & destroying democracy , having done in in the USA now threatening Ukraines democracy.
Are you still visiting your psychiatrist? Keeping overestimated your real possibility and underestimated Russians, you will got surprised, Ukraine alone with all support will loose, nothing will stop that, if NATO join to war is going to be WW3 , and nuclear strikes, keep that in mind.
Funny. Didn't according to our media the "ghost of Kiev" and the "goat of Kiev" destroy the Russian air fleet? Where are the hundreds of Ukrainian fighter jets? Why after being so gloriously victorious are they now denying the ground forces any support? And why is the glorious, victorious Ukrainian army "inadequatly trained"? Stoltenberg and Merkel have all said clearly that Minsk II was a sham and that they have trained the Ukrainian army since 2014. Why is 9 years of training not enough? Could it be that our media and regimes are LIARS and that the alternative media and the Russian MOD speak the truth and they really have eliminated TWO Ukrainian armies along with all of Ukrainian ex Soviet military equipment including the entire air force and that the reports that the Ukrainians are so desparate to kidnap even minors and older men from the streets, and now even women, to put them into uniforms and throw them on the front without any training?
@@donzell1945 The consensus among western defense analysts and experts points to the inevitability of a war between Putin's Russia and Nato within the next three to six years if Ukraine loses this war, and by losing I mean fails to liberate their territories and is forced to sue for peace. Counter to this bleak reality, the western support to Ukraine is dwindling, and it never was adequate to begin with. At this point we are on a trajectory which will lead to the inevitable ruzzian victory over Ukraine, with the war to follow, unless NATO steps in and becomes a direct party to this conflict. In other words, the west will be in a war against Putin unless they radically and quickly step up their military and financial aid to Ukraine. I'm not talking about millions here, I'm talking about billions of US dollars every month.
Romania and Poland were never part of the USSR. The whole validity of this video went up in flames when you said that. How is it possible to make such a huge mistake?
at first 01:30 it is said Romania and Poland territories were part of the old Russian Empire, not the USSR. did you get it wrong from the video, or are you manipulating?
The Russian empire was a separate entity than the ussr. It basically just had a tiny bit of Romania and the majority of Poland with all of the USSR’s borders.
One day, and I'm not sure how I admit, we all will have to find a way to solve the problems with news. It cant go on like this anymore. They can simply lie and lie and lie.
Whys is this even a discussion? We can't attack Russia through fear of nuclear retaliation but they can attack NATO, who also have nukes? Either the Nukes are a problem or they are not, which is it?
@@jacekpliszka5326 not public opinion but they ensure a country will never be fully destroyed or invaded (as in Russia will not become another Iraq or Germany in ww2). it might also be a possibility for Russia to use nukes on non-Nato countries but it's not very likely.
we do not know who has better ANTINUKE defense. If Nato has secret new technology "radars" and "antimissile weapons" placed all over the world, and if the Russian Secret Service fails to obtain this information, then NATO can win a nuclear war because no or less nukes will fall on its soil. there is ALWAYS way to outsmart and defeat the enemy. so do not underestimate russia either
I say this as an American, after the wars in Iraq, Afgan and all over, this is probably the smartest comment on I unironically have seen on RUclips. That is the danger of a major continental war or world war. Reliance on technology can be a death nail because technologies you become dependent on can become obsolete overnight in something as competitive as a large scale war, never mind one side purposely abandoning technologies(ie a digital grid) to gain an advantage on a 'superior' technological opponent. From Afghanistan to Vietnam, you can feel over confident when winning a quick battle and a war (iraq, shock and awe) and lose the long wars because of jungle fighters and cave dwellers over a war of attrition. Technological advantages matter less as a war goes on, see America in Vietnam or Afganistan, Germany vs Soviet Union in WW2 and so on.
@@yellow1one Half a million children abused by grooming gangs. Stabbings almost daily. Teachers in hiding for violating sharia. More of them fighting for ISIS than for our army. Whole swaths of the country totally unrecognizable. Terrorism alerts now reported as casually as weather forecasts. Jewish people afraid to go out on the streets. Our own culture being cancelled to appease them. Mass intimidation in public spaces. You want more?
I think people are comparing todays Russia with the 80s USSR. These are very different countries, to include the amount of soldiers they would have on hand to conduct military operations. I have a really hard time seeing Russian Soldiers rolling through western Europe. I dont think they have the capabilities to do so. As for NATO, they do have the integrated combined arms warfare, but the amount of war stocks have been allowed to shrink compared to what was on hand in the 80s. Drone warfare is a huge thing, countries should be concentrating on anti-drone tech to counter drone swarms.
Not even that, Russia invading Europe is like punching your best client. Europe feeds Russia’s economy and even though its hostile to Russia, Russia still does trade with Europe in the hundreds of billions every year
Why are the number of tanks even seriously considered when it was already proven that tank on tank engagements have become very uncommon on the battlefield? A more realistic comparison would be in terms of Air Power which has proved to be one of if not the most decisive aspect of modern warfare.
When was it proven? If there is a conflict between Russia/EU( or NATO), and then possibly China and the US are pulled in, it will look nothing like any of the conflicts that have occurred in the twenty-first century so far.
AFAIK Tank on tank engagements were never the biggest thing anyway, that's a myth. E.g. In ww2 they were generally infantry support with a smattering of upgunned tanks for when they needed to meet other tanks.
Exactly, Putin is not interested in fighting NATO, he is only intrested in taking down the corrupt politicians and what they done for the East! He doesn't want to goto war with Germany, Italy, UK, France and even Finland, he only wants NATO to not have U.S intervention due to the Russpphobia from losing Alaska! That's apart of the deal.
I cannot understand why Britain is is getting so involved with the ukrainan problem when they are people over here who is finding it hard to survive daily.
Germany, the UK and France mentioned. It is really a bit funny, that the latest NATO member Finland has in its war time troops and reserves roughly as many trained soldiers as Germany, the UK and France combined... No, actually you must add Italy to the three to get even.
@@kingwata1 A nation of 180 million failed to conquer a country of 3,5 million. But my point is that the armies of the big European countries are ridiculously small, not that the Finnish Defense Forces were extremely strong.
not really, they fought the soviets off and then later on lost territory to the soviet army, so ukranian, belarusian, baltic, polish, kasachic etc troops combines with the russians. Remember Russia isnt the soviet union, its only half that population which is old, sick and with a low life expectency. The european states should be able to beat back Russia and work towards that. We cant rely on the Americans to save the continent again. The capabilities are there, the money, the people, the tech. Its just that everyone here needs to wake df up and prepare for a war in a few years. Its doable@@kingwata1
The Russian Empire did not include Romania. It was Finland and Moldova. Also, do not forget Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan as well as all the 'stans. They used to be part of the Empire.
@@elmarmammadov8349 yeah we all know Azeri used to launch rockets into space 500 years ago before those pesky Russians woke you up from opioid induced fever 😂
@@AndrewKoff I can write whole book about it. In short: In 1804 invaded Azerbaijan and from that time on took all natural wealth. Mainly Baku oil. Banned mother language from schools, to make people forget origin. In 1918 invaded again and created Armenia in Yeravan. In 1937 killed all enlightening people. Deported people from own cities to cental asia and moved Armenians there. In 1991 killed innocent people in streets: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_January . In 1994 helped Armenia to invade Azerbaijan and took all golds from Kabajar (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sotk_gold_mine#After_2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war). And still trying to do something here.
I wonder what could go wrong if almost 50 european countries started militarising and building massive armies right next to eachother :) . It seems these days we have loads of ''smart'' people but fewer and fewer wise people.
No need to wonder, their brains were replaced by media long time ago, just accept this fact and try to survive in this madness, among the masses of brainwashed idiots.
@@adwaitnaravane5285 It would save you all so much money in the long run. Your combined military would be much more efficient and likely as strong as the US' military after 5-10 years of reorganizing.
Whenever commentators talk about defence in the UK they always talk about the army. A land war in Europe should be defended primarily by central European powers (Poland has already taken on this mantle). The UK is a maritime power and we should prioritise the Royal Navy with an additional emphasis on deployable air power.
Our navy might be smaller than before but its well trained with a lot of real world experience and it's also technically advanced two air craft carriers a third being built also the most devastating battle ship ever made, nuclear submarines anything as great as the Americans can build. People also forget about these key features like we and the Americans are the only true blue water navy whereas we can put our forces anywhere around the world and keep them supplied in feul, weapons and fed think Afghanistan and Iraq two wars thousands of miles apart oh and of course the Falklands 8000 miles in the South Atlantic rough seas. Russia on on the other hand had trouble supplying their troops by road next door to Russia! Better food, better logistics, better medical care, better military equipment, better training, better reconicense (MI6, GCHQ), better navy, better Air force. Russia could not win against the UK or the UK and EU. 🇬🇧🤝👍
@@shihtzu291Успокаиваете себя пропагандой, жалкие островетяне. Ваше "сила" - блеф, и всегда была токовой. Ваш остров уже окружён ядерными "Посейдонами", стоит только👑 Русскому Императору разозлится, и ваш остров станет пустынным архипелагом 💥
It is these Poles who dream of great Poland again. Neither Germany nor Russia will accept that. We have already seen tensions rise between Poland and Germany after Poland's claims for ww2 war reparations have been made several times this year. It was about: 1 trillion Euro in damages. The Poles need the money for all the weapons they are buying. It will be expensive for the Polish taxpayers with all the new weapons.
You are talking about Prime Minister Tusk and his new old government. There are suspicions that he is a former STASI agent codenamed Oskar. Poles have always fought on the side of NATO, but they may be betrayed by the current government, which was elected in a questionable way.@@189Blake
not only Poland, also the Baltic countries and Finland. The Russians will not attack Finland, they remember how they were humiliated there. But the Baltic countries are most likely under attack
Do you have any evidence that the weapons systems have been successful? I am asking a serious question not trolling. All my research online seems to suggest the Russian weaoons are mire advanced
@@RNA0ROGER Russia also is failing to achieve air superiority. Both countries have fairly capable air defense systems; while both also lack modern aircraft.
