@Binkov Nah, more like biased assumptions and ramblings here.
2 месяца назад+6
i think we are not watching the same map xd because ukraine is not losing that much ground,they are gaining more then they are losing specially in kursk so nice try rusky ;) that vodka is strong
That’s because you have no idea what you’re talking about this is a war of attribution please go look up what that is it might help you not sound so clueless in the future
@@christophe5756 +1 for hypothetical and historical crew! So many idiots profess to love the idea of war and conflict until it's literally their arse in the trench.
@@christophe5756 I miss the days when Binkov felt honest in his analyses. Also, a real war clearly shows how idioticly simple his previous analyses were.
@@MichaelWhite-c2z also russia took back about 30% of the territory they lost in kursk and they arent losing any more sq km there, plus the second invasion ukraine started north of the first one failed the day it started so, def not worth the gamble
The 72nd Mechanized Brigade was completely destroyed in Vuglahdar. The 72nd was one of the most experienced brigades in the Ukrainian Army. Zelensky could have saved this brigade and issued an order to retreat from the town. But Zelensky was in New York at the time begging for money speaking to an empty UN General Assembly and did not want any bad PR while he was on his begging tour, so he refused to allow the brigade to evacuate, even though it was becoming apparent that the soldiers from the brigade were being surrounded. 800 prisoners were taken and 700 men were killed while trying to evacuate the city through the Russian lines. Only a handful managed to make it to the Ukrainian lines. Zelensky sacrificed these 1500 men just so there was no bad PR while he was in New York trying to convince Biden and Trump of his ridiculous "Victory Plan". The western media are being silent about this because the blood of at least 700 Ukrainian troops are on the hands of Zelensky because of Ukrainian propaganda.
Because theres nothing to talk about. The drunk Russian commanders have lost a lot within the past 2 years just to capture that town. Suddenly the Russian commanders became sober and realized that frontal attacks wont work after 2 years and now they decided to a flank attack which brought them success.
In retrospect seeing the media say Russia is out of ammo 9 times in a week or that they are using full auto assault shovels( or that Putin is dying of cancer for the 95th time ) is even more amusing when the reality on the front speaks for itself.
So true . People in comment section would call you bot too . But the thing is you need to see both sides of a map to find out your location. I mean if Russia is out of ammo , how come it’s always Zelensky who always begs for more . Critical thinking is important .
Finally someone acknowledged that capturing dense urban and industrial area, that has been fortified for the past 10 years, is not the same like like capturing flat empty steppe with a handful of villages. Bravo!
People are on full on denial. Folk are not pro-Russian at all just because we say the war is not going in favor of the Ukrainian side. You need to look at the war objectively even despite a personal bias. Then you can move to other things.
@@happycarnivore.. People with "Military backgrounds" tend to be some of the biggest liars in the media. Although privately they probably do see the reality.
@@markienlYou writing that comment has TOTALLY turned the tables for Ukraine just now! They TOTALLY are no longer losing thanks to your comment! Great work!
So let me get this straight. Russians have a million casualties, Ukrainian lost only 31 thousand, Ukrainian army is 1.5 million men, and yet Russia has x3 x5 men advantage? Something does not add up. Can someone tell to Zelenskyy?
Yah your numbers are made up that’s the problem (you created a straw man). The ruSSians don’t have a million casualties, it’s about half that (killed and wounded). 31,000 is the number of Ukrainian soldiers that the Ukrainian government can confirm killed. Obviously Ukraines casualties (killed and wounded) is higher, but according to all data significantly lower than ruSSias (because that is how being the side doing most of the attacking and the ruSSian tactics works). Ukraine does not have 1.5 million men in the army it has under 1 million total personnel. As for ruSSia their military is x5 bigger than that. The ratio you should be interested in is the number of frontline personnel at any given time in that regard ruSSia does have a x3 advantage over Ukraine.
@@maryanchabursky9148 If you think Ukraine lost only 31,000 people in this two years of war you’re delusional and brainwashed to the core or you came to know about this war just yesterday.. Even hardcore NAFO fanboys who has been cheering for Ukraine since Feb 2022 knows that the president Zelensky lied about the casualties.. No both Ukraine and Russia didn’t lost millions of soldiers on each sides but they will soon reach the numbers of the war isn’t stopped .
even if im pro ukrainian, these numbers are insane. the ukrainian military is about 800,000 strong, and ukraine only lost about 80k to nearly 120,000 russians.
The problem is that russia have superior air force superior artillery superior fire power , more advanced drones and missiles more tanks more troops more of every thing also russia can hit any target inside of ukraine will ukraine have limited areas Both are on the offense non of them is fully defensive Russia air force is leveling entire cities to the ground The russian artillery is stronger and more precise than even before Russian mlrs are extremely accurate now Russian balistic missiles are hitting ukrainian forces left and right And with all of that there is people that still believe russia is losing more 😂
not all territories are equal, a square kilometer of very heavily fortified cities Severodonetsk, Lysychans'k, Soledar, Bahkmut, Avdiivka, Vuhledar is not the same as 1 square kilometer of open fields that is impossible to defend or hold. Once this line of cities fall, next realistic line of defense is the Dnipro river, and between here and there are more than hundred thousand square kilometers of area. According to chatgpt, 45% of Ukraine is on east side of Dnipro or about 270000 square kilometers. That is area bigger than whole UK
Not to mention the kursk region is russian territory hence russia can use home guards and conscripts as support/logistics troops at the very least. As they say, 80% of the armed forces are support troops, so this stretches the ukraine manpower disadvantage to russia further on the military front
To be fair, the BBC actually counts the Russian losses by confirmed dead (unlike every other source) and that statement is actually correct. About 60k is indeed "tens of thousands." Ukraine should simply be hundreds of thousands.
@@ROBOSapiens7 obviously that Russia has multiply advantage in artillery shells, rockets, plane bombs, drones, vehicles and etc. but ofc Ukraine losses are smaller)) funny logic tbh.
Binkov :- Russian losses in Bakhmut :- Tens of thousands of men Ukrainian during the failed counter offensive:- Ukraine lost some men ..lol😂 The shameless biases of the video .
Nah he just bothered to look at literally any data that was not the ruSSian ministry of war. It was well established that Ukraine suffered surprisingly low losses during the summer offensive. It is also well established that Bakhmut was one of the most reckless and bloodiest assaults of the war. Maybe if ruSSia didn’t use such wasteful tactics they wouldn’t suffer such high losses when on the offensive (they have improved this since Bakhmut btw).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Ukraine lost a lot of people last counter offensive... Bahkmut was a disaster for Ukraine, they lost way more than was being mentioned. The problem is Ukraine can't afford to publicly say this haha
@@maryanchabursky9148 giga cope. ukraine lost a ton of people trying to hold bakhmut and there is pic of the losses counted where its up to 50 vehicles that the ukrainains lost just to take one village.
@@gmeme9252 have any evidence (you don’t because that’s BS)? If Bakhmut was a disaster for Ukraine is must have been an apocalypse for ruSSia who suffered much higher losses than Ukraine in Bakhmut (that’s a fact, cope and seethe).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Bakhmut was taken by Wagners not Russian military and they have different tactics.. the losses they took during the capture of Bakhmut do not rest upon Russian military at all.
Yea. But that means worse news for Ukraine. they are on a worse attiriton situation and their only grace was talking about their territorial gains. Russia saved their units retreating back in 2022.
@@Sevastous 🤣🤣🤣 ok captain opposite, please tell me more things that are the inverse of the truth (ruSSian units both relatively and in real terms take higher losses than Ukraine according to all data and basic military logic).
You might be late to learn about something but they wouldn't draw an alternative different map, it would diverge too much with time, the idea that they would do that is absurd
This is a reality check video on a pro Ukranian channel for the Ukraine supporters. None of this is a surprise for those who have been following both sides and staying neutral.
Funny how it's ok to be pro ukraine or neutral butt not pro Russia. Funny how that's always true no matter what is happening at any point in history. It's almost as if you make decisions based on race.
@@yaelz6043 I think it's changing. I'm a 50 year old Aussie dude and I have helped Rybar get the truth out for about a year now. When I first started, it was weird for them to see my surname helping out Now, it's just normal.
@@Shannon-Smith you will revert back to your old ways the moment Russia has a government that doesn't hand over all its resources to the west. You're just smart enough to see how much you gain from plundering the place.
“Every time they lie a debt to the truth is incurred. And sooner or later the truth will come to collect its due.” -Valery Legasov And here we are. You can only ignore reality for so long until it hits you like a truck.
@JohnDorian-j7x Yes I do. I remember reading it in The Times I think that the Russians were running out of equipment and ammunition and were fighting with shovels. It was probably 2022 when the propaganda was ridiculous which is why I remember it. I also remember being told just before that that the Russians were about to run out of missiles.
@@icekidtvshorts4504 NO. That's incorrect, but commonly mistaken. It came from a UK defense ministry statement/update that was then written about by the BCC which specifically stated that Russians were being sent out to fight often 'unsupported' to attack hardened position with only: rifles and shovels. It had nothing to do with "ammunition shortage". It was always "rifles and shovels" or "firearms and shovels" since the first report... but the pro-rus crowd chose to take the statement about rifles and shovels and removed the firearms part to create a "meme" that was then propagated across all the pro-rus propaganda channels in a campaign to help rouse support for the pro-rus narrative (i.e., that the west was too stuhpihd and biased to understand anything that Russia did and that all their supposed "reports" were inherently wrong/ridiculous/biased) whilst discrediting supposed 'objectivity' of the West/western/mainstream media. Unfortunately, it caught on to the point where the pro-rus crowd has no idea where the original statement actually came from or what it even meant... unfortunately. And the situation that resulted in the original report has since changed massively and multiple times on each side since then. However, the pro-rus propaganda department doesn't care and is acting like the situation on the ground in feb/mar 2022 is exactly the same situation as on the ground today (2.5 years later) in Sept 2024 (or any other times in between them).
@@maryanchabursky9148 когда-нибудь обязательно научишься отличать Курск от города в Курской области. Как дела в Авдеевке, Мелитополе, Мариуполе, Лисичанске, Артемовске?