@@RNA0ROGER tier 1 no longer. this war has devolved into something comparable to corrupt arab armies fighting one another. yea, iran might have had the f14, and the ukrainians have the m1 abrams, but doing better than either of those countries means you're barely tier 3
America also knows, no matter the president, that their biggest trade partner so far is and will be Europe, so yes they might ignore Ukraine. But im extremely sceptical towards the idea of US leaving Europe to Russia. No superpower with military bases in Europe would want the whole cold war era again.
Wrong, The top five purchasers of U.S. goods exports in 2022 were: Canada ($356.5 billion), Mexico ($324.3 billion), China ($150.4 billion), Japan ($80.2 billion), and the United Kingdom ($76.2 billion). Everything that Europe sells to the US we can get at better price points elsewhere. Europe is on it's own sooner or later.
I was expecting to see the comments full of war hawks regurgitating propaganda, and I am very pleasantly surprised to see the world is onto their tricks now.
Definitely if you live in Britain. Humiliated government, humiliated military and BS journalism. Not much to look forward to economically. Self-inflicted hardship. The world is now laughing at you - the looters.
@kingof206 Since you are so happy, that you decided to tell the world about it, could you please elaborate on your disclosure and tell us more specifically ‐ what are you so happy about and also what is your IQ, please.
And the West sent Ukraine scraps and hand-me downs - plus we did not give Ukraine the yields they asked for. Ukraine only had moderate success and is currently suffering because the West did not step up + several US congressmen were compromised by Russian intel.
NATO should enter Ukraine and create a defensive line from Kyiv down to Odessa and that would make a safety zone of Western Ukraine . This would allow Ukraine to secure a place to receive goods and weapons , set up manufacturing and protect the refugees from the occupied areas . Also stop Russia from taking all of Ukraine which will seriously threaten NATO countries . I don't understand why NATO is so hung up on a signed membership when they refused to let Ukraine in way before the war or separatist movement started and Russia winning would be a real threat to existing NATO borders .
Even when Hitler occupied Austria and has been given Czechoslovakia, most in the west believed he will stop right there. Britain was completely unprepared as was France and the rest of Europe
I don't think it's down to the UK to fight a ground war with our tanks in continental Europe, and we're highly unlikely to fight a ground war with tanks on UK soil anytime soon, so I'm not surprised our tank numbers are that low. It's just priorities.
It's obvious that you know nothing about history like WWII when a madman decided he wanted to take over the world. What happened to the UK the last time a person like that existed. The UK at the time Hitler came to power thought the same way you are now and what happened. Maybe learn about the Battle of Britain. Look at pictures of what happened to London during that time.
We need more men and equipment. In the current climate, even if nothing at all ever happens, it'd be sensible to have it. Plus being an island means we can pick and choose where we help if any major conflict breaks out, that's the other benefit. You are correct in that we could invest in our naval and air assets again instead, but we need to be prepared either way.
When you spoke about the vulnerability of the Baltics and Poland there was no mention of the strength and reach of NATO Air and Naval forces in the region.
Whilst those would tip the balance in our favour quite a bit, I don't think we could keep up with the logistical and supply challenges that such a war would demand. How many Typhoons could the UK provide for defence? How quickly and easily could we replace them?
Yankees figting Russia directly? Unless you want to be next Ukraine. If Yanks fight Russia this is gona be their last cowboy war. Before Yanks move in close proximity to Russia forces they always call to make sure there are no Russian force, Wagner in Syria. Rusiia gave green light to US. It was merecenaries
Russia does not have air superiority over Ukraine and the Ukraine does not have much of a air force . Can you imagine Russia fighting NATO's air force even without the US .
@@TalentSpotter83 Why just the UK? You have massive economies outside of the UK. You have massive industrial capability if you would just do it. You have the knowledge. You have the money. The only thing you lack is the will power and the drive to do it because you don't want to believe that Russia is threatening you because it would ruin your meaningless life schedule. Ukraine has shown how truly weak the EU, including the UK, has become. You people literally have no military. You have a little basically for show but you have no true scale military. You thought having "free healthcare" was the best thing ever whilst you've compromised and given way your nations by not having any real defense budget. You have been spoiled by peace for too long and have forgotten the threat that has been arming and preparing to kill you since the 90's. Mind you, they've been arming and building all of their stuff with YOUR money that you bought their oil and gas with. We have the abilities and knowledge to restart our industries and production lines. We just have to accept that we are going to lose some luxury items, temporarily, to make it all happen. Are you willing to do that or not?
Its worth noting that the underwhelming Ukranian gains in the offensive was attempted with no air superiority (something that the west would never do, but Ukraine was forced to), and agaisnt a very well prepared defense in deph. Even the tactics that they would've been using agiasnt the defensive line had air superiority in mind. NATO has no problem with air superiority, and its pretty impossible to evaluate how the west would fare by comparing them to Ukraine while we have been withholding crucial equipment that Ukraine needs to win this war
@@kevincorrigan1754 the issue is we can't send the pilots and mechanics alongside the planes, so we have to rely on the few existing Ukrainian pilots and train them to newer planes. Also the logistical chain for keeping the planes combat ready after each sorty is complicated and the reason why the west sends few planes.
Russia vs Europe would be same level of power disproportion as Japan vs US in world war 2.. So they would be fighting lost war from get-go. Russians could get strong suprise push, but we have enough to stop them and if european economy militarizes we would get as strong as USA. We have simmilar GDP (as US) it's just that right now it's not allocated to military. The only problem is unity among EU countries. That's why I think we need further consolidation and unification of our nations.
Absolutely. EU-army ASAP. There is no need for us to have 27 separate militaries. Naturally the different formations will "belong" to their respective states, but a unified command-structure would be great. More importantly, we wouldn't have 27 countries buying stuff at various prices and from various producers all over. Standardization will boost our militaries immensely.
yeah, we will see for how long... :) They don't have the infinitive amount of resources to make quantity infinitive, it is finite and that limit is closer day by day. After that limit, there is a collapse.
@@rufanuf1 Russia had a 10 times larger airforce and 10 times more artillery than Ukraine as well as a 5 times larger armored force, yet they can’t even gain more than a couple kilometers after a 2 month offensive on Avdiivka. Despite its numerical advantage, Russia is in a stalemate against Ukraine. And the small amounts of western equipment Ukraine has gotten has been essential to Ukraine matching Russia head to head. And Ukraine was only given several hundred pieces of western heavy equipment, most of which is stuff like Leopard 2A4 and Bradley M2A2 which are both over 30 years old. Ukraine is not getting the newest western kit like M1A2 Sep V3 or Leopard 2A7 or Bradley M2A4
@@rufanuf1Russia is producing about 20 tanks per month. And they have use older optics and electronic equipment due to a lack of western parts. Before sanctions, Russia was using French commercially available thermals on their tank optics as well as many American electronics in missiles and tanks and aircraft Most of Russia’s tanks going in to service now are old T-62M tanks, T-72B tanks as well as some T-80’s and T-55’s. These tanks would be completely obsolete against a Nato army like Poland
It will all be pointless when civilization is in ruins and most of humanity has been fried with fire, radiation, disease and starvation. How can one be happy after such a "win"?
"Western equipment is not as powerful as thought" This isn't a true statement. The equipment has proven it's power against the Russian equivalent and continues to do so, but it has become evident that drones limit their use until upgrades are made. The other issue is not enough was provided and it was expected to work without air support (something NATO would never do), in difficult terrain that it was not designed for.
I think it's easy to underestimate how much stronger the support from other nations in Europe would be in Ukraine if there was war within their own borders. Right now the general populations of those nations are supportive but not passionate. If their own people were dying in war the fires of passion would grow very strong very fast, and I don't think that effect can be gauged very easily by the current tea time support for Ukraine by average families and formal support for Ukraine by leaders. It'd be a fire.
@albertkirilov6921 I live in Europe. Norway. "Do you reckon family life is any better with the conflict going?" It sounds like you are implying that it's the defenders side that is causing the conflict to keep going. Russia has no intention of stopping. Fighting back and winning is the shortest least destructive path to ending the conflict, which was your point. Not fighting back, losing, and letting Russia expand, is the path to create broader and longer conflict. It also sounds alien to me to evaluate political opinion from the perspective of 'how does it benefit my family'. How would anyone ever fight for their nations freedom in history if that was the line of thinking? Our view here is that the west isn't instigating, Russia is currently like a criminal who is shooting at a person under cover and we are trying to hand the poor guy ammo to fight back. People opposed to that are saying "Hey you should both try to step back." while people trying to give the gun *correctly know* that the attacker has no intention of stopping shooting no matter what. Give an inch and a mile will be taken is the accurate assessment of the situation. -- Your reference to Socialism and Capitalism strikes me as a very American like view. I've always lived with 3-4 left parties and 3-4 right parties. The republicans are slightly to the right of our most right leaning party while the democrats are to the center over here. The thing is that here, if the rightmost party does something crazy they lose votes to the other parties on the right cause conservative voters don't need to sell their soul to the left. They have other conservative options. Same for the left. By only having two parties in America it leads to people more often than is natural 'seeing their own parties views' since there are no options. The party forming the people rather than the opposite. The two main reasons we have multiple parties here is that we have a voting system were we vote for parties in bunch. All votes are then tallied and if the green party gets 6% of the votes they get 6% of parliament. In America you would need the green party to get 40-ish % of the votes in 6 % of the congressional districts since you vote for every candidates rather than for party. This makes it so that it's practically impossible for smaller parties to get representation because in spite of having 6% of the vote in every state they never get a candidate. I think conservatives as well as liberals could benefit from more parties in the US as they would see that they don't have as much support for their causes as it appears they have and that they need to fully convince the population of their views rather than enact policies before the public is truly convinced. --
@albertkirilov6921 Socialists from the east were to a large extent dictatorships and the unhappiness stems from that. Free nations tend to choose some of the socialist policies but not all out ban the market. It's always been a part of American propaganda that the Socialism rather than the Dictatorship was the problem. Very transparent to me since we've always had socialist parties getting some of their policies through and it didn't destroy our nation, the problem is authoritarianism and in some cases totalitarianism. The free nations where the people can elect socialists sometimes and not at other times we simply don't vote for socialist party next election if it goes abit too far.
More than 50% in my country would just let the russians pass so they can go where they actually want to go. People here dont care about if the rich people who have power here are pro usa or pro russia. I say let them pass so they can go to uk and america. Their real enemies....
@@cyberneticbutterfly8506 I agree on Ukraine, but I will note that your idea that "we've always had socialist parties getting policies through and it didn't destroy our nation" is predicated on short-sightedness. Socialism is barely 100 years old. That's nothing at a state level. Things like dysgenic fertility can utterly destroy nations and even entire species, but often require decades to actually manifest, and centuries to take full effect. Norway is very lucky in this sense, but take one look at modern-day Sweden, and its fertility trends, and it is easy to appreciate how seemingly-benign policies can have unintended, and potentially catastrophic, long-term consequences. And of course Sweden not being an isolated example, but one out of many, corroborates this point further.
@@VVayVVard I agree that any policy might have unforeseen long term consequences. Why would socialism be special here if it's unforeseen? Wouldn't capitalist policies also have unforeseeable consequences? Isn't that the whole reason why people are critical of it these days? I am uncertain what you are saying with the Swedish fertility example.
No one would be surprised if America pulled out but they are smart enough to realise that Europe and the rest of the world would no longer be listening/trading with them the same.
@@colabear1529 Todays world is shaped by the global trade and the dependency on other nations, trading would no doubt occur in some degree even during a full scale war.
It would probably be the opposite: When you're in a war, you do not exactly care where your weapons and ammunition comes from, just that you get it. The first part of WW2 and the majority of WW1, the US was considered an ally to various degrees to various countries, but did little more than sell weapons, ammunition, loans, and other products to Europe. The U.S. will probably do the same until forced to put troops on the ground. Vietnam, Korea, and the middle east are still very fresh on memories here, fighting for countries that had no meaningful effect on us, with what was basically the US vs the USSR and Russia. Also, this is what Europe has done historically, squabble over pointless things every 10 minutes. Like mentioned in the video, Europe isn't really arming either. That isn't a way to sell an ally, an ally who complained loudly and was laughed at when they brought up the fact that basically no one was meeting their NATO requirements, that you're preparing. That's telling your ally that you're depending on them to die for you. The same ally talked about not relying on your now enemy too, with the pipeline, but that was also ignored. The only exception here is Poland. Poland throws a wrench in these predictions as when was the last time a country asked to host the US military and its weapons, including nuclear weapons, while reaming and building its military?
Hello from Romania 🇷🇴. We re latinized thracians colonized by the Roman's. I hope my country will stay independent free. Russians took a Moldovan land rusified our indigenous Moldovan people. Hungarians took transylvania but we got it back 🙏. I wish the best for my Slavic neighbors but we Romanians wants to be free and live in peace. Thanks for your video.
Some things don't add up: NATO promised to deliver 1.000.000 artillery shells to Ukraine in 2024 but only managed to allocate 300.000. On the other side, Rheinmetall claims they have produced 350.000 in 2023 and will produce twice as much in 2024. And Rheinmetall only represents like 5% of NATO armament capabilities. So... why don't these numbers add up?
Well google tells me the whole global market for 155 mm ammunition was around 1 million pieces in 2021 (USD 3.37 Bn). Now US factories & Rheinmetall & others have more than doubled their production capasity. But more importantly you have your own facts quite wrong. It was EU alone who promised to deliver 1 Mn pieces in all calibers and by March 2024, not in 2024. And by the end of Nov it'd delivered 480,000, not 300,000. There are also other nations as customers than Ukraine. So the global production of shells can't go all to them. Some kind of majority of the new production certainly, but again not all of it, as all the countries prepare more also for themselves.
The West always lie to bolster themselves. It's called propaganda. But unfortunately the west no longer has the industrial capacity to make their propaganda come to life. Much of the industrial capacity US and the west had in WW2 no longer exists for the West thanks to China. Russia has the advantage of keeping much of their industrial capacity and they still had a lot of stock built up from the Soviet Union Era.
The western weapons systems were designed to work in conjunction with air power. Ukraine does not have anywhere near the kind of air power that NATO has. NATO’s air power and training will multiply the of those Western weapon systems.
How long air power lasts against air defences which are so numerous that you will be seeing fighter jets getting shot down every day just like how tanks are getting destroyed left and right with FPV drones and shells. How long will the air power remain before it turns back to same trench warfare we see in Ukraine? You can't manufacture enough shells to keep up with war. Forget about building aircrafts at this rate. This is not middle east warfare.
One other thing to consider is that the whole NATO military doctrine is designed around overwhelming airpower, which would not work if NATO's adversary had capability to shoot down aircraft, including stealth, and sink the aircraft carriers.
Fair enough but how would NATO react to a limited war in for example Estonia or Latvia ? There is likely to be some NATO countries ie Poland and Germany that are for going to war but then there will be other countries that want to stay out of it. So when it comes down to it yes NATO has air superiority….on paper. Let’s not even go there….the time to defeat putin is here and now. Give Ukraine the weapons and means to do it.
Less than the number paying extra gas and fuel prices, who also vote, so maybe the reason we support Ukraine is because Russia is in the wrong, and unlike the US we don't do everything based on profits?
@m1leswilliams profits? Who sends you the guns and money? We're profiting? Maybe Lockheed is but yall haven't paid your dues. That means America is paying for your lunch. Not a solid profitable business model hey genious. Weird a capitalist society looks at cost vs benefit. We're paying for your defense? Not if we can vote about it. My breakfast tastes the same if Poland ceases to exist. Make sense? We do not care about your derelict military. That is your fault. Don't try to shame me because I would worry about my son before yours. When will you worry about your own? Is it my duty to pay with money? Blood? Kiss my American ass. The way Europe whines, putin gains support. You think the cuck leftists that you all laude is your salvation? It's red blood red necks and trumpers that are the fearsome warriors... your cuck lefties dye their hair pink and need safe spaces. They will carry signs at protests but cannot run across a battlefield with an m60. Cheer for your cucks. We "deplorables" care not about European children. We will not shed blood for your derelict countries. Time to start buying weapons. Training real men to war for you. Stop counting on American money. We're so greedy? Youre a greedy little cuckold punk. 😂
Euros are guzzling more Russian fuel than prior to the war, and South Korea has sent more artillery to Ukraine than the entirety of the EU. EU economies also aren't in war production. That should give you a sense of how much the EU and Nato view Russia as a "threat".
that’s a fallacy. even before the war, Ukraine had the largest military in Europe by quite a bit in terms of armour and shells. if our army can’t stop the russians, i just hope NATO’s nuclear forces would be enough of a deterrent because a conventional war in the Baltics would be ugly. It doesn’t even matter if ultimately russia loses, because the real victims would be the citizens that would have their lives destroyed. there’s not much “strategic depth”, which means reaction would have to be immediate. same problem Israel has, they don’t have the geography to fall back before mustering a defence, unlike Ukraine. Will this reaction be quick and strong enough to stop russians before they inflict significant damage? i certainly hope so.
@@EugeneYunak Dude, the largest military but full of weapons that were from the 60s and soviet that couldnt even be resupplied because Ukraine never even had an own military industry. Shells literally from WW2. Ukraine even had crisis because they didnt have enough Ak 47 for its 150k professional soldiers once the war began. Stop eating russian propaganda.
Nothing to worry about now - but if russia is going all naZi and ramps up military prodution to 200% we may have a problem in 5-10 years if we don't respond. However - if your name is dimitri then I would say you have a lot to worry about. Problem with naZi regimes is that anyone could be the next victim.
@@anssiluomaranta34aren't the Ukraine soldiers supporting Nazis, and having swastika tattoos? Didn't Canada give standing ovation to a Nazi Ukrainian just because he fought Russia in ww2?
"According to western media Russia is the 2nd strongest army in Ukraine. So Europe has nothing to worry about, right?" The funny thing about this is the fact that the US News website, in their nation rankings, they raised the Russian military to the #1 spot a few months ago.
"Russia can't even conquer Ukraine"
"Anyway, Russia will attack NATO"
Yeah, makes total sense, nothing contradictory.
Ukraine got funded since 2014 so I'm not that surprised
"Russia can't even conquer Ukraine."
Russia has achieved the objectives they set out to do, they occupy the Russian speaking Donbas region. At the start of the conflict in Russia was on the outskirts of Kiev which brought Ukraine to the negotiating table and an peace agreement was on the verge of been signed but the US sent its lapdog Boris Johnson to Kiev to persuade Zelensky to walk away from the talks, which he did. Now the result is that Ukraine has lost hundreds of thousands of their young men.
Russia can’t take Ukraine right now. However, if The West abandons Ukraine, Russia will box it up and rebuild their military for another bigger attack.
Its because you are stupid and cannot see past next week.
It’s propaganda for the smooth brains. Last year Russia was on the brink of collapse now Russia has become the Soviet Union again and is able to conquer Europe.
On one hand they wanted us to believe Russia was losing the war against Ukraine.. And on the other hand they want us to believe Russia is about to take 4 other countries 😂😂
With proper support for Ukraine, Russia will lose the war in no time.
Keep telling yourself that@@oteleaionutbogdan5381
doublethink
@@oteleaionutbogdan5381I doubt Ukraine could draft 20 millions to beat Russia
@@oteleaionutbogdan5381if you really think Russia will lose. Than you are blind
The world is insane.Humanity didn't learn from history apparently.
Nato wants to start world War III or something
Not humanity, you mean Europeans have this evil complex.
@@rdeleeuw4408 it has never been like this. this time we are closer to the great reset than ever before. in other name: ww3
Want to bet...?!@@scoper7897
Capitalism never change
The UK is a disgrace, one point in time we had the strongest army in the world. Now we couldn’t even sell out Wembley.
That's scary when you think that's not an exaggeration!
This is the first time I've ever heard someone try and claim NATO weapons are proving to be less powerful than expected lmao
It's a fact. NATO weaponry is being destroyed by old Soviet-era equipment. Russia has rarely used its modern equipment due to there rarely being a need for it.