@@Avdeev77 нехай буде Курсщина чи КурНР .Напевно там справи погані бо там роССія. Як там Херсон, Ізюм, Купянськ, Лиман, та Суджа? Ну що взяли Київ за два дні, Одесу, Харків, Запоріжжя, Миколаїв, та інші міста Окопували? Смішно бачити як ви з руйнування Авдіївки та Бахмута пишається якщо ці міста порівнювати із вашими намірам. Хотіли Київ 5 міліон за 3 дні а отримали Бахмут 70 тисяч за 10 місяців.
Taking those potato fields has had a political ripple effect across Ukraine’s allies and has been important for Ukrainian morale. The effects of an offensive are not only measured in the type of territory they take or the quantity. Pokrovsk will likely fall in the next few months based on the current pace of advance. Had Ukraine not invaded Kursk perhaps they could have delayed Russia taking the city by 2-3 months. Invading Kursk will likely have more benefits than holding Pokrovsk for a few more months.
"hey i think russia is winning heres wh-" SHADDUP RUSSIAN BOT "so did Ukraine recaptu-" HOW MUCH PUTIN PAY YOU "okay so why is Ukraine territory shrin-" LA LA LA IM NOT LISTENING TO RUSSIAN BOT
@@afaha2214 “hey ruSSia is suffering very high losses for minor gains” SHUT UP WE TOOK A TOWNWITH A POPULATION UNDER 1,000 UKRAINE WILL SOON FALL. “So has ruSSia achieved any of its states strategic objectives” UKRAINE IS RUNNING OUT OF MEN (for the 10th time or something) “Why can’t ruSSia make much progress in a country that is right next door” SECOND ARMY IN THE WORLD “Why is ruSSia stealing Ukrainian children and denying Ukrainians exist” ITS ALL NATOS FAULT RUSSIA IS DEFENDING ITSELF.
It's attrition warfare. Neither side is going to suddenly get a massive breakout and capture the other's capital and leaders and force a surrender. So all that matters is who can keep going longer in the meat grinder at current loss rates for both sides.
@@Mcsqw That's exactly what it was. Russia has been crippled for most of a decade. With that flank secured, the focus can go to the Pacific and dealing with the Chinese threat.
@@McsqwYou play stupid game, you win stupid prize. If i get what're you saying, then the game is to trade poor Ukrainian lads for a chance to inflict any damage to Russia. In which case the only side benefitting from this are NATO. And thus a stupid prize is to follow interests of NATO to blead out in a mathematically unwinnable conflict when they were able to achieve peace without additional losses of people and territory two years ago. Yeah, sounds about right.
@@devansa125it'll probably be longer than that since the wet season is about to set in. That'll be a lot more difficult to handle for an invading force.
Toretsk is gonna fall faster, russian are already inaide of the city. Povrovsk front is probably gonna re active after the ground will be stable enough after the fall mud, so i guess february
Diverting manpower to kursk while suffering man power shortages in the frontline is what the ukrainian high command gambled on, from a previous video i mentioned that this kursk gambit may pay off politically and strategically. But i think its becoming too obvious that the risk taken was not worth it, best case scenario is that russia is slowed down enough for another year or two, worse case would be a total collapse of logistics and thus the front…
You mean, worst case scenario is Russia opening up another front in Sumy because Ukraine's has been weaken in that area while attacking to Pokrovsk. Now Ukraine have to choose which city to save.
@@SelfProclaimedEmperorFailed? If their goal was to liberate all of Kursk area than yes, but I doubt that. I mean, as far as I know, they only counterattacked in one direction
I think it Kursk was worth it. Now it’s a problem for Russia. If it doesn’t try to take it back Ukraine has territory to trade if there is a peace deal. If it does it will require substantial manpower and equipment. Some of the units used by Ukraine that binkov says are good ones have skills in manoeuvre warfare etc. those skills won’t be that useful sitting in a trench under constant fire.
Watching this just 3 weeks later and surprised how obsolete maps already are. In just 3 weeks Russians captured Uhledar and several smaller cities, control 60% of Toretsk, surrounded Selidovo, recaptured almost half of the original Ukrainian gains in Kursk, closing on Seversk and first Russian units already entering Mirnograd.
Yes, but pro-AFU wants to keep believing that they are grinding russian soldiers by thousands each days passing while still losing all their (strategically non important) defenses. At some point they think the russian army will collapse due to menpower lacking and that the AFU will just have to steamroll them back to the border. I'm pretty sure the Germans were in the same mindset after the 1943 Kursk failed counter offensive and that the most delusionnal between them kept this spirit very alive when the russians were entering the suburbs of Berlin 2 years after. Oh, wait, I nearly forgot: Russia can't win this war, of course! Because the only reason why Russia won WWII was exclusively because of US shipping of equipment. And since they don't have any this time, and that Ukraine gets all the equipment, well this can only mean that Ukraine is inbound for a complete victory.😄
@@realWARPIGThe last time someone sent troops to Russia they numbered three million. Someone in Washington thought it would be a great idea to send a few thousand to take Kursk.
If we go by your comment, it would sound like Russia is gaining massive territory. But then we look at any of the dozens of maps and along Russia's main axis of advance, there has been only about 7-8km deep advance since last month. Like 1 month ago, Vulhedar was already surrounded on 3 sides... Now they finally controlled its entirety. Russians already had a foothold in Toretsk last month yet they still only got 60% of a fairly small city. Also Russia didn't recapture half or Ukrainian gains in Kursk in 3 weeks. It took about a month and a half, or 6 weeks, twice the time you claimed it took. The misleading framing continues. The map isn't obsolete considering if one zoom out to see the entirety of just the Donbas, you won't see any significant change, let alone relative to the entirety of Ukraine.
Perhaps but Russia even by their own accounts are taking heavy losses for their gains. Much is true in history for offensive side going against set defenses, layered with western aid and modern warfare it wouldn’t be shocking that Russians sustaining higher casualties even with winning the war
I remember his country comparison videos were he would often describe Russian equipment (e.g. tanks) as less capable than their western counterparts. Hilarious, especially in hindsight.
@@gta1kevUkranie had nothing to do, they are just a puppet. Remember how "they" killed their own intelligence head which wanted to make peace with Russians. And how set up all the Bucha psy op to boycott all the negotiations. Anglos really said "BIG NO, until the last Ukranian".
Apparently they have no effect on “old men, woman, and children”. Ghost of Kyiv must be single handedly holding the line since Ukraine has “run out of men” a dozen times since last year lol.
If most of the deaths are caused by artillery rounds and Ukraine is running out of be them , the casualties on the Ukranian side should correspond to that . Russia can't be moving slow while also opting for mass attacks . Quite obviously the Russians are not benchmarking their progress on territorial gains . They are looking to destroy the Ukrainian military . That's also why the Kursk chapter lacks any strategic caluculus that's satisfactory enough to vindicate the diversion of prime troops and equipment in a season of scarcity .
Ukraine is actually increasing its artillery supply by producing them locally now while still getting them from the west. Furthermore, unlike Russian artillery, Ukraine artillery like HIMARS always hits its target.
@@SelfProclaimedEmperorMust be hard to run factories without power. Bro, Zelenskyy isn’t the 17th Avenger like the telly says, so step outside and touch grass and lay off the copium. It’s actually embarrassing. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a Russian bot - that’s also cope.
Obviously territorial losses and gains aren't equal, losing a major logistic hub and a well fortified chokepoint can lead to major cascading losses while losing random space no where near the front will not. I don't think the push into Kursk was bad, but it's too little too late. You will not persuade Russia by inserting a toke of forces in the middle of no where, at the worst they can just ignore your push or slow it down with an equal token of troops. It need to be a major effort, something that actually threaten their current front to be even worth it. They really need to stop doing this 'show off' push and aim at something with real tactical value.
I agree but I think the reason Ukraine made the offensive is to show there western backers and western people that they have a chance so that they keep supporting Ukraine
Another offense was alternative less from an efficiency standpoint. Offensive forces are wasted in an area where bombs are used in high numbers. You can't counter an offensive with another offensive if you don't have the necessary force. It's logical that the trenches are understaffed. If a bomb falls, it's preferable to only lose two instead of five men. What's Ukraine supposed to do against those bombs other than attacking the ammunition stores?
What the fuck are you talking about? The invasion into kursk had tons of positive outcomes for Ukraine and they didn't do it so that they would stop russia or some shit. That would never have worked. Also the idea that putin can just ignore an invasion into his country especially if it isn't stopping is absolutely braindead. No he cannot. I'm not even going to argue that because the most basic knowledge of warfare should allow you to see why. Also the idea that if you just deploy an equal amount of troops means you win the engagement is also extremely dumb. In war the determining factor for a winner isn't just "who has more people to throw at them". Russia has 500k while Ukraine has 300k though it has recently increased. That argument also assumes that there won't be any repercussions on eastern part of Ukraine if they redeploy troops to kursk which is again extremely detached from reality. Honestly it's fascinating that this comment got so many likes while understanding so little about actual modern or overall warfare.
Ukraine was trying to fix Russian forces and force the Russians to divert resources and manpower from other fronts. This didn't happen as Pokrovsk, Siversk, Niu-York, and Vuhledar front are deteriorating. Ukraine miscalculated and now they're suffering massive material losses and manpower losses in Kursk.
well it was a good try , the problem is that instead of writing it off , the Ukrainian leadership will insist in keeping fighting there , thus immobilizing good troops in an overall thinning front
@@MINDPLUNK Ukraine was on a steadily losing trend , they had to try something they had to trumpet positive news both for internal and external consumption , they had to have something to trade in any potential peace talks , sure it turned to be a very bad idea but the really big mistake is to double down on it rather than get out and claim that was the intend all along
How did this "analyst" completely missed the elephant in the room? The day Kursk Offensive started, the Eastern frontlines collapse. Seriously? Every minute, 60 seconds pass in Donbass. Together Ukranians could have stopped this. but then they decided to go to Kursk and take selfies in front of some babushka's potato garden
@@Intel-i7-9700k damn that means they directed their soldeirs froom those eastern frontlines which later collapsed in order to do a offensive on kursk which didnt got succesfull. eastern frontlines were actually more important than kursk though
This war was always unwinnable for Ukraine. As much as people might not want to hear this. All the Western support has done is prolong the inevitable. Russia can keep up this pace for years. Can Ukraine and the west?