@@AnnedolfFrankler911 We understood that you're a Russian bot already so shut it plz.
You don't like facts, I see.
Wrong
@@AnnedolfFrankler911 What weaponry are you speaking of? The stuff developed and purchased in the 60s?
Nope, Russia is not going to invade Nato for the same reason Nato has not put boots on the ground in Ukraine...Nuclear weapons
NATO has been involved i Ukraine since 2014.
Correct, who needs stinking Warsaw and berlin
@@niarlatotepbasset no it hasnt
Americans need to start their industry, after their decision to move facilities to China. Now, to start a new production, they must clear market for their goods. Germany is competitor, now it's closing/relocating plants to USA/China. Win Win for USA and China.
We the people will not allow it. Bread and butter for US taxpayer is more important than Polaks fighting Russia. Kapish? This is why US Congress told F++you to Zelenski@@ZARuslan
war propaganda at its finest
Exactly
👏
Dont be scared when it happens . 😱
I don't think NATO's weapons are ineffective, it's just that there is less of a supply from NATO.
there was a big deal made about the tanks. they weren't nearly as effective in practice.
The "funny thing" is that Russia is buying chips for rockets/boms from USA. Not only that, but from who all scared EU country's are buying military equipment from😅 USA is racking in big time
NATO equipment is meant to be combined with massive air power. Something Ukraine doesn't have much of. The destroyed rate would not equate to the same equipment being used by NATO forces.
I think it needs to be pointed out that NATO have only sent smaller arms to Ukraine as they don't want Ukraine using weapons to cross the Russian border. If people think we are sending our best weapons to Ukraine think again. We've sent our older weapons to Ukraine hence why people think that they are less effective.
@@jdiluigi NATO needs to understand that russia got anti air defense.
I get really worried about the media actively spreading conspiracy theories like this article.
thank u ..bang on
They want to distract us and try to save face, then whenever UA falls to RU, EU can say that they actually won and saved EU against RU invasion
Well it was said first by Poland and Germany's governments
How's this even a conspiracy? It's called realism. You're either lying to yourselves to comfort yourselves or are straight up naive. As much as we'd wish, Russia is not losing the war in Ukraine.
What conspiracy
Born in 1989, growing up I always thought wars in europe was a thing of the past. It feels so weird and horrifying to have been proven wrong.
There was a war in Europe in Europe in the 90's
@@hrvsmartthese people are actively ignorant don’t bother
@@NeostormXLMAX How much did u watch the news while under the age of 10??
nazi usa is playing cards with youir lives..... wake up eurosavages!!!
All it took was the WW2 generation dying off before the cycle repeats itself.
Romania and Poland were never part of the USSR.
Yet they helped the naxi kill jews 😂
He said the Russian Empire. Half of Poland and Romania were part of it. Also all of Finland btw
@@romko4496 Romania was never part of the Russian Empire tf?
@@kennethroth6757 yeah the sacrafices for jews and the 60k saved by Poles doesnt count
@@barb1493 moldova and a large portion of romania was part of the russian empire, maybe actually check before commenting something this stupid
In Tuker Carlson’s interview with Putin he said Russia achieved its historical borders when the Russian Empire hit its peak. Still gives the same point but is really interesting that he is trying to push this on western viewers
Lockheed martin are getting creative with their commericals
They have to get creative when the US only seems to want to fund only one regional war at a time. They were hoping for a bumper year in 2024, with three wars, but now they are behind schedule.
Russia has no intention to attack Europe.... It's ridiculous.
The Zelenskey regimen should have honoured the minsk accords and we wouldnt have a war now. Thanks to Boris and Angela
🤣
Always been like this
Unfortunately some people benefit from every war, war is an interest for a handful of people who don't fight it themselves... Russia has been slowly and steadily winning in Ukraine for some time now, Bakhmut fell, now Avdiivka is gonna fall for sure, and some smaller settlements, but we have to remember...Ukraine was the underdog from the start, Russia couldn't even capture Kyiv and was repelled, they couldn't hold their own against some counteroffensives in 2022, Khakrhiv, Kherson, Izium, Krasny Liman.... and people think they're gonna attack Poland? No way, Russia is overestimated hard, it can only make empty threats like against Finland joining NATO. We should stop China potentially attacking Taiwan, that's a bigger issue and China must be stopped and prevented.
Those same 2014 war games analysts would've predicted Russia to take Kiev in 72 hours as well...
shh shhhh just 2 more weeks
But i thought they only had shovels left?
If Russia ever had the goal of conquering Ukraine - then it would have done so in a week at most.
@@AnnedolfFrankler911 Ofc they totally planned to lose 300k soldiers and thousands of tanks. Big brain strategy right there.
@@AnnedolfFrankler911 Just 2 more weeks!!!!
is the Sulwaki gap still the game changer? I would think with Finland being a NATO member with Sweden's application pending the Baltic sea is open to supply the Baltic states. Is that wrong to assume?
Much less import with NATO bases in Sweden and support from Finland. Still connection to Koenigsberg is what Hitler demanded in August 1939...
Baltic Sea is a NATO sea and will be a total no-go zone for russia. It will be closed for russia.
Rheinmetall Marketing team is getting a raise for this one
LOL indeed.
KF-51 Panther needs more costumers.
@@8LegoVogel8 probable they forget what russians did to their fathers during ww2
Absolute nonsense. Corporate media really is finished, in the modern age of freely available information.
Where do you get your information? Vlads speeches?
@@Bigbosssss780 From Fortnite
@@Madej16x lmao
@@Bigbosssss780 And yours ? from TV ?
Exactly! That's why they're desperate to censor the internet.
What crap for last year plus all we heard is how uselss is Russia and how crappy they are and the pathetic Rusiian military hardware, training, soldiers are and now suddenly " they are a threat" So which is it, are they useless or are they powerful
They are powerful, especially with the backing of its eastern allies like Iran, North Korea, China, Syria, Hezbollah and Lebanon, many African nations, states of Latin America hating Yankees, Gulf states, you name them.
Classic. The enemy is always strong and weak at the same time
Russia was supposed to have 2000 Armata tanks by 2022. They have under 15.
@@Michael-ss7pc That's a shame
Its what we tell you slave boy.
Almost died laughing watching this
Happy to see so many have such a smug sense of humor about war in Europe. You won’t be laughing when it escalates to nuclear war.
Will you continue laughing when Russia has the backing of North Korea, China and Iran as well? If Europe cannot count on US help, then it is a sitting duck.
But I will laugh every day it doesn't happen.Whats the point of conquering iradiated waste-land?
If RU conquered Ukraine, would they repopulate Chernobyl?
@@galfisher2499boo hoo it is Europes problem
@@Ballz961 ya know, that’s exactly what Americans were saying in the 30’s--and then oops… Japan attacked us, and then, oops… we went to World War. Read a book, you dummy.
The problem was lack of equipment not the equipment itself.
Exactly, I thought that was weird when they said "western weapons were less powerful than expected" A 155mm shell is a 155mm shell, it's just as powerful as you would expect. Giving Ukraine a few hundred vehicles and half a million shells won't win the war for them.
Additionally, US/Western equipment is meant to be used as part of a larger military force that assumes far more air support than Ukraine can manage. If Russia were to try and invade Europe (even without US backing) that wouldn't be the case there. Ukraine has done a great job at limiting the air operations of Russia, but doesn't have what it needs to project force the way European forces would.
And lack of the right type of equipment.
Even the F-16s they shall be getting too late, are the older models from European oeprators, not more modern ones the US has plenty of in storage.
The problem was both.
@@truth959 How so?
The idea that the weaponry sent to Ukraine represent well what NATO would use is quite wrong. NATO would use its aviation and integrate weapons in different strategies that Ukraine cannot implement, and it makes a huge difference.
But would NATO be able to sustain losses in ammunition and units though? The logistical and supply demands would be huge and I'm not so sure we could sustain this for too long. Even certain NATO commentators stated that the US would struggle to pull off the style of combined arms/manoeuvre warfare that was unrealistically demanded of Ukraine this year.
First of all you think Russia is showin their full power? 😂 They arent even trying
By NATO, you mean USA. Europe is not capable of running an air campaign. Their army would prove as incompetent and useless as Russia has proven in the beginning of the invasion.
Russia could do the same. They were literary tipotoing during this war.
Untrue if that were the case Putin would never have had Prigozhin assassinated the head of the Wagner group. Russia is very clearly struggling in this conflict or else it would have ended. @@icjorii
Europe's dependency on America will be it's mistake.
Well not for ww1 annnnnd ww2. The US, it seems to let people get attacked, then come in saying here’s some weapons but in turn you will owe us for the 80 years 😂
That IS funny. What's even funnier is all the Americans that died fighting for your country. But the funniest of all is that you never paid for the 80 years😂😂😂😂😂😂
Not will be but reliance on US is it's mistake.
In November, the Americans will almost certainly elect a criminal and Russian agent to be their president again, and that president has and will actively continue to support Russian attacks on Europe. The obese, stupid Americans are not friends with any Europeans. Each European nation is on its own, and must arm and prepare
@@ClarkyMalarky Lend Lease to the UK, Canada and other allies was free! You are moaning about a post war reconstruction loan at ludicrously low interest rates. You also forgot to mention the $70billion Marshall Plan gift that the UK and others received. Whingeing Pom!
British media banging the drum of war. What a surprise.
Don't worry migrants are taking care of them
Sure lmao
NATO would be correct to assume the US won't be around to help out forever. Isolationism is creeping back as a policy by lots of US politicians. It's just that the US will find it will have vastly reduced leverage after doing so. US Diplomats will start getting the middle finger from all sorts of countries that previously bowed to US demands. Europe best get real about removing the bureaucracy that's hamstringing their weapons manufacturing, and the US better start ramping up for China.
nope you guys only fight your own people in usa and western europe and they tried to advocate for taking my gun rights away in europe so eff them
Bang on, Bro!
bang on mate.. and guess usa would be the first to come to europe to ask for help when china and usa start over tiawan but turning ya back on europe is wrong idea from them
@@dazzer7961 How many times has the USA funded Europe's salvation?
@@dudelebowski8629 Without France you wouldn't even exist.
As a Norwegian I know a lot of polish... Their mindset is never again
the poles really are the go to experts on russia
It should be mindset of all europeans, not only poles and baltic states citizens, if you are rich somebody will envy and come for your riches. Easy to grasp
@@jenifferschmitz8618 Apart from Russians. Sting wrote a song many years ago. If the Russians love their children too.
There are many families in Russia that have lost their children the last 2 years.
Add to that the tradegy in Israel/Palestine. It is mindboggeling how some leaders send thousands to die.
That's funny, because that's Russian mindset too. Ukrainian Nazis tried to exterminate them 80 years ago.
When you put political ideology before common sense, nationalism and religion
delete nationalism and religion
Yes. The truth is that Russia stands no chance against NATO. Russia would be attacked and got "democracy" installed if they had no nukes. Beside that they have oil and gas, they have other valuable resources.
Russia cannot deal with Ukraine properly, that is spoon feed weapons by the west. Poland would be a much harder opponent than Ukraine. Even if Russia is successful, it is silly to believe that US will not get involved or that nukes will be used. The only countries that are in risk are Baltic countries - Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Finland, though Fins are a menace when engaged in war.
Billions of Europeans are falling in dream to become an Australian
It is true that better gear is no guarantee of victory, but in large part the poor success of the Ukrainian counteroffensive was due to other factors. 1) shortages of modern equipment, 2) inadequate training, 3) being postponed too long allowing the Russians to build the fortifications that proved impossible to break through, and last, but not least 4) lack of air support and air supremacy, or even air superiority as the opposite was true with the Russians having it instead.
🧔🏻♂️🧔🏻♂️👩🦰🧔🏻♂️🧔♂️🔫🔑🏹⛏️🏹🪃🛡9⛓️🔖🔖⛓️⛓️💉💉🛼🚥🏍🚁
GOP Blocked it as they did in 1941 when the Nazis threatened Britain & GOP Turned down Churchills please, so she on the right will & destroying democracy , having done in in the USA now threatening Ukraines democracy.
Are you still visiting your psychiatrist? Keeping overestimated your real possibility and underestimated Russians, you will got surprised, Ukraine alone with all support will loose, nothing will stop that, if NATO join to war is going to be WW3 , and nuclear strikes, keep that in mind.
Funny. Didn't according to our media the "ghost of Kiev" and the "goat of Kiev" destroy the Russian air fleet? Where are the hundreds of Ukrainian fighter jets? Why after being so gloriously victorious are they now denying the ground forces any support?
And why is the glorious, victorious Ukrainian army "inadequatly trained"?
Stoltenberg and Merkel have all said clearly that Minsk II was a sham and that they have trained the Ukrainian army since 2014. Why is 9 years of training not enough?
Could it be that our media and regimes are LIARS and that the alternative media and the Russian MOD speak the truth and they really have eliminated TWO Ukrainian armies along with all of Ukrainian ex Soviet military equipment including the entire air force and that the reports that the Ukrainians are so desparate to kidnap even minors and older men from the streets, and now even women, to put them into uniforms and throw them on the front without any training?
@@donzell1945 The consensus among western defense analysts and experts points to the inevitability of a war between Putin's Russia and Nato within the next three to six years if Ukraine loses this war, and by losing I mean fails to liberate their territories and is forced to sue for peace.
Counter to this bleak reality, the western support to Ukraine is dwindling, and it never was adequate to begin with. At this point we are on a trajectory which will lead to the inevitable ruzzian victory over Ukraine, with the war to follow, unless NATO steps in and becomes a direct party to this conflict.
In other words, the west will be in a war against Putin unless they radically and quickly step up their military and financial aid to Ukraine. I'm not talking about millions here, I'm talking about billions of US dollars every month.
All those migrants in Europe Im sure will be more than willing to fight for their new countries lol.
give us your new mexicans
@@yberaithey’re getting deported to Columbia sorry 😂
They are .
@@adwaitnaravane5285sure 😂😂😂😂😂
thats my plan!
Romania and Poland were never part of the USSR. The whole validity of this video went up in flames when you said that. How is it possible to make such a huge mistake?
They were member of Warsaw Pact and although independent countries on paper where on reality the Soviets were in control.
@@XIIItanrelevant.... Poland and Romania were separate countries NOT part of ussr. Like yugoslavia there for dynamic were totally different.
and the soviets could have easily taken Romania but they did not, they had a mutual understanding and similar traditions. I am not sold on this video.
at first 01:30 it is said Romania and Poland territories were part of the old Russian Empire, not the USSR. did you get it wrong from the video, or are you manipulating?
The Russian empire was a separate entity than the ussr. It basically just had a tiny bit of Romania and the majority of Poland with all of the USSR’s borders.
One day, and I'm not sure how I admit, we all will have to find a way to solve the problems with news. It cant go on like this anymore. They can simply lie and lie and lie.
Ukraine didn’t get “cutting edge” weapons, rather they got second tier or de-rated ones.
No cutting-edge, but still better than the average Russian weapons.
@@user-wd8wx5md5z all the same
Got the same ones we carried in Iraq.
@@user-wd8wx5md5z and you know this how? Mass media said so? poor guy
@@Unknown_Web_Userthere literally videos and pictures Russia and Ukraine are using old weapons some from ww2
Whys is this even a discussion? We can't attack Russia through fear of nuclear retaliation but they can attack NATO, who also have nukes? Either the Nukes are a problem or they are not, which is it?
I seriously doubt nukes matter. NATO will not use them first and I seriously Russia would. IMO nukes are only public opinion scare.
It's not. The media as always have blown everything out of proportion to create fear and panic. They're spreading dangerous lies..
@@jacekpliszka5326 not public opinion but they ensure a country will never be fully destroyed or invaded (as in Russia will not become another Iraq or Germany in ww2). it might also be a possibility for Russia to use nukes on non-Nato countries but it's not very likely.
@@jacekpliszka5326 nato would use them if russia were winning so it wouldnt make sense for russia to attack nato anyway
we do not know who has better ANTINUKE defense. If Nato has secret new technology "radars" and "antimissile weapons" placed all over the world, and if the Russian Secret Service fails to obtain this information, then NATO can win a nuclear war because no or less nukes will fall on its soil. there is ALWAYS way to outsmart and defeat the enemy. so do not underestimate russia either
Nah Europe is not loosing to a guy who can’t even invade Ukraine
Am i the only one contemplating that overreliance on technology might be similar to frances over reliance on the maginot line?
I say this as an American, after the wars in Iraq, Afgan and all over, this is probably the smartest comment on I unironically have seen on RUclips. That is the danger of a major continental war or world war. Reliance on technology can be a death nail because technologies you become dependent on can become obsolete overnight in something as competitive as a large scale war, never mind one side purposely abandoning technologies(ie a digital grid) to gain an advantage on a 'superior' technological opponent. From Afghanistan to Vietnam, you can feel over confident when winning a quick battle and a war (iraq, shock and awe) and lose the long wars because of jungle fighters and cave dwellers over a war of attrition. Technological advantages matter less as a war goes on, see America in Vietnam or Afganistan, Germany vs Soviet Union in WW2 and so on.
@LewtenantZen Wtf you are talking about. French lost 74k soldiers and 240k wounded, with more than 1,5mil POW just in the initial invasion alone.
cringe
Yeah overreliance on tech in general is a bad idea one emp and anything electrical is toast
@FantomMisfit yea there's a reason militaries shield equipment from emp events.
I'm a *lot* more worried about the internal threat that has been imported into Europe than I am about Russia.
Will Russia get rid of all your 'undesirables' once they've conquered Europe?
Really! Which internal threat are you speaking of?
@@yellow1one The one that's going around yelling "From the river to the sea"
@@incurableromantic4006 Ok. But what is the threat you believe those men, women, and children pose to you/Europe?
@@yellow1one Half a million children abused by grooming gangs. Stabbings almost daily. Teachers in hiding for violating sharia. More of them fighting for ISIS than for our army. Whole swaths of the country totally unrecognizable. Terrorism alerts now reported as casually as weather forecasts. Jewish people afraid to go out on the streets. Our own culture being cancelled to appease them. Mass intimidation in public spaces.
You want more?
Romania was never a part of Russian Empire. Astonishing lack of knowledge in school level of history.
I think people are comparing todays Russia with the 80s USSR. These are very different countries, to include the amount of soldiers they would have on hand to conduct military operations.
I have a really hard time seeing Russian Soldiers rolling through western Europe. I dont think they have the capabilities to do so.
As for NATO, they do have the integrated combined arms warfare, but the amount of war stocks have been allowed to shrink compared to what was on hand in the 80s.
Drone warfare is a huge thing, countries should be concentrating on anti-drone tech to counter drone swarms.
NATO was made for the USSR. No more USSR, yet still NATO 🤔
Bro this is a plot US wants Europe vs Russia in order to save its economy.
Not even that, Russia invading Europe is like punching your best client. Europe feeds Russia’s economy and even though its hostile to Russia, Russia still does trade with Europe in the hundreds of billions every year
Russia never had any intention of invading Europe. It was Europe that always wanted to invade Russia in order to capture its resources.
Hahahahaaaaa
Why are the number of tanks even seriously considered when it was already proven that tank on tank engagements have become very uncommon on the battlefield? A more realistic comparison would be in terms of Air Power which has proved to be one of if not the most decisive aspect of modern warfare.
It also depends on anti-aircraft systems quality. Excellent AA can annihilate any possibility of using aviation at battlefield (except drones)
When was it proven? If there is a conflict between Russia/EU( or NATO), and then possibly China and the US are pulled in, it will look nothing like any of the conflicts that have occurred in the twenty-first century so far.
@@dunnohow2live997 Yes, which is why SEAD operations are important.
AFAIK Tank on tank engagements were never the biggest thing anyway, that's a myth. E.g. In ww2 they were generally infantry support with a smattering of upgunned tanks for when they needed to meet other tanks.