@@calebman9999 yes Ukraine can and has no choice but to. You are naive and ignorant, Ukraine can “win” just at a high price. However there are no good alternatives.
Any time the Ukrainian Army seizes territory its almost always undefended. Their invasion into Kursk Oblast was like driving full speed into empty fields, and the second they encountered serious resistance their gains halted immediatly. And now the Russian Army in the area is already attmpted an operational encirclement and has seized back 30-40% of the areas captured. Russian victories in Donbass are over heavily defended entrenched battle-scared towns. In almost every instance the Ukranian Army loses direct confronations. I don't even blame the Ukranian government for this situation. All of their useful combat units are to few in number and they have no way of building offensive-cabaple units without sagnificant western aid that that has been dwindeling. Ukraine's economy is decimated, their government is entirely dependent on western aid and their existence continues just because Putin doesn't want to disturb his domestic audience more than he already has. He could have announced general mobilization and probably taken Kiev, Kharkiv, Chernihiv and other cities very easily for a simple reason, the Russian Federation is almost completely self-reliant in all major fields. Putin is playing the long-game, he knows that as the years drag on, attention to Ukraine will dwindle (because westerners think this shit is COD and when "cool headcam videos" aren't on their feeds they won't give a shit) and the Ukrainian Army will become increasingly a demoralized mob of conscripts who watch as wealthy Ukrainians flee and bribe their way out of service.
@DomLab-g2n can you please tell me what's wrong ? The ukrainiens failed all their counteroffensive. The karkhiv and the kherson offensive where against an disorganised enemy and they didn't have a lot of resistance.
@@DomLab-g2n thank for you laying out an argument about what i said. Actually argue against my points instead of just using lame boring ass insults that makes you look like a dipshit
A lot of people just don't want war. There's even more on the side of russia. I don't feel any type of way against someone who leaves. I DO have an issue with countires invading other people
Meanwhile just Romania reported 100 per day sucesfully registring after illigaly crossing border. It is at least 35k/year. And it is one of 5 western borders. Plus those who lost in river or mountains, plus those who were captured on attempt, plus those who prefer to hide, plus those who crossed the frontline or to Belarus, plus those who bought freedom from corrupt officials.
@@Triumph633 put one zero behind that number Croatian coast is full of thus modest and humble people Who peacfully cruise our streets in bmw 7 .merc s class while we are paying their rent and health insurance
Kursk can't be viewed as a gain, since Ukraine are not holding onto it. Whereas Russian gains in Ukraine are being held and Ukraine can't counter attack to take their land back. That's a huge difference.
the fact that Russia now has to defend its border now is an enormous victory in and of itself. Russia was free to run behind a magic forcefield with their border and not defend it meaning nearly all resources went into fighting in Ukraine. That enormous benefit is now gone and they have to defend their border like Ukraine has had to... Putin is also showing he cannot defend Russia... He cares more about Ukrainian land than defending Russia itself.
He's always been pro-Russian and Kremlin-trolls / bots always spam that everything is pro Ukrainian as it's part of the disinformation campaign. Because it implies their pro-russian fantasy propaganda version on a video is not only not neutral but pro-ukranian. Thus giving the impression that "a balanced somewhere in the middle" view is even more into some fantasy pro-kremlin disinformation position. Of course you already know that, your comment was literally part of how the kremlin disinformation operation functions. You're the "look both sides hehehehhehe so clearly this is neutral".
What people on the pro-Ukraine side don't want to realise is that Ukraine never had a chance in a protracted war against Russia. You can claim all you want of millions upon millions of enemy casualties in comparison to you. These claims are always lies! Manpower, Industry, Military, none of these metrics favour Ukraine. The end result would always be the same, the question was how soon. Our intervention only lengthened the time for the ultimate defeat of Ukraine, not stopped it.
That's a fallacy that Putin is falling for and it's used by russian propaganda to dissuade people who believe in it from supporting Ukraine. This has costed him >3:1 ratio of casualties visually confirmed (~6:1 on Pokrovsk axis visually confirmed) and wiped out most of his modern weapons, causing his army to be most probably incapable of completely defeating Ukraine and definitely unable to stand a chance against NATO for the next few dozen years. Russia does NOT have infinite resources, not one country does, that's why huge powers failed in i.e. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Ukraine.
@@maciekGTR The Afghanistan (both soviet and American) and Iraq Wars are radically different than Ukraine. Those were counter-insurgency wars, where the powers didn't lose because of lack of resources but mainly because of public perception/ failing to build a stable state. The Ukraine war is a conventional war with defined frontlines where two countries are battling it out with their whole industries and manpowers (again, not the case in Iraq/Afghanistan, in case of the americans they were fought almost simultaneously) Not saying that Russia has won this war already, but it is true that Ukraine is in a very bad position considering the war they found themselves in unfortunately.
@@facundomouly9446 the argument still works because even if Putin somehow managed to achieve the "inevitable", as some suggest, victory, he can't even nudge NATO right afterwards, since his army would be obliterated within less than a year (unless either side uses nukes and the world ends xd), and the Ukrainian army and it's guns wouldn't disappear overnight and he would have to fight a counterinsurgency campaign probably even worse than my examples. So if anything is certain it's that either side can't achieve complete victory. Ukraine's collapse isn't inevitable, and even if it was, armed resistance would consume so many resources and people it would prevent Putin from ever achieving his next step which is to attack rest of Eastern Europe
@@maciekGTR The problem is the Russian army will not be obliterated, in-fact it is only growing stronger both tactically and in experience, the "obliteration" is just the west coping through propaganda because they are failing to release the truth that Ukraine is and will lose this war.
I wish there was Russian bots, or atleast as many as Ukrainian bots, but I saw a study on bots on X where it showed something like 90% of bots are Ukrainian bots
@@Ricky-oc4xc That study was done by UNI of Adelaide, Australia and was the only study (that I know of) since then because it proved that 90% of pro UA twits are from UA bot accounts. Not that 90% of accounts were bots, just that 90% of twits were pushed by UA bots. This being said, from my personal experience online, is it even a surprise that side backed by USA can afford more bots?
@@Jollingo I wouldn't classify bot accounts as straight up programs (bots) but a real person operating from multiple of "fake" accounts. Good way to spot them on YT is checking out their join date - most have one past Feb 2022 and a generic username user|random|numbers|and|letters. This being said, I'm a proud RU bot, Ork, Putler lover etc (Because it is impossible I'm a real person against NATO and US bs). I was also under hacker attacks 8 times, with most recent one being just last month. Got my address leaked once and got two death threats. Had 150euros spent in a game (one of first hackings) but luckily WarGaming refunded me.
@@rinkashikachi really? Because just 2 years before Gorbachev dissolved the Soviet Union, a Top Analyst at the CIA in a report said that the Soviet Union had atleast 20 years left
Was it a mistake to extend your supply line into enemy territory allowing them to engage using untapped reserves that were unavailable for political reason... until your invasion...
Kursk was necessary for MORALE reasons, and to convince the West to keep sending arms. It never made sense from a tactical standpoint especially given that it unlocking of conscript reserves like you mention. But the West was losing interest (which this rekindled), and Ukraine was about to lose Robotyne, so they launched Kursk to distract from the loss of Robotyne & rekindle western support. In that sense, it was a complete PR & Morale success even if it strategically was foolish ("victory" with the Kursk offensive would be worse than a gradual defeat, because the more Russian territory they take, the more overstretched they get, the more Russians they have to spend millions to take care of, etc.). Ukrainians AND Westerners never mentioned the fact Ukraine lost all Robotyne and their previous counteroffensive was now all for nothing (including the huge casualties from it that caused all western defense agencies to classify Ukrainian casualties and stop publishing them, like the Pentagon which hasn't publicly stated any figures since then). What's hilarious about the Kursk offensive is that Ukraine has already had to spend $2 million on taking care of the few thousand Russians living there and will have to spend about $10 million a year to take care of those occupied Russians, which they may very well have needed that money for all the Pokrovsk refugees (50,000 internal refugees from Pokrovsk is gonna cost them about $300 million a year).
@@TexanIndependence the men and the equipment could have been used for something better. I bet none of those who took part in that mission will come home alive
@@Black_Heritage Ukraine sent their best elite units, so I'd take your bet, probably half will manage to evacuate, the rest will be a mix of POW+KIA/WIA. That's assuming Russia does a decent pincer and cuts off their retreat, if it doesn't do that Ukraine might only lose 1/4th of them, but that's still 1/4th of their best elite units AND keeping them tied up fighting Russian conscripts (who were unable to be used in the war for domestic political reasons until the Kursk invasion, as Russia didn't allow conscripts to go to Ukraine but DOES allow them to defend Russian soil). The REAL question for me is, will the conscripts who saw action against Russia in Kursk, suddenly be used to push BEYOND the Ukraine border, once Kursk is retaken? If so, that may be a disaster for Ukraine. It's kind of like those conscripts have popped their combat cherry (no longer could anyone say Putin is sending "inexperienced conscripts" if he had them keep pushing beyond the border). If so, then Ukraine may have just unlocked an extra 50,000 troops for Russia or however many conscripts take part (Russia has anywhere from 600,000 to 800,000 conscripts though many will not take part in the op). And many of the conscripts themselves may volunteer to keep fighting, since they already started, maybe they lost a friend to the enemy, and now they aren't as scared of direct combat since they've been in it.
No, the Russians are still incredibly stupid, and it shows in every report. And we know why Ukraine is loosing ground. It's because the west is twiddling its thumbs.
@@Alexander_Kale This outcome was inevitable from the start, and only a matter of time. The aid you want to send to Ukraine only prolongs the war and costs more lives. The only way Ukraine wins is direct NATO involvement, which nobody should want.
@@Legarosss ok thanks. I was just about to ask how trustworthy this channel is. Even by the title its clearly to see. Why even ask that question? Every noob can see that (Why are Ukraine’s defenses failing?), and knows why is that. Does he want to talk to idio..s normally?