@FallNorth i think it was a quite big thing in desert storm no?
As an American my southern border is more important than ukraines
Exactly, that is the reason why Ukraine has struggled so much due to these naive views.
There is nothing to be concerned about for regular people, only corrupt politicians should
Exactly, Putin is not interested in fighting NATO, he is only intrested in taking down the corrupt politicians and what they done for the East!
He doesn't want to goto war with Germany, Italy, UK, France and even Finland, he only wants NATO to not have U.S intervention due to the Russpphobia from losing Alaska!
That's apart of the deal.
Russia is going to win honestly. Easily
I cannot understand why Britain is is getting so involved with the ukrainan problem when they are people over here who is finding it hard to survive daily.
Germany, the UK and France mentioned. It is really a bit funny, that the latest NATO member Finland has in its war time troops and reserves roughly as many trained soldiers as Germany, the UK and France combined... No, actually you must add Italy to the three to get even.
That's disgraceful Finland population is only 5 million
Findland hasn’t fought in 100 years. Stop overestimating Findland. The last time Russia and Findland fought, they lost 9 percent of their land
@@kingwata1 A nation of 180 million failed to conquer a country of 3,5 million. But my point is that the armies of the big European countries are ridiculously small, not that the Finnish Defense Forces were extremely strong.
not really, they fought the soviets off and then later on lost territory to the soviet army, so ukranian, belarusian, baltic, polish, kasachic etc troops combines with the russians. Remember Russia isnt the soviet union, its only half that population which is old, sick and with a low life expectency. The european states should be able to beat back Russia and work towards that. We cant rely on the Americans to save the continent again. The capabilities are there, the money, the people, the tech. Its just that everyone here needs to wake df up and prepare for a war in a few years. Its doable@@kingwata1
these countries are a joke
All we can do is try ❤ wish us the best
" Compelling reasons "
The Russian Empire did not include Romania. It was Finland and Moldova.
Also, do not forget Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan as well as all the 'stans. They used to be part of the Empire.
those poor countries with arabs that trow rocks yes very scary compared to nato
For some reason they don't consider us as russian opposite. We also don't like Russia as they have destroyed Azerbaijan for 200 years
@@elmarmammadov8349 yeah we all know Azeri used to launch rockets into space 500 years ago before those pesky Russians woke you up from opioid induced fever 😂
@@elmarmammadov8349 do you really know the history well , boy ... in what way Russia destroyed you
@@AndrewKoff I can write whole book about it. In short: In 1804 invaded Azerbaijan and from that time on took all natural wealth. Mainly Baku oil. Banned mother language from schools, to make people forget origin. In 1918 invaded again and created Armenia in Yeravan. In 1937 killed all enlightening people. Deported people from own cities to cental asia and moved Armenians there. In 1991 killed innocent people in streets: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_January . In 1994 helped Armenia to invade Azerbaijan and took all golds from Kabajar (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sotk_gold_mine#After_2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war). And still trying to do something here.
I wonder what could go wrong if almost 50 european countries started militarising and building massive armies right next to eachother :) . It seems these days we have loads of ''smart'' people but fewer and fewer wise people.
No need to wonder, their brains were replaced by media long time ago, just accept this fact and try to survive in this madness, among the masses of brainwashed idiots.
Some might get greedy and take other peoples pie. Haha i see the point.
germans are re arming watch out poland
We should have a combined EU military.
@@adwaitnaravane5285 It would save you all so much money in the long run. Your combined military would be much more efficient and likely as strong as the US' military after 5-10 years of reorganizing.
I would rather listen to Russian propaganda because at least they don't try to make it subtle like Western ones
This is a sobering wake up call for Western Europe. Let’s hope our political leaders are listening.
Whenever commentators talk about defence in the UK they always talk about the army. A land war in Europe should be defended primarily by central European powers (Poland has already taken on this mantle). The UK is a maritime power and we should prioritise the Royal Navy with an additional emphasis on deployable air power.
You are right this is true however our military standards are slacking
Our navy might be smaller than before but its well trained with a lot of real world experience and it's also technically advanced two air craft carriers a third being built also the most devastating battle ship ever made, nuclear submarines anything as great as the Americans can build. People also forget about these key features like we and the Americans are the only true blue water navy whereas we can put our forces anywhere around the world and keep them supplied in feul, weapons and fed think Afghanistan and Iraq two wars thousands of miles apart oh and of course the Falklands 8000 miles in the South Atlantic rough seas. Russia on on the other hand had trouble supplying their troops by road next door to Russia! Better food, better logistics, better medical care, better military equipment, better training, better reconicense (MI6, GCHQ), better navy, better Air force. Russia could not win against the UK or the UK and EU. 🇬🇧🤝👍
Правильно. Отсидитесь за проливом, как обычно, а полякам набьют морду как всегда 👊💥🤕
@@shihtzu291Успокаиваете себя пропагандой, жалкие островетяне. Ваше "сила" - блеф, и всегда была токовой. Ваш остров уже окружён ядерными "Посейдонами", стоит только👑 Русскому Императору разозлится, и ваш остров станет пустынным архипелагом 💥
What navy?
Poland is the only country that is taking stuff seriously, the rest of Europe are slill in sleep mode
Poland speedrunning another betrayal from his allies WW2 style. Some never learn
It is these Poles who dream of great Poland again. Neither Germany nor Russia will accept that. We have already seen tensions rise between Poland and Germany after Poland's claims for ww2 war reparations have been made several times this year. It was about: 1 trillion Euro in damages. The Poles need the money for all the weapons they are buying. It will be expensive for the Polish taxpayers with all the new weapons.
You are talking about Prime Minister Tusk and his new old government. There are suspicions that he is a former STASI agent codenamed Oskar. Poles have always fought on the side of NATO, but they may be betrayed by the current government, which was elected in a questionable way.@@189Blake
Because Poland knows no one will save them
not only Poland, also the Baltic countries and Finland. The Russians will not attack Finland, they remember how they were humiliated there. But the Baltic countries are most likely under attack
Also why are tanks the only metric of strength here? LOL
If putin never attack poland or nato, will you keep playing this video?
I don’t know where to start, the outfit of this reporter or the wild imaginary scenario that Russia will attack NATO.
They ask Europeans to pay for the war US/UK have started.
The weapon systems worked famously. The lack of quantity in our stockpiles is the problem
Reliance on GPS handicapped a lot of NATO guided munitions, given the level of electronic warfare Russia engages in.
US hypersonic famously failed
The WESTERN COWARDICE towards Hitl... I mean Putler is infuriating!!
Half a million Ukrainians have died. Russia is winning you fool. It's not equipment they need they need men.
Do you have any evidence that the weapons systems have been successful? I am asking a serious question not trolling. All my research online seems to suggest the Russian weaoons are mire advanced
STOP PEOPLE!! WE ALL NEED TO LIVE IN PEACE!!😭😭😭💔💔💔
NATO clearly doesn't want to. And think of all the poor people working in the military industrial sector.
A 71 year old waiting for decades to invade is a great idea
EX-KGB Putin wants to rebuild the "soviet union", FACT
One does not simply launch a counter offensive without air supremacy.
Hence the suggestion Ukraine can win this one is a bit of a joke
Which would mean that NAFO would never launch any offensives since their air assets would be swatted down like a fly
@@RNA0ROGER Russia also is failing to achieve air superiority. Both countries have fairly capable air defense systems; while both also lack modern aircraft.
@@elijah4685Russia is a tier 1 military and they have vastly more aircraft than Ukraine. Some of which are modern
@@RNA0ROGER tier 1 no longer. this war has devolved into something comparable to corrupt arab armies fighting one another. yea, iran might have had the f14, and the ukrainians have the m1 abrams, but doing better than either of those countries means you're barely tier 3
America also knows, no matter the president, that their biggest trade partner so far is and will be Europe, so yes they might ignore Ukraine. But im extremely sceptical towards the idea of US leaving Europe to Russia. No superpower with military bases in Europe would want the whole cold war era again.
Yeah I don’t think people fully grasp the complexity of American thought around NATO and Europe
i feel like it depends on the president a lot
@@mharley3791Especially when this US thought relies on a brain splitted into a right brain and left brain that can no longer communicate.
Wrong, The top five purchasers of U.S. goods exports in 2022 were: Canada ($356.5 billion), Mexico ($324.3 billion), China ($150.4 billion), Japan ($80.2 billion), and the United Kingdom ($76.2 billion). Everything that Europe sells to the US we can get at better price points elsewhere. Europe is on it's own sooner or later.
NATO is a military alliance and only the President can declare ware or deploy forces.@@HXRRVISH
Suggesting that a reduction of personnel and tanks produced by the UK means a weaker military, is a gross misunderstanding of modern warfare
I was expecting to see the comments full of war hawks regurgitating propaganda, and I am very pleasantly surprised to see the world is onto their tricks now.
A crazy world, even more crazier. Something to look forward to, I think not.
Crazy world it is if all got along
War is what happens when U-kraine is busy waiting for other planes.
Definitely if you live in Britain. Humiliated government, humiliated military and BS journalism. Not much to look forward to economically. Self-inflicted hardship. The world is now laughing at you - the looters.
I’m happy I’m American. Long live America 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💪🏻
@kingof206 Since you are so happy, that you decided to tell the world about it, could you please elaborate on your disclosure and tell us more specifically ‐ what are you so happy about and also what is your IQ, please.
We have planes, Ukraine doesn't, its not a fair comparison!
And the West sent Ukraine scraps and hand-me downs - plus we did not give Ukraine the yields they asked for. Ukraine only had moderate success and is currently suffering because the West did not step up + several US congressmen were compromised by Russian intel.
Ukraine has a air force and Russia does not even have air superiority it is contested
@@nickg7015 has better fighter planes than us you dmb boi 😂
@@icjorii are you saying russias are better
@@icjorii then how have they not won the air battle then?
NATO should enter Ukraine and create a defensive line from Kyiv down to Odessa and that would make a safety zone of Western Ukraine . This would allow Ukraine to secure a place to receive goods and weapons , set up manufacturing and protect the refugees from the occupied areas . Also stop Russia from taking all of Ukraine which will seriously threaten NATO countries . I don't understand why NATO is so hung up on a signed membership when they refused to let Ukraine in way before the war or separatist movement started and Russia winning would be a real threat to existing NATO borders .
Even when Hitler occupied Austria and has been given Czechoslovakia, most in the west believed he will stop right there. Britain was completely unprepared as was France and the rest of Europe
I don't think it's down to the UK to fight a ground war with our tanks in continental Europe, and we're highly unlikely to fight a ground war with tanks on UK soil anytime soon, so I'm not surprised our tank numbers are that low. It's just priorities.
It's obvious that you know nothing about history like WWII when a madman decided he wanted to take over the world. What happened to the UK the last time a person like that existed. The UK at the time Hitler came to power thought the same way you are now and what happened. Maybe learn about the Battle of Britain. Look at pictures of what happened to London during that time.
Priorities change.
@@TonyM540 "Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Sad people will have to repeat history because of ignorance.
Yup, the UK (being an island country) is primarily an aeronaval power rather than a land power.
We need more men and equipment. In the current climate, even if nothing at all ever happens, it'd be sensible to have it. Plus being an island means we can pick and choose where we help if any major conflict breaks out, that's the other benefit. You are correct in that we could invest in our naval and air assets again instead, but we need to be prepared either way.
The British army yes is professional but considering how small it is… it’s an absolute joke
Lol. I'm more scared of the teletubbies invading
Russia can't even beat Ukraine, so why should Europe worry? Europe could soon be very big, with lots of oil and gas.
When you spoke about the vulnerability of the Baltics and Poland there was no mention of the strength and reach of NATO Air and Naval forces in the region.
Of course he didn't, that doesn't instill enough fear in people.
Whilst those would tip the balance in our favour quite a bit, I don't think we could keep up with the logistical and supply challenges that such a war would demand.
How many Typhoons could the UK provide for defence? How quickly and easily could we replace them?
Yankees figting Russia directly? Unless you want to be next Ukraine. If Yanks fight Russia this is gona be their last cowboy war. Before Yanks move in close proximity to Russia forces they always call to make sure there are no Russian force, Wagner in Syria. Rusiia gave green light to US. It was merecenaries
Russia does not have air superiority over Ukraine and the Ukraine does not have much of a air force .
Can you imagine Russia fighting NATO's air force even without the US .
@@TalentSpotter83 Why just the UK? You have massive economies outside of the UK. You have massive industrial capability if you would just do it. You have the knowledge. You have the money. The only thing you lack is the will power and the drive to do it because you don't want to believe that Russia is threatening you because it would ruin your meaningless life schedule. Ukraine has shown how truly weak the EU, including the UK, has become. You people literally have no military. You have a little basically for show but you have no true scale military. You thought having "free healthcare" was the best thing ever whilst you've compromised and given way your nations by not having any real defense budget. You have been spoiled by peace for too long and have forgotten the threat that has been arming and preparing to kill you since the 90's. Mind you, they've been arming and building all of their stuff with YOUR money that you bought their oil and gas with. We have the abilities and knowledge to restart our industries and production lines. We just have to accept that we are going to lose some luxury items, temporarily, to make it all happen. Are you willing to do that or not?
Its worth noting that the underwhelming Ukranian gains in the offensive was attempted with no air superiority (something that the west would never do, but Ukraine was forced to), and agaisnt a very well prepared defense in deph. Even the tactics that they would've been using agiasnt the defensive line had air superiority in mind. NATO has no problem with air superiority, and its pretty impossible to evaluate how the west would fare by comparing them to Ukraine while we have been withholding crucial equipment that Ukraine needs to win this war
Fr, so tired of the bs.. send them literally hundreds of f16s f18s a10s and f15s ffs
@@kevincorrigan1754Like you don't send Ukraine a lot of planes.
@@kevincorrigan1754 the issue is we can't send the pilots and mechanics alongside the planes, so we have to rely on the few existing Ukrainian pilots and train them to newer planes. Also the logistical chain for keeping the planes combat ready after each sorty is complicated and the reason why the west sends few planes.
Russia also is not using air force
Why? Because they are easy targets for air defence
European air force is worthless and so is Russian
Exactly.
"You can only destroy tanks with tanks." - That's why Ukraine is still on the map.
Russia vs Europe would be same level of power disproportion as Japan vs US in world war 2.. So they would be fighting lost war from get-go.
Russians could get strong suprise push, but we have enough to stop them and if european economy militarizes we would get as strong as USA. We have simmilar GDP (as US) it's just that right now it's not allocated to military.
The only problem is unity among EU countries. That's why I think we need further consolidation and unification of our nations.
Absolutely. EU-army ASAP. There is no need for us to have 27 separate militaries. Naturally the different formations will "belong" to their respective states, but a unified command-structure would be great. More importantly, we wouldn't have 27 countries buying stuff at various prices and from various producers all over. Standardization will boost our militaries immensely.
"Quantity has a quality in its own"
yeah, we will see for how long... :) They don't have the infinitive amount of resources to make quantity infinitive, it is finite and that limit is closer day by day. After that limit, there is a collapse.
@@Hury209 Sadlt not if they are producing 2100 tanks in 12 months. Whats need is for the manufacturing hubs to be taken out.
@@rufanuf1 Russia had a 10 times larger airforce and 10 times more artillery than Ukraine as well as a 5 times larger armored force, yet they can’t even gain more than a couple kilometers after a 2 month offensive on Avdiivka.
Despite its numerical advantage, Russia is in a stalemate against Ukraine. And the small amounts of western equipment Ukraine has gotten has been essential to Ukraine matching Russia head to head. And Ukraine was only given several hundred pieces of western heavy equipment, most of which is stuff like Leopard 2A4 and Bradley M2A2 which are both over 30 years old. Ukraine is not getting the newest western kit like M1A2 Sep V3 or Leopard 2A7 or Bradley M2A4
@@rufanuf1Russia is producing about 20 tanks per month. And they have use older optics and electronic equipment due to a lack of western parts. Before sanctions, Russia was using French commercially available thermals on their tank optics as well as many American electronics in missiles and tanks and aircraft
Most of Russia’s tanks going in to service now are old T-62M tanks, T-72B tanks as well as some T-80’s and T-55’s. These tanks would be completely obsolete against a Nato army like Poland
tell that to the 4th largest military that only lasted 3 days of land warfare lol
No matter what happens the military industrial complex is going to be happy.
I guess Putin loves the military industrial complex
It will all be pointless when civilization is in ruins and most of humanity has been fried with fire, radiation, disease and starvation. How can one be happy after such a "win"?
Fr business is booming
Putin wants to rebuild the old empire 🤔
"Western equipment is not as powerful as thought"
This isn't a true statement. The equipment has proven it's power against the Russian equivalent and continues to do so, but it has become evident that drones limit their use until upgrades are made. The other issue is not enough was provided and it was expected to work without air support (something NATO would never do), in difficult terrain that it was not designed for.
I think it's easy to underestimate how much stronger the support from other nations in Europe would be in Ukraine if there was war within their own borders.
Right now the general populations of those nations are supportive but not passionate.
If their own people were dying in war the fires of passion would grow very strong very fast, and I don't think that effect can be gauged very easily by the current tea time support for Ukraine by average families and formal support for Ukraine by leaders.
It'd be a fire.
@albertkirilov6921 I live in Europe. Norway.
"Do you reckon family life is any better with the conflict going?"
It sounds like you are implying that it's the defenders side that is causing the conflict to keep going.
Russia has no intention of stopping. Fighting back and winning is the shortest least destructive path to ending the conflict, which was your point.
Not fighting back, losing, and letting Russia expand, is the path to create broader and longer conflict.
It also sounds alien to me to evaluate political opinion from the perspective of 'how does it benefit my family'.
How would anyone ever fight for their nations freedom in history if that was the line of thinking?
Our view here is that the west isn't instigating, Russia is currently like a criminal who is shooting at a person under cover and we are trying to hand the poor guy ammo to fight back.
People opposed to that are saying
"Hey you should both try to step back."
while people trying to give the gun *correctly know* that the attacker has no intention of stopping shooting no matter what.
Give an inch and a mile will be taken is the accurate assessment of the situation.
--
Your reference to Socialism and Capitalism strikes me as a very American like view.
I've always lived with 3-4 left parties and 3-4 right parties.
The republicans are slightly to the right of our most right leaning party while the democrats are to the center over here.
The thing is that here, if the rightmost party does something crazy they lose votes to the other parties on the right cause conservative voters don't need to sell their soul to the left.
They have other conservative options.
Same for the left.
By only having two parties in America it leads to people more often than is natural 'seeing their own parties views' since there are no options. The party forming the people rather than the opposite.
The two main reasons we have multiple parties here is that we have a voting system were we vote for parties in bunch.
All votes are then tallied and if the green party gets 6% of the votes they get 6% of parliament.
In America you would need the green party to get 40-ish % of the votes in 6 % of the congressional districts since you vote for every candidates rather than for party.
This makes it so that it's practically impossible for smaller parties to get representation because in spite of having 6% of the vote in every state they never get a candidate.
I think conservatives as well as liberals could benefit from more parties in the US as they would see that they don't have as much support for their causes as it appears they have and that they need to fully convince the population of their views rather than enact policies before the public is truly convinced.
--
@albertkirilov6921 Socialists from the east were to a large extent dictatorships and the unhappiness stems from that.
Free nations tend to choose some of the socialist policies but not all out ban the market.
It's always been a part of American propaganda that the Socialism rather than the Dictatorship was the problem.
Very transparent to me since we've always had socialist parties getting some of their policies through and it didn't destroy our nation, the problem is authoritarianism and in some cases totalitarianism.
The free nations where the people can elect socialists sometimes and not at other times we simply don't vote for socialist party next election if it goes abit too far.
More than 50% in my country would just let the russians pass so they can go where they actually want to go. People here dont care about if the rich people who have power here are pro usa or pro russia. I say let them pass so they can go to uk and america. Their real enemies....