I don't support either side of this conflict. Yet if I bring up that Ukraine is consistently losing ground and troop at a higher rate per capita they call me a russian bot
There's a saying in Russian, a folklore wisdom: " He who shouts the loudest " get this thief" is a thief himself. " . They are doing it as an organization, and are diverging on others(genuine people) what they are doing themselves...
Thank you for pointing out it's eating up both sides slowly and steadily. Western media and Ukrainian supporters are always talking about Russia is suffering economically and losing men and can't keep this war forever. But they don't see Ukraine will run out of everything before it really starts to hurt Russia.
Economics honestly aren't the problem. Russia has maxed out its economic credit card for the next two decades, meanwhile, the West had been building its colloquially, debt, for a very long time at this point. Both will be in terrible positions by the end. This war will be ultimately be decided on battlefield. The debate to be had is: how pyrrhic of a victory will this be for the Russians?
@@PancakeProduct Russia economically is surprisingly better now than before, even wit additional sanctions. Incase if victory Russia would gain a neutral buffer state in Ukraine against NATO, and gain its industrial and mineral rich eastern provinces. Not to mention the permanent stain on the reputation of the West and its supposed technological and military superiority. Wouldn't be phyrric at all if the Ukranians surrender.
@@Tobi-wt4sh Russia depending on nuclear saber rattling is not a sign of strength my guy. Eastern Ukraine will capitulate but all these events will eventually lead to the balkanization of Russia. The western military industrial complex is making a killing and Ukraine is a cash cow. NATO armaments will continue to flow. Capturing the east is one thing, holding it is completely different.
as a Historian i cant believe how many people mistake skeptical and valid analysis questioning the potential for ukrainian victory as 'pro-russian' or 'kremlin bots'. I did my MA mostly on modern history regarding WW2. The Red Army was notorious for, initially, mistaking correct tactical or strategic (depending on the rank of the 'offender') as 'secret support for fascism' or 'fascists in disguise' aka '5th columnists' who had awaited the german attack and now sought to undermine the soviet response from within. Even if generals were not accused of 'collusion' during Fall Blau, there was a public perception in Germany that 'Fall Blau', and by extension Stalingrad, was the only correct strategic response. Doubting this could only come from secret admiration of the enemy, or support for 'bolshevism'. Pretty much the same '5th columnist' story. I recall the centrist/liberal historians we used for the subject would mostly chalk this up to the hysteria and paranoia inherent in totalitarian regimes. They would of course also point to the circumstance of total war. What has shocked me - even being quite far left and always skeptical of the liberal/bourgeois portrayal of western morality and superiority - is how quickly and naturally this same paranoia has reached the centre of public political opinion, even despite not being in a condition of total war, despite not even really being at war, despite our 'free' media and 'diversity of opinion' etc. Personally, I think this is a consequence of the development/evolution of mass media and its political deployment as a tool of propaganda. At the end of the day we will think as we are told. We are told to support war, so we support war. You dont support the war? Kremlin sympathizer! Both the West and the East is engaged in an 'information war' the likes of which the 40's never even thought possible. We all know the Russians is engaged in this, but few outlets talk about the NATO/EU institutions specifically designed and purposed for the creation of fake news and the utilization of media to bolster political support for foreign policy goals. Namely NATO's 'Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence' (StratCom) based in Riga or GLOBSEC in Bratislava. The European Left group commissioned a report on the subject written and published by two german academic historians. Its freely available if anybody is interested in the subject.
Don't leave out Great Britain. They have had several centuries to prefect their propaganda technics. Why did the British population support Turkey during the Crimean Wars? Were France and England really the good guys in WWI?
@@PeterKoperdan I haven't read the report in more than a year, so you're better off reading it yourself. IF you google 'rhetoric and reality of disinformation in the european union' you will definitely find it. search 'GlOBSEC' and you'll find the parts specifically designed to analyse GLOBSEC activities in Slovakia :) cheers
@@larrycable1948 historians generally dont separate the world into 'good' and 'bad' guys. A monochrome revision of history where we simply switch from lauding anything the west has ever done like liberals do today, and instead to making the west - or Britain in particular - the 'antagonist' of early modern/modern history, is just as analytically and empirically wrong. I find the self-congratulating 'centre' of western historiography very naive in that regard. The 'counter narratives' favoured in many third world countries or in China and Russia are no less irrational and self congratulating, however. China and Russia has a penchant for teaching their school kids how any historical wrong, atrocity or war is due to western imperialism. The supposition being that *they* would never have acted like that, were the roles reversed. The insight here is not to simply switch out your irrational protagonist/antagonist interpretations of history and turn it around, but instead to realize that historical analysis is manipulated to serve the foreign policy goals everywhere, and that we should be skeptical towards the 'official narratives' of any nation including our own of course.
@@gustavalexander8676 In my opinion, most modern historians try to judge history with a modern "morality" that simply didn't exist. I mentioned that Britain had centuries of practice at propoganda and they are pretty good at it. As for their Imperialist tendencies, no worse than most of their contemporaries, and if nothing else, did end most of the African Slave Trade. I'm not only skeptical of "official narratives", I'm skeptical of most historical works since most historians work for the University systems and are by definition, part of the ruling class. If you look at the American Civil War, the original histories were largely written by the losers and gave a false impression of the conflict that has only recently been seriously challenged.
At the end of the day, a smaller country can defend itself against a bigger country for only so long. Eventually over time. the bigger military and economy will overwhelm the smaller country.
@@theWACKIIRAQIdo you seriously think that the West cares? The big thing that occurs is that if the war continues past 2026, Russia will run out of stockpiles, meaning that the Russians will start to lose power projection globally and even inside its own territory following 2026. And if Ukraine wins even better.
Unless the smaller nation is given outside support. Eventually, the bigger nation runs out of tanks and jets and starts having to rely on weapons from the cold war era
@@daaw74If you learned something from the past , the only thing that the Soviet Union and Russia can is mass production . They produce more artillery shells than the US and EU together , you are not beating them by thinking they ran out of weapons .
The objective of an army should be to destroy the opponents army, not capture territory. Russia is destroying Ukraines army, and as a result, defenses are collapsing and territory just coming by itself.😅
not really true, ukraine has only lost about 80 thousand men. of course, russia has a population overmight, and it isn't 1940 anymore, where spamming tanks will win you the war. still, if ukraine gets a good number of f-35s, russia would be pretty screwed.
@@adamelghalmi9771 keep telling yourself that, there's no magic weapon to win the war, it's just the western propaganda to keep Ukraine burning so that it weakens Russia as the west desires
The NAFO side was silent from 2014-2022. There was no reason for them to go pull propaganda until the stalemate was broken by RU's increased material/Air support for the DPR and LPR.
In regards to the eventual siege of Pokrovsk, I don't think we will see much of a grind if Ukraine aren't willing to sacrifice just as many soldiers. Why? Because like you said Russia now has a superiority in basically everything AND they now have access to large FABs that can literally demolish large commie block houses, so there's nowhere to hide. During the siege of Bakhmut you still had a large amount of veterans on the ukrainian side that could easily hold out for months against what was then Wagner troops, however now those veteran brigades are very rare. They're so rare Ukraine had to send the veteran brigade from Vuhledar to plug the holes in the Pokrovsk direction, which has now led to Russia advancing on Vuhledar, and on-top of that they had to deploy four national guard brigades from different parts of the fronts to Pokrovsk aswell. Ukraine clearly has a gigantic issue with manpower if they have resort to these things, so are they actually willing to defend Pokrovsk against superior firepower? Maybe, but judging by the reaction from Ukraine's leadership, they obviously expect this to be very very costly, there's no 5:1 or 3:1 kill ratio anymore.
Also a key point about Backmut is that it was meant to distract Ukraine (more specifically its 6 new assault brigades) and make sure they couldn’t launch a large scale offensive while the Russian army was still in a very bad position (recovering from losses and trying to fix its terrible NCO corps). If Backmut fell earlier the great spring counter offensive might have actually been successful and the war would be completely different by now
@@privatebandana as a Ukrainian it’s both sad and amusing how out of tough with reality your analysis is. No Ukraine doesn’t have a man power problem we have a weapons problem (we have 10 brigades that can’t be deployed due to a lack of equipment). Ukraine has superiority in drones and the general quality of troops (otherwise we would have actually lost). Veterans are no less common than before. You don’t hide in building or even trenches the war has moved into a phase of bunkers that’s why advancing is such a man power drain. There absolutely is a 1:3 kill ratio (otherwise the ruSSians would already be in Pokrovsk).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Brother, your own president has literally said you have a manpower issue, western generals have said you have a manpower issue and your own commander of the military has said you have a manpower issue. It's so bad that Ukraine are forcing Poland to mobilize and train the male refugees that are hiding in polish territory. Veterans ARE less common, that's a fact that has been told by ukrainian troops on the ground. In the Pokrovsk direction they're being told that the men coming in are all newly mobilized that doesn't have the moral or know-how of how to fight, so they're more of a nuisance for the veterans that are on the ground there. And again, Ukraine had to pull their only veteran brigade from Vuhledar to fill the gaps in the Pokrovsk front because they had no other veteran groupings to pull from, and now Vuhledar looks like it's falling.. so if Ukraine had enough veteran groupings to go around, why did they potentially sacrifice Vuhledar? Why didn't they at least send parts of a veteran brigade to defend Vuhledar if there's no issues with veteran manpower? There's zero bunkers on the Pokrovsk front, you literally just made that up. Russia advanced from Prohres to Novohrodivka in ~5 weeks, something Ukraine did not expect, there was no time to build bunkers around that area in such a short amount of time and they took Novohrodivka almost intact which wouldn't have been the case if there were bunkers and massive fortifications there lol. Sitting here lying won't help with anything.
Because ukraine could not reform its army structure and logistics. Territorial battalions are thrown into open fields without any support while all the manpower and equipment goes to newly formed units
Russia doesn’t measure success in territory caught. They measure it in demilitarisation (of NATO) and denazification of Ukraine forces including paid international mercenaries. Where they situate their meatgrinders doesn’t matter to Russia.
@@mithridatesii6925 I mean I am european, and you speak nonsense. Finland lose war. I don't get you really, you just speak some nonsenses from propaganda. Educate yourself first.
@@mithridatesii6925Those countries are laughable now, LGBTQXYZ++++--- who knows what more hubs, full of immigrants which dont give a flying duck for those countries, and weak native people. And Russia doesn't have any reason to attack any of those countries. Unlike country led by nato n a t zz is and smol gib mani kokainski.
@@markienl I'm talking to you. Neutrality is supposed to be the default approach to coverage on wars, otherwise it's just propaganda. You can't force anyone to pick your side. Get over yourself.
The main losers are the Russian and Ukrainian people. Did you see the increases in wealth for the Russian elites involved in military supplies? Substantial to say the least
@@amadeokomnenus1414 so black rock owns no arable land in Ukraine. The only things I’ve seen them putting up investment money into is reconstruction when the war ends. Black rock along with JP Morgan and others hopes to have $15b set aside for reconstruction projects.
@MrJones-yq7wm no, not my show nor my monkeys, but been somewhere and seen enough . You do not know what being in a trench is like while shells are flying all over the place, and these days with drones, i believe it's even more horrific. When your best friend is turned into minced meat from waist up in a split second before your eyes, you start to question everything.
@@lewissmith-t4b The issue is people are mad because the guy in the video said the truth about the reality of this conflict, hence the invitation for them to go check for themselves
@ Yea a lot of the hardcore pro Ukrainian to the point of delusion analysts seem to be rolling over. I honestly always figured Russia was going to take it eventually. The Americans don’t really understand attrition warfare so many of us are interpreting slow gains in territory as strategic failure. Ofc we also fail to understand that taking territory is actually not one of Russia’s primary objectives, one could argue. I wonder if NATO will hold the L or mobilize some eurocucks into the grinder ostensibly (because they are ofc already there unofficially).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Simpletons like you can only think of 1 thing at a time, while people like you were busy celebrating the Kursk offensive the Russians propelled forward towards Pokrovsk. After a few weeks of celebration your mind finally had the capacity to see that Pokrovsk was in a sh*tty situation so now your mind is glued on Pokrovsk city. Meanwhile Russians start encircling Vuhledar, move north of Staromaiorske and Urozhaine, move into Chasiv Yar, 2 km from cutting off the Ukrainians near Oskil river, start retaking Kursk and here you are bragging about Pokrovsk . Your cheap one-liners wno't work on me, probably in 1-2 weeks your idiotic brain will start focusing on Vuhledar meanwhile Russians advance in 10 other places
Kursk was a reasonable gamble for Ukraine to take, but now it's done and nothing's come of it. But what was Ukraine supposed to do? What they did before was have their professional soldiers run from place to place like a fire brigade to stem the Russians, but it only delayed the inevitable fall of these defensive works. Now we see a faster collapse of defenses because you have Ukrainian troops who, by no fault of their own, don't know what they're doing and so are just giving up ground to the Russians. I think the biggest failure of the AFU can be attributed to the abysmal performance of their officers and lack of accountability. If a Russian commander makes a mistake and gets a lot of people killed for nothing, they're fired or rotated, if they're caught stealing from the army and soldiers, they're fired and probably prosecuted. The AFU has very little accountability for such commanders
The problem is Ukraine either doesn’t want to, or straight up can’t, admit they have corruption problems. Zelensky has stated he got rid of all corruption in Ukraine and everyone who claims otherwise is called a traitor
@@yarnickgoovaerts exactly and this attitude leaks into these mid level officers, where they treat their own little areas like they're kings of their own little grid squares and they don't really want to work together. Not to say all the time, the professional army brigades definitely work together better, but now most of them are in Kursk. This is ignoring issues of supplies and industrial capacity to continue the war. Regardless I think a post Ukraine western world is going to be very interesting
@@gabrielseth5142 and let’s not forget many officers are afraid of showing initiative and risking demotion or other forms of punishment if they fail, and the fact that NATO training only focuses on platoon (and occasionally maybe company) level manoeuvres and you get an army that’s (except for a few good officers) incapable of any large scale operations
@@esphilee then why do we have 10 brigades that can’t be deployed due to a lack of equipment? How is it possible to run out of men when we haven’t even started conscripting under 25 yet? The answer is that Ukraine is not running out of men anymore that it ran out of men when ruSSian propaganda claimed this a year and a half ago.
@@Floridaboi-pe3fk I think a pretty large number of the people in this comments section are actually flesh and blood manchildren. The bots like more visible venues like CNN and BBC reports.
About 90% of the casualties (dead and wounded) are due to indirect fire - artillery and bombing. It is not hard to get the losses ratio using the firepower ratios. No wonder why Ukraine is performing forced mobilization, while the Russian have a steady flow of volunteers that are signing professional contracts with the army.
And russia has had massive artillery superiority in the whole war. Bro they were firing 32 times the amount of shells as Ukraine was in the first couple months of the war
@@doublehelix7880 indeed it is quite easy to be completely wrong. Drones play a hushed factor in casualties (no artillery is not inflicting 90% or anything close to that). Also how accurate the artillery fire is matters. Ukraine has an advantage in drones and it’s on the defensive, Ukraine is suffering far fewer losses than ruSSia as a result of this. ruSSia is still performing mobilizing men as is Ukraine. They are just not doing so in the same numbers as they used to. The ruSSia volunteers are signing because they are being offered the equivalent of $200,000 signing bonuses in some parts. Many ruSSin military have been calling for another wave of mobilization for a while due to ruSSias own manpower problems.
@@eliasziad7864 it can't be either or. You can advance quickly because you achieved a breakthrough of the enemies front , by exploiting some new weakness or throwing a lot of bodies at the problem to overwhelm the enemy (example of the latter is soviet rapid advance into Germany in late WW2 where they suffered heavy losses and advanced quickly because they were using their numbers). As well the front can grind to a halt or slow pace if there is high attrition (like in WW1 western front) or if both sides are being too cautious (like in early WW2 western front where Germans and French practically stared at each other for months , or how the allies were advancing through France in 1944, cautesly and slowly, not suffering huge losses, while soviets were taking huge chunks of their territory back using their superior numbers).
Correct, this is Russian attritional warfare doctrine. Don't want to push through and over extend leading to logistical issues, it's why Russia tactically retreated in 2022 because they didn't have the logistics in place.
Go to ground.news/binkov to see through media bias in coverage of Ukraine and Russia. Try Ground News today and get 40% off your subscription.
@@Binkov you are a horrible analyst do you have any military experience at all because it sure doesn’t seem like it
@@Binkov even when your information is correct you almost always come to the wrong conclusion
@Binkov Nah, more like biased assumptions and ramblings here.
i think we are not watching the same map xd because ukraine is not losing that much ground,they are gaining more then they are losing specially in kursk so nice try rusky ;)
that vodka is strong
That’s because you have no idea what you’re talking about this is a war of attribution please go look up what that is it might help you not sound so clueless in the future
I miss the days when the wars you talked about were hypothetical. 💔
@@christophe5756 +1 for hypothetical and historical crew!
So many idiots profess to love the idea of war and conflict until it's literally their arse in the trench.
Emil Cosman channel does.
Military summary channel
Nah, he's a russian propagandist
@@christophe5756 I miss the days when Binkov felt honest in his analyses.
Also, a real war clearly shows how idioticly simple his previous analyses were.
@@aniksamiurrahman6365 So what is not honest in this analysis?
Russia is retreating forward and Ukraine advancing backwards
Ukraine is retreating forward and Ruzzia advancing backwards
@@johndonaldson3619cope harder
@@johndonaldson3619 did you watch the video?
@@johndonaldson3619 You are just backwards yourself
@@Cruz8R You are just BLIND yourself
2 weeks after this video got uploaded, vuhledar has fallen........
Vuhledar fell two days ago and its insane no one in the media is talking about it.
That would mean Russia is winning and they can't have that.
@@MichaelWhite-c2z also russia took back about 30% of the territory they lost in kursk and they arent losing any more sq km there, plus the second invasion ukraine started north of the first one failed the day it started so, def not worth the gamble
Worst trade Russian take here now it's gone
The 72nd Mechanized Brigade was completely destroyed in Vuglahdar. The 72nd was one of the most experienced brigades in the Ukrainian Army.
Zelensky could have saved this brigade and issued an order to retreat from the town.
But Zelensky was in New York at the time begging for money speaking to an empty UN General Assembly and did not want any bad PR while he was on his begging tour, so he refused to allow the brigade to evacuate, even though it was becoming apparent that the soldiers from the brigade were being surrounded.
800 prisoners were taken and 700 men were killed while trying to evacuate the city through the Russian lines. Only a handful managed to make it to the Ukrainian lines.
Zelensky sacrificed these 1500 men just so there was no bad PR while he was in New York trying to convince Biden and Trump of his ridiculous "Victory Plan".
The western media are being silent about this because the blood of at least 700 Ukrainian troops are on the hands of Zelensky because of Ukrainian propaganda.
Because theres nothing to talk about. The drunk Russian commanders have lost a lot within the past 2 years just to capture that town. Suddenly the Russian commanders became sober and realized that frontal attacks wont work after 2 years and now they decided to a flank attack which brought them success.
In retrospect seeing the media say Russia is out of ammo 9 times in a week or that they are using full auto assault shovels( or that Putin is dying of cancer for the 95th time ) is even more amusing when the reality on the front speaks for itself.
So true . People in comment section would call you bot too . But the thing is you need to see both sides of a map to find out your location. I mean if Russia is out of ammo , how come it’s always Zelensky who always begs for more . Critical thinking is important .
What's the most recent media report claiming Russia is out of ammo you saw and where did you see it?
@@orion3253 The Sun
@@prabalmohanty3018 I dislike that British tabloid.
Ahh the sun , the most unbiased media platform in the world.@@prabalmohanty3018
Finally someone acknowledged that capturing dense urban and industrial area, that has been fortified for the past 10 years, is not the same like like capturing flat empty steppe with a handful of villages. Bravo!
People are on full on denial. Folk are not pro-Russian at all just because we say the war is not going in favor of the Ukrainian side. You need to look at the war objectively even despite a personal bias. Then you can move to other things.
Yep, anyone with a military background can objectively see the reality of the conflict.
Любой , кто умеет думать , может увидеть реальность конфликта . К сожалению таких не так уж и много. @@happycarnivore..
Folk are pro Russian because they are, in fact, against NATO.
At least in South America
@@happycarnivore.. People with "Military backgrounds" tend to be some of the biggest liars in the media. Although privately they probably do see the reality.
I've said that Russia would win in the long term the entire time.
But Ukraine is winning in the battlefield of Reddit, they’ve also launched a new counteroffensive in the RUclips front.
Ukraine is a proxy war between Reddit and 4Chan.
@@lamchunting856 ah you are likely one of the people whom thougt russia was gonna win in two weeks. Womp womp womp here we are 2 years later.
The 69th NAFO desktop brigade just captured new territory on the hellscapes of Commissar Binkov comment section. 😂
@@markienlYou writing that comment has TOTALLY turned the tables for Ukraine just now! They TOTALLY are no longer losing thanks to your comment! Great work!
@@markienlMost Reddit person I’ve ever seen lmfao.
fun fact General Syrskyi is an ethnic Russian, his parents and brother still live there :P
Syrsky is Russia’s best agent.
Must be awkward for the guy
забавный факт все украинские военачальники и российские учились в одних и тех же военных училищах
So let me get this straight. Russians have a million casualties, Ukrainian lost only 31 thousand, Ukrainian army is 1.5 million men, and yet Russia has x3 x5 men advantage?
Something does not add up. Can someone tell to Zelenskyy?
Yah your numbers are made up that’s the problem (you created a straw man). The ruSSians don’t have a million casualties, it’s about half that (killed and wounded). 31,000 is the number of Ukrainian soldiers that the Ukrainian government can confirm killed. Obviously Ukraines casualties (killed and wounded) is higher, but according to all data significantly lower than ruSSias (because that is how being the side doing most of the attacking and the ruSSian tactics works).
Ukraine does not have 1.5 million men in the army it has under 1 million total personnel. As for ruSSia their military is x5 bigger than that. The ratio you should be interested in is the number of frontline personnel at any given time in that regard ruSSia does have a x3 advantage over Ukraine.
At least youre admiting Ukraine is lying. Its a start
@@maryanchabursky9148
If you think Ukraine lost only 31,000 people in this two years of war you’re delusional and brainwashed to the core or you came to know about this war just yesterday..
Even hardcore NAFO fanboys who has been cheering for Ukraine since Feb 2022 knows that the president Zelensky lied about the casualties..
No both Ukraine and Russia didn’t lost millions of soldiers on each sides but they will soon reach the numbers of the war isn’t stopped .
He’s busy powdering his nose.
even if im pro ukrainian, these numbers are insane. the ukrainian military is about 800,000 strong, and ukraine only lost about 80k to nearly 120,000 russians.
"ten of thousands troops of russia where losed"
"few ucranian troops where losed"
there you can see where is the narration going
G O Y D A
O
Y
D
A
ps: sign on contract bonuses have been raised for prospective patriots
The problem is that russia have superior air force superior artillery superior fire power , more advanced drones and missiles more tanks more troops more of every thing also russia can hit any target inside of ukraine will ukraine have limited areas
Both are on the offense non of them is fully defensive
Russia air force is leveling entire cities to the ground
The russian artillery is stronger and more precise than even before
Russian mlrs are extremely accurate now
Russian balistic missiles are hitting ukrainian forces left and right
And with all of that there is people that still believe russia is losing more 😂
not all territories are equal, a square kilometer of very heavily fortified cities Severodonetsk, Lysychans'k, Soledar, Bahkmut, Avdiivka, Vuhledar is not the same as 1 square kilometer of open fields that is impossible to defend or hold.
Once this line of cities fall, next realistic line of defense is the Dnipro river, and between here and there are more than hundred thousand square kilometers of area.
According to chatgpt, 45% of Ukraine is on east side of Dnipro or about 270000 square kilometers. That is area bigger than whole UK
Not to mention the kursk region is russian territory hence russia can use home guards and conscripts as support/logistics troops at the very least. As they say, 80% of the armed forces are support troops, so this stretches the ukraine manpower disadvantage to russia further on the military front
"Russia lost ten of thousands"
"Ukarine too likely lost quite a few troops"
Well, watching this video to know how a nafo try to justify the reality.
To be fair, the BBC actually counts the Russian losses by confirmed dead (unlike every other source) and that statement is actually correct. About 60k is indeed "tens of thousands." Ukraine should simply be hundreds of thousands.
nafo use armed cope walmart defence force with speciality use all mighty verb to defend
Cope more z boy
@@roskcity cope more na*zi (azov) boy
@@ROBOSapiens7 obviously that Russia has multiply advantage in artillery shells, rockets, plane bombs, drones, vehicles and etc. but ofc Ukraine losses are smaller)) funny logic tbh.
Binkov :-
Russian losses in Bakhmut :- Tens of thousands of men
Ukrainian during the failed counter offensive:- Ukraine lost some men ..lol😂
The shameless biases of the video .
Nah he just bothered to look at literally any data that was not the ruSSian ministry of war. It was well established that Ukraine suffered surprisingly low losses during the summer offensive. It is also well established that Bakhmut was one of the most reckless and bloodiest assaults of the war. Maybe if ruSSia didn’t use such wasteful tactics they wouldn’t suffer such high losses when on the offensive (they have improved this since Bakhmut btw).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Ukraine lost a lot of people last counter offensive... Bahkmut was a disaster for Ukraine, they lost way more than was being mentioned. The problem is Ukraine can't afford to publicly say this haha
@@maryanchabursky9148 giga cope. ukraine lost a ton of people trying to hold bakhmut and there is pic of the losses counted where its up to 50 vehicles that the ukrainains lost just to take one village.
@@gmeme9252 have any evidence (you don’t because that’s BS)? If Bakhmut was a disaster for Ukraine is must have been an apocalypse for ruSSia who suffered much higher losses than Ukraine in Bakhmut (that’s a fact, cope and seethe).
@@maryanchabursky9148
Bakhmut was taken by Wagners not Russian military and they have different tactics.. the losses they took during the capture of Bakhmut do not rest upon Russian military at all.
i dont understand the obsession with territory, thats not gonna decide the war
Yea. But that means worse news for Ukraine. they are on a worse attiriton situation and their only grace was talking about their territorial gains. Russia saved their units retreating back in 2022.
@@Sevastous 🤣🤣🤣 ok captain opposite, please tell me more things that are the inverse of the truth (ruSSian units both relatively and in real terms take higher losses than Ukraine according to all data and basic military logic).
For mapper content
It will, gains are gains.
@@LXST-IN-TRVNSLVTIXN U wanna talk about man and equipment attrition? In that front Ukraine’s situation is 10 times worse.
Why Ukraine is failing? Because they are fighting a war of attrition against Russia.
Stop using only deepstate map as source try other sources please otherwise you info is only pro ukraine .
That's a fact!
Why do you care? What's the point?
You might be late to learn about something but they wouldn't draw an alternative different map, it would diverge too much with time, the idea that they would do that is absurd
Please no more highlighter sound effects.
This is a reality check video on a pro Ukranian channel for the Ukraine supporters. None of this is a surprise for those who have been following both sides and staying neutral.
I’m Pro-Ukraine, but its been obvious to me for the past year that the war was going to turn out this way.
100% correct
Funny how it's ok to be pro ukraine or neutral butt not pro Russia. Funny how that's always true no matter what is happening at any point in history. It's almost as if you make decisions based on race.
@@yaelz6043 I think it's changing. I'm a 50 year old Aussie dude and I have helped Rybar get the truth out for about a year now. When I first started, it was weird for them to see my surname helping out Now, it's just normal.
@@Shannon-Smith you will revert back to your old ways the moment Russia has a government that doesn't hand over all its resources to the west. You're just smart enough to see how much you gain from plundering the place.
When Binkov posts a title like that, you just know the situation is a lot worse.
Indeed
To me, Binkov was pro-Nato and Ukraine from the start.
“Every time they lie a debt to the truth is incurred. And sooner or later the truth will come to collect its due.” -Valery Legasov
And here we are. You can only ignore reality for so long until it hits you like a truck.
NAFO 69th Sniffing Brigade won't like this comment.
"Here's how Ukraine can still win!"
"Russia is winning, but at what cost?"
Truth is: m.ruclips.net/video/CTt-bM-ZCIE/видео.html&pp=2AEJkAIB
@@ctrlaltdebug “Ukraine is running out of men”
“(insert minor town or city here) is the key and Ukrainian lines will collapse if we take it”
@@themissingpeace7956 ruSSia is paying a high price for its lies.
pro-Ukrainian channel talking about the losing Ukrainian army, I'm glad that I was right all along and did not fall for the lies of the ignorants.
Fr. The harsh reality of truth is a breath of fresh air.
They can't deny it anymore 😂 numbers and maps don't lie
3 day special operation bro
@@yeeyee7083 what’s your point in bringing this up?
@yeeyee7083 do yourself a favor and look up who said 3 day operation.. I'll give you a hint. It wasn't who you think it was.
Its amazing what you can do fighting with chips out of washing machines and shovels.
Self propelled shovels
Do you even know where the "shovels" meme came from?
@JohnDorian-j7x
Yes I do. I remember reading it in The Times I think that the Russians were running out of equipment and ammunition and were fighting with shovels. It was probably 2022 when the propaganda was ridiculous which is why I remember it. I also remember being told just before that that the Russians were about to run out of missiles.
@@JohnDorian-j7x It came from BBC report early 2023 that Russian infantry has resulted to fight with shovels due to ammunition shortage
@@icekidtvshorts4504 NO. That's incorrect, but commonly mistaken. It came from a UK defense ministry statement/update that was then written about by the BCC which specifically stated that Russians were being sent out to fight often 'unsupported' to attack hardened position with only: rifles and shovels.
It had nothing to do with "ammunition shortage". It was always "rifles and shovels" or "firearms and shovels" since the first report... but the pro-rus crowd chose to take the statement about rifles and shovels and removed the firearms part to create a "meme" that was then propagated across all the pro-rus propaganda channels in a campaign to help rouse support for the pro-rus narrative (i.e., that the west was too stuhpihd and biased to understand anything that Russia did and that all their supposed "reports" were inherently wrong/ridiculous/biased) whilst discrediting supposed 'objectivity' of the West/western/mainstream media.
Unfortunately, it caught on to the point where the pro-rus crowd has no idea where the original statement actually came from or what it even meant... unfortunately. And the situation that resulted in the original report has since changed massively and multiple times on each side since then. However, the pro-rus propaganda department doesn't care and is acting like the situation on the ground in feb/mar 2022 is exactly the same situation as on the ground today (2.5 years later) in Sept 2024 (or any other times in between them).
Vuhledar most likely will fall before Pokrovsk
Nyet Kiev will
You both are wrong, Washington will
@@kko5779 new-york fell already
u post this 2 days ago and propably tonight Ugledar is falling
Just did
This video was well made and well researched. Well done.
Hey, I think I know this guy!
Didn’t expect to see you here
Ukraine is actually winning
On social media
ah yes, russia has been winning for 3 years now!
What the Kursk doing
@@maryanchabursky9148 когда-нибудь обязательно научишься отличать Курск от города в Курской области. Как дела в Авдеевке, Мелитополе, Мариуполе, Лисичанске, Артемовске?
@@tyler-dy1smwere they suppose to win within a timeline you made up? I don’t understand what 3 years have anything to do with winning.
@@Avdeev77 нехай буде Курсщина чи КурНР .Напевно там справи погані бо там роССія. Як там Херсон, Ізюм, Купянськ, Лиман, та Суджа? Ну що взяли Київ за два дні, Одесу, Харків, Запоріжжя, Миколаїв, та інші міста Окопували? Смішно бачити як ви з руйнування Авдіївки та Бахмута пишається якщо ці міста порівнювати із вашими намірам. Хотіли Київ 5 міліон за 3 дні а отримали Бахмут 70 тисяч за 10 місяців.
Taking indefensible potato fields and in the process loosing fortified industrial towns and mining resources is not a smart move.
but CNN told me ukraine is winning
@@reorseX for CNN Bakhmut is still an ukrainan possession
🤣🤣
@@reorseX But RT told me russia is winning (while getting their asses whooped in their own country).
Taking those potato fields has had a political ripple effect across Ukraine’s allies and has been important for Ukrainian morale. The effects of an offensive are not only measured in the type of territory they take or the quantity.
Pokrovsk will likely fall in the next few months based on the current pace of advance. Had Ukraine not invaded Kursk perhaps they could have delayed Russia taking the city by 2-3 months. Invading Kursk will likely have more benefits than holding Pokrovsk for a few more months.
"hey i think russia is winning heres wh-"
SHADDUP RUSSIAN BOT
"so did Ukraine recaptu-"
HOW MUCH PUTIN PAY YOU
"okay so why is Ukraine territory shrin-"
LA LA LA IM NOT LISTENING TO RUSSIAN BOT
Ukraine is collapsing.
Straight facts 🤣. I can't say anything not 100% pro-Ukraine without being asked how much I make from the Russians 😂.
@@afaha2214 all fucking day
@@afaha2214 “hey ruSSia is suffering very high losses for minor gains”
SHUT UP WE TOOK A TOWNWITH A POPULATION UNDER 1,000 UKRAINE WILL SOON FALL.
“So has ruSSia achieved any of its states strategic objectives”
UKRAINE IS RUNNING OUT OF MEN (for the 10th time or something)
“Why can’t ruSSia make much progress in a country that is right next door”
SECOND ARMY IN THE WORLD
“Why is ruSSia stealing Ukrainian children and denying Ukrainians exist”
ITS ALL NATOS FAULT RUSSIA IS DEFENDING ITSELF.
russian bot detected
This war is a marathon not a race
It's attrition warfare. Neither side is going to suddenly get a massive breakout and capture the other's capital and leaders and force a surrender. So all that matters is who can keep going longer in the meat grinder at current loss rates for both sides.
The strategy "war to the last Ukrainian" had one major flaw..
Ukrainians eventually run out.....
That is assuming that the strategy wasn't just "drag this out as long as possible so Russia are out of the picture for a few years".
@@Mcsqw That's exactly what it was. Russia has been crippled for most of a decade. With that flank secured, the focus can go to the Pacific and dealing with the Chinese threat.
@@McsqwYou play stupid game, you win stupid prize. If i get what're you saying, then the game is to trade poor Ukrainian lads for a chance to inflict any damage to Russia. In which case the only side benefitting from this are NATO. And thus a stupid prize is to follow interests of NATO to blead out in a mathematically unwinnable conflict when they were able to achieve peace without additional losses of people and territory two years ago. Yeah, sounds about right.
@@DAethrys The war hasn't crippled Russia. It's made them stronger.
War of attrition. Ukraine can't sustain it, even with NATO help. That's why.
Man I sure think that this will be a civilized and non-aggressive comment section
lesson on how to make 23minute video for what could have been said in 5 minutes
I dont think it is a question if Pokrovsk will fall, but when
Probably in 2 months time.
Seems like Russia is currently focused on collapsing the southern Donetsk direction and bringing the entire frontline to Pokrovsk.
@@devansa125it'll probably be longer than that since the wet season is about to set in. That'll be a lot more difficult to handle for an invading force.
Toretsk is gonna fall faster, russian are already inaide of the city. Povrovsk front is probably gonna re active after the ground will be stable enough after the fall mud, so i guess february
Probably over the winter, ending in the spring, like Bakhmut and Avdiivka before it.
Why are Ukraine’s defenses failing ? Now this will go into the history books as one of the most stupid questions of the year 2024 ! 😂😂😂
Silence Zigger
Diverting manpower to kursk while suffering man power shortages in the frontline is what the ukrainian high command gambled on, from a previous video i mentioned that this kursk gambit may pay off politically and strategically. But i think its becoming too obvious that the risk taken was not worth it, best case scenario is that russia is slowed down enough for another year or two, worse case would be a total collapse of logistics and thus the front…
You mean, worst case scenario is Russia opening up another front in Sumy because Ukraine's has been weaken in that area while attacking to Pokrovsk. Now Ukraine have to choose which city to save.
@@esense9602Russia cannot open another front, they can't even keep the prokovsk offensive going and in Kursk their counter attack has already failed
@@SelfProclaimedEmperor if 150k troops is true they can but if it's not then they can't.
@@SelfProclaimedEmperorFailed? If their goal was to liberate all of Kursk area than yes, but I doubt that. I mean, as far as I know, they only counterattacked in one direction
I think it Kursk was worth it. Now it’s a problem for Russia. If it doesn’t try to take it back Ukraine has territory to trade if there is a peace deal. If it does it will require substantial manpower and equipment.
Some of the units used by Ukraine that binkov says are good ones have skills in manoeuvre warfare etc. those skills won’t be that useful sitting in a trench under constant fire.
Watching this just 3 weeks later and surprised how obsolete maps already are. In just 3 weeks Russians captured Uhledar and several smaller cities, control 60% of Toretsk, surrounded Selidovo, recaptured almost half of the original Ukrainian gains in Kursk, closing on Seversk and first Russian units already entering Mirnograd.
Yes, but pro-AFU wants to keep believing that they are grinding russian soldiers by thousands each days passing while still losing all their (strategically non important) defenses.
At some point they think the russian army will collapse due to menpower lacking and that the AFU will just have to steamroll them back to the border.
I'm pretty sure the Germans were in the same mindset after the 1943 Kursk failed counter offensive and that the most delusionnal between them kept this spirit very alive when the russians were entering the suburbs of Berlin 2 years after.
Oh, wait, I nearly forgot: Russia can't win this war, of course! Because the only reason why Russia won WWII was exclusively because of US shipping of equipment. And since they don't have any this time, and that Ukraine gets all the equipment, well this can only mean that Ukraine is inbound for a complete victory.😄
That's why people who have brains said that this war was over the moment it started. Russia will win and they always were going to.
@@realWARPIGThe last time someone sent troops to Russia they numbered three million.
Someone in Washington thought it would be a great idea to send a few thousand to take Kursk.
If we go by your comment, it would sound like Russia is gaining massive territory. But then we look at any of the dozens of maps and along Russia's main axis of advance, there has been only about 7-8km deep advance since last month.
Like 1 month ago, Vulhedar was already surrounded on 3 sides... Now they finally controlled its entirety. Russians already had a foothold in Toretsk last month yet they still only got 60% of a fairly small city. Also Russia didn't recapture half or Ukrainian gains in Kursk in 3 weeks. It took about a month and a half, or 6 weeks, twice the time you claimed it took. The misleading framing continues.
The map isn't obsolete considering if one zoom out to see the entirety of just the Donbas, you won't see any significant change, let alone relative to the entirety of Ukraine.
meanwhile Russia needs North korean troops to replace heavy losses
You can clearly hear a bios from Binkov, "Russia lost tens of thousands of troops", "Ukranians lost quite a few"
Only don't tell that because it would expose western media and politicians😂
@@LikeTeeMO he's a big supporter of the West. Hopefully he doesn't place his cards on Ukraine because he will most likely lose this game 🤣🤣😅🍿
Perhaps but Russia even by their own accounts are taking heavy losses for their gains. Much is true in history for offensive side going against set defenses, layered with western aid and modern warfare it wouldn’t be shocking that Russians sustaining higher casualties even with winning the war
@@anthonytrevino3191 в какой стране людей хватают на улице и кидают в копы ? ( подсказка "не Россия" )
@@РаРа-у3д settle down you (motions to come over here) this one right here, officer
"Those Russian gains were easy so we didn't count them"
LOL, the epic bootlick
and somehow he counted kursk, as if those gains werent easy...
@@minnihd6470 gotta lick somehow, even against all odds
I remember his country comparison videos were he would often describe Russian equipment (e.g. tanks) as less capable than their western counterparts. Hilarious, especially in hindsight.
@@captaindak5119 Both blow up from drones just as much.
Except that Russian "cope" cages actually worked
Should have signed the peace deal in april 2022.....
Indeed, zelensky talks about peace only in favour of ukranian strength, yet they had this strength in 2022 and are losing it every year they fight
@@gta1kev demands were few then
@@AnthonySmith-x5z indeed, worst decision ever to reject the Russian peace offer.
The West is busting out Boris again.
@@gta1kevUkranie had nothing to do, they are just a puppet. Remember how "they" killed their own intelligence head which wanted to make peace with Russians. And how set up all the Bucha psy op to boycott all the negotiations.
Anglos really said "BIG NO, until the last Ukranian".
Shovel is a superior weapon. Period
No one expected the hypersonic shovels.
Apparently they have no effect on “old men, woman, and children”. Ghost of Kyiv must be single handedly holding the line since Ukraine has “run out of men” a dozen times since last year lol.
@@maryanchabursky9148 comfy for an ukrainian sitting in canada to say that right.
If most of the deaths are caused by artillery rounds and Ukraine is running out of be them , the casualties on the Ukranian side should correspond to that .
Russia can't be moving slow while also opting for mass attacks . Quite obviously the Russians are not benchmarking their progress on territorial gains .
They are looking to destroy the Ukrainian military .
That's also why the Kursk chapter lacks any strategic caluculus that's satisfactory enough to vindicate the diversion of prime troops and equipment in a season of scarcity .
Ukraine is actually increasing its artillery supply by producing them locally now while still getting them from the west. Furthermore, unlike Russian artillery, Ukraine artillery like HIMARS always hits its target.
@@SelfProclaimedEmperorMust be hard to run factories without power.
Bro, Zelenskyy isn’t the 17th Avenger like the telly says, so step outside and touch grass and lay off the copium. It’s actually embarrassing.
Not everyone who disagrees with you is a Russian bot - that’s also cope.
@@Komsomolskaya idk you tell me, Ukraine has hit all of Russias oil refineries and some of their power plants
@@SelfProclaimedEmperorWith drones, not artillery
@@SelfProclaimedEmperor do you think Russian use artileri from 18 century?
Many succeed to enter Russia,
but nobody managed to survive.
That's "the real" never solved problem.
Genghis Khan says hi.
@@GRIGGINS1 вижу на карте Россию и не вижу на карте империю Чингисхана )))
@@РаРа-у3д It existed for 200 years bub. And when he was alive Russia was punked and Bitched by his empire
funny how this guy was wrong about everything in this war...
Like literally, almost nothing happens as this channel predicts 🤣
Like every pro ukranian channel withe the exception of willy
(Looking at you Dennys)
Obviously territorial losses and gains aren't equal, losing a major logistic hub and a well fortified chokepoint can lead to major cascading losses while losing random space no where near the front will not. I don't think the push into Kursk was bad, but it's too little too late. You will not persuade Russia by inserting a toke of forces in the middle of no where, at the worst they can just ignore your push or slow it down with an equal token of troops.
It need to be a major effort, something that actually threaten their current front to be even worth it. They really need to stop doing this 'show off' push and aim at something with real tactical value.
I agree but I think the reason Ukraine made the offensive is to show there western backers and western people that they have a chance so that they keep supporting Ukraine
And I was afraided that was the case the first time I saw the news.
Another offense was alternative less from an efficiency standpoint. Offensive forces are wasted in an area where bombs are used in high numbers. You can't counter an offensive with another offensive if you don't have the necessary force. It's logical that the trenches are understaffed. If a bomb falls, it's preferable to only lose two instead of five men. What's Ukraine supposed to do against those bombs other than attacking the ammunition stores?
@@e21big can't help but think the battle of the bulge still
What the fuck are you talking about? The invasion into kursk had tons of positive outcomes for Ukraine and they didn't do it so that they would stop russia or some shit. That would never have worked.
Also the idea that putin can just ignore an invasion into his country especially if it isn't stopping is absolutely braindead. No he cannot. I'm not even going to argue that because the most basic knowledge of warfare should allow you to see why.
Also the idea that if you just deploy an equal amount of troops means you win the engagement is also extremely dumb. In war the determining factor for a winner isn't just "who has more people to throw at them". Russia has 500k while Ukraine has 300k though it has recently increased.
That argument also assumes that there won't be any repercussions on eastern part of Ukraine if they redeploy troops to kursk which is again extremely detached from reality.
Honestly it's fascinating that this comment got so many likes while understanding so little about actual modern or overall warfare.
Ukraine was trying to fix Russian forces and force the Russians to divert resources and manpower from other fronts. This didn't happen as Pokrovsk, Siversk, Niu-York, and Vuhledar front are deteriorating. Ukraine miscalculated and now they're suffering massive material losses and manpower losses in Kursk.
А почему нью йорк не New york, а niu york? 🤔
well it was a good try , the problem is that instead of writing it off , the Ukrainian leadership will insist in keeping fighting there ,
thus immobilizing good troops in an overall thinning front
@@alekssv9657 I put Niu-York because that is how it appears on: live ua map
It was not a good try. It was a massive strategic failure like Nazi Germany's Battle of the Bulge @@sparkyfromel
@@MINDPLUNK Ukraine was on a steadily losing trend , they had to try something
they had to trumpet positive news both for internal and external consumption ,
they had to have something to trade in any potential peace talks ,
sure it turned to be a very bad idea but the really big mistake is to double down on it rather than get out and claim that was the intend all along
How did this "analyst" completely missed the elephant in the room? The day Kursk Offensive started, the Eastern frontlines collapse. Seriously? Every minute, 60 seconds pass in Donbass. Together Ukranians could have stopped this.
but then they decided to go to Kursk and take selfies in front of some babushka's potato garden
Heard it was supposed to be a dash to capture a nuclear power plant
@@Intel-i7-9700kmaybe, but they didn't even get near
@@Intel-i7-9700k damn that means they directed their soldeirs froom those eastern frontlines which later collapsed in order to do a offensive on kursk which didnt got succesfull. eastern frontlines were actually more important than kursk though
This war was always unwinnable for Ukraine. As much as people might not want to hear this. All the Western support has done is prolong the inevitable. Russia can keep up this pace for years. Can Ukraine and the west?
The west is rapidly being re play .sid...... they are no threath it will be 70 percent braw nuh...in ten years...
🇷🇺❤️
@@calebman9999 yes Ukraine can and has no choice but to. You are naive and ignorant, Ukraine can “win” just at a high price. However there are no good alternatives.
@maryanchabursky9148 No, they can't. And they have already paid a high price.
Any time the Ukrainian Army seizes territory its almost always undefended. Their invasion into Kursk Oblast was like driving full speed into empty fields, and the second they encountered serious resistance their gains halted immediatly. And now the Russian Army in the area is already attmpted an operational encirclement and has seized back 30-40% of the areas captured. Russian victories in Donbass are over heavily defended entrenched battle-scared towns. In almost every instance the Ukranian Army loses direct confronations. I don't even blame the Ukranian government for this situation. All of their useful combat units are to few in number and they have no way of building offensive-cabaple units without sagnificant western aid that that has been dwindeling. Ukraine's economy is decimated, their government is entirely dependent on western aid and their existence continues just because Putin doesn't want to disturb his domestic audience more than he already has. He could have announced general mobilization and probably taken Kiev, Kharkiv, Chernihiv and other cities very easily for a simple reason, the Russian Federation is almost completely self-reliant in all major fields. Putin is playing the long-game, he knows that as the years drag on, attention to Ukraine will dwindle (because westerners think this shit is COD and when "cool headcam videos" aren't on their feeds they won't give a shit) and the Ukrainian Army will become increasingly a demoralized mob of conscripts who watch as wealthy Ukrainians flee and bribe their way out of service.
Well said.
Found the Russian disinfo troll 😂
@DomLab-g2n can you please tell me what's wrong ? The ukrainiens failed all their counteroffensive. The karkhiv and the kherson offensive where against an disorganised enemy and they didn't have a lot of resistance.
@@DomLab-g2n Russia Russia Russia
Oink oink oink...
@@DomLab-g2n thank for you laying out an argument about what i said. Actually argue against my points instead of just using lame boring ass insults that makes you look like a dipshit
You should also mention that Ukraine had more than 29.000 deserters just this year...
THose are officials numbers...
A lot of people just don't want war. There's even more on the side of russia. I don't feel any type of way against someone who leaves. I DO have an issue with countires invading other people
@@WilliamSperbernope
@@WilliamSperberKeep coping
Meanwhile just Romania reported 100 per day sucesfully registring after illigaly crossing border. It is at least 35k/year. And it is one of 5 western borders. Plus those who lost in river or mountains, plus those who were captured on attempt, plus those who prefer to hide, plus those who crossed the frontline or to Belarus, plus those who bought freedom from corrupt officials.
@@Triumph633 put one zero behind that number
Croatian coast is full of thus modest and humble people
Who peacfully cruise our streets in bmw 7 .merc s class while we are paying their rent and health insurance
Kursk can't be viewed as a gain, since Ukraine are not holding onto it. Whereas Russian gains in Ukraine are being held and Ukraine can't counter attack to take their land back. That's a huge difference.
Very very well said
Es ist nicht das Land der Ukrainer sondern die Heimat der russischen Menschen des Donbass die sich für Russland entschieden haben.
the fact that Russia now has to defend its border now is an enormous victory in and of itself. Russia was free to run behind a magic forcefield with their border and not defend it meaning nearly all resources went into fighting in Ukraine. That enormous benefit is now gone and they have to defend their border like Ukraine has had to...
Putin is also showing he cannot defend Russia... He cares more about Ukrainian land than defending Russia itself.
It is funny when people in comments section simultaneously accuse Binkov of being Pro-Russian AND Pro-Ukrainian
He used pro-Ukrainian sources but his analysis was objective imo. He seems fairly neutral to me.
@@christianriddler5063 Neutral means pro-Russian to the west. Lol.
He's always been pro-Russian and Kremlin-trolls / bots always spam that everything is pro Ukrainian as it's part of the disinformation campaign.
Because it implies their pro-russian fantasy propaganda version on a video is not only not neutral but pro-ukranian. Thus giving the impression that "a balanced somewhere in the middle" view is even more into some fantasy pro-kremlin disinformation position.
Of course you already know that, your comment was literally part of how the kremlin disinformation operation functions. You're the "look both sides hehehehhehe so clearly this is neutral".
What people on the pro-Ukraine side don't want to realise is that Ukraine never had a chance in a protracted war against Russia. You can claim all you want of millions upon millions of enemy casualties