@@cyberneticbutterfly8506 I agree on Ukraine, but I will note that your idea that "we've always had socialist parties getting policies through and it didn't destroy our nation" is predicated on short-sightedness. Socialism is barely 100 years old. That's nothing at a state level. Things like dysgenic fertility can utterly destroy nations and even entire species, but often require decades to actually manifest, and centuries to take full effect. Norway is very lucky in this sense, but take one look at modern-day Sweden, and its fertility trends, and it is easy to appreciate how seemingly-benign policies can have unintended, and potentially catastrophic, long-term consequences. And of course Sweden not being an isolated example, but one out of many, corroborates this point further.
@@VVayVVard I agree that any policy might have unforeseen long term consequences.
Why would socialism be special here if it's unforeseen?
Wouldn't capitalist policies also have unforeseeable consequences?
Isn't that the whole reason why people are critical of it these days?
I am uncertain what you are saying with the Swedish fertility example.
British Germanic interest have the most money to make they will play both sides and CASH in LARGE
No one would be surprised if America pulled out but they are smart enough to realise that Europe and the rest of the world would no longer be listening/trading with them the same.
The US isn't smart enough.
@@colabear1529 Todays world is shaped by the global trade and the dependency on other nations, trading would no doubt occur in some degree even during a full scale war.
Americans are stupid enough to think that the rest of the world doesn't matter.
@@colabear1529 100%
It would probably be the opposite: When you're in a war, you do not exactly care where your weapons and ammunition comes from, just that you get it. The first part of WW2 and the majority of WW1, the US was considered an ally to various degrees to various countries, but did little more than sell weapons, ammunition, loans, and other products to Europe.
The U.S. will probably do the same until forced to put troops on the ground. Vietnam, Korea, and the middle east are still very fresh on memories here, fighting for countries that had no meaningful effect on us, with what was basically the US vs the USSR and Russia. Also, this is what Europe has done historically, squabble over pointless things every 10 minutes.
Like mentioned in the video, Europe isn't really arming either. That isn't a way to sell an ally, an ally who complained loudly and was laughed at when they brought up the fact that basically no one was meeting their NATO requirements, that you're preparing. That's telling your ally that you're depending on them to die for you. The same ally talked about not relying on your now enemy too, with the pipeline, but that was also ignored.
The only exception here is Poland. Poland throws a wrench in these predictions as when was the last time a country asked to host the US military and its weapons, including nuclear weapons, while reaming and building its military?
Hello from Romania 🇷🇴. We re latinized thracians colonized by the Roman's. I hope my country will stay independent free. Russians took a Moldovan land rusified our indigenous Moldovan people. Hungarians took transylvania but we got it back 🙏. I wish the best for my Slavic neighbors but we Romanians wants to be free and live in peace. Thanks for your video.
Romania was never part of Russian territory. It was just a satellite country.
Some things don't add up: NATO promised to deliver 1.000.000 artillery shells to Ukraine in 2024 but only managed to allocate 300.000. On the other side, Rheinmetall claims they have produced 350.000 in 2023 and will produce twice as much in 2024. And Rheinmetall only represents like 5% of NATO armament capabilities. So... why don't these numbers add up?
Well google tells me the whole global market for 155 mm ammunition was around 1 million pieces in 2021 (USD 3.37 Bn). Now US factories & Rheinmetall & others have more than doubled their production capasity.
But more importantly you have your own facts quite wrong. It was EU alone who promised to deliver 1 Mn pieces in all calibers and by March 2024, not in 2024. And by the end of Nov it'd delivered 480,000, not 300,000.
There are also other nations as customers than Ukraine. So the global production of shells can't go all to them. Some kind of majority of the new production certainly, but again not all of it, as all the countries prepare more also for themselves.
the western propaganda never adds up
Lawl, how a little north Korea, sell 1 000 000 art shells to Russia in a month? A miracle?
Numbers add up , what they teel you is happening or what is happening perhaps may not cohere .
The West always lie to bolster themselves. It's called propaganda. But unfortunately the west no longer has the industrial capacity to make their propaganda come to life. Much of the industrial capacity US and the west had in WW2 no longer exists for the West thanks to China. Russia has the advantage of keeping much of their industrial capacity and they still had a lot of stock built up from the Soviet Union Era.
If world leaders were serious about hurting or stopping Russia, they would become oil independent of Russia.
I agree. India and Turkey do not agree.
What difference does it make whether you speak Russian or English?)))))
Has US gotten weak that it needs world to stop russia
Cmon US hasnt fallen or are you saying it is
The West are working towards it.
@@southparklionAnd what about China 😂😂
Note there is a recruitment crisis in the UK. We just dont pay enough to our forces.
Following the politics for last 15 years Russia will only attack if you cross red line. NATO was insisting on crossing on Red line after line 😢
The western weapons systems were designed to work in conjunction with air power. Ukraine does not have anywhere near the kind of air power that NATO has. NATO’s air power and training will multiply the of those Western weapon systems.
How long air power lasts against air defences which are so numerous that you will be seeing fighter jets getting shot down every day just like how tanks are getting destroyed left and right with FPV drones and shells. How long will the air power remain before it turns back to same trench warfare we see in Ukraine? You can't manufacture enough shells to keep up with war. Forget about building aircrafts at this rate. This is not middle east warfare.
One other thing to consider is that the whole NATO military doctrine is designed around overwhelming airpower, which would not work if NATO's adversary had capability to shoot down aircraft, including stealth, and sink the aircraft carriers.
Fair enough but how would NATO react to a limited war in for example Estonia or Latvia ? There is likely to be some NATO countries ie Poland and Germany that are for going to war but then there will be other countries that want to stay out of it. So when it comes down to it yes NATO has air superiority….on paper. Let’s not even go there….the time to defeat putin is here and now. Give Ukraine the weapons and means to do it.
Western Weapons were designed to fight third world peasants.
@@Nick_S0 No, it was designed around the US babysitting these countries.
In the mean time european leaders struggle to decide how many genders there are
Didn't realize Europe was this weak
I'd also point out how much Poland has tooled up lately.
This needs to be a documentary series.
ASAP
1.5x
I wonder how many people in the governments of Germany and Poland have a vested interest in multi billion dollar defence contracts?
Less than the number paying extra gas and fuel prices, who also vote, so maybe the reason we support Ukraine is because Russia is in the wrong, and unlike the US we don't do everything based on profits?
@m1leswilliams profits? Who sends you the guns and money? We're profiting? Maybe Lockheed is but yall haven't paid your dues. That means America is paying for your lunch. Not a solid profitable business model hey genious. Weird a capitalist society looks at cost vs benefit. We're paying for your defense? Not if we can vote about it. My breakfast tastes the same if Poland ceases to exist. Make sense? We do not care about your derelict military. That is your fault. Don't try to shame me because I would worry about my son before yours. When will you worry about your own? Is it my duty to pay with money? Blood? Kiss my American ass. The way Europe whines, putin gains support. You think the cuck leftists that you all laude is your salvation? It's red blood red necks and trumpers that are the fearsome warriors... your cuck lefties dye their hair pink and need safe spaces. They will carry signs at protests but cannot run across a battlefield with an m60. Cheer for your cucks. We "deplorables" care not about European children. We will not shed blood for your derelict countries. Time to start buying weapons. Training real men to war for you. Stop counting on American money. We're so greedy? Youre a greedy little cuckold punk. 😂
Many
Why dont you keep your dumbass baseless conspiracy theories to yourself, how about that?
Euros are guzzling more Russian fuel than prior to the war, and South Korea has sent more artillery to Ukraine than the entirety of the EU. EU economies also aren't in war production. That should give you a sense of how much the EU and Nato view Russia as a "threat".
South Korea doesn't send weapons, what are you talking about? It's part of the problem, by the way, I don't understand them
Nonsense
Zip it, vatnik
Yes. The Russian fuel is going via India who take a profit and then sell it to Europe! You could not make it up.
Russians are just a bunch of corrupt idiots running around.
Quality journalism
All this hypothesis have no base ... Nobody threatened Europe, money going in the military could serve for housing, hospitals and schools ..
UN without the USA? Does that make sense to anyone?
Yes
Yes let’s leave the UN 😍 we already don’t recognize the criminal courts so why not.
According to western media Russia is the 2nd strongest army in Ukraine. So Europe has nothing to worry about, right?
that’s a fallacy. even before the war, Ukraine had the largest military in Europe by quite a bit in terms of armour and shells. if our army can’t stop the russians, i just hope NATO’s nuclear forces would be enough of a deterrent because a conventional war in the Baltics would be ugly. It doesn’t even matter if ultimately russia loses, because the real victims would be the citizens that would have their lives destroyed. there’s not much “strategic depth”, which means reaction would have to be immediate. same problem Israel has, they don’t have the geography to fall back before mustering a defence, unlike Ukraine. Will this reaction be quick and strong enough to stop russians before they inflict significant damage? i certainly hope so.
@@EugeneYunak Dude, the largest military but full of weapons that were from the 60s and soviet that couldnt even be resupplied because Ukraine never even had an own military industry. Shells literally from WW2. Ukraine even had crisis because they didnt have enough Ak 47 for its 150k professional soldiers once the war began. Stop eating russian propaganda.
Nothing to worry about now - but if russia is going all naZi and ramps up military prodution to 200% we may have a problem in 5-10 years if we don't respond. However - if your name is dimitri then I would say you have a lot to worry about. Problem with naZi regimes is that anyone could be the next victim.
@@anssiluomaranta34aren't the Ukraine soldiers supporting Nazis, and having swastika tattoos? Didn't Canada give standing ovation to a Nazi Ukrainian just because he fought Russia in ww2?
"According to western media Russia is the 2nd strongest army in Ukraine. So Europe has nothing to worry about, right?"
The funny thing about this is the fact that the US News website, in their nation rankings, they raised the Russian military to the #1 spot a few months ago.
So get ready for nuclear war you mean?
This is like watching the traitors when the whole table turns on a faithful
That's the best laugh I've had in a long time😂
nice
Same here
it is dangerous to underestimate your enemies, better prepare than be sorry, better be aggressive than be a victim.
putin will come for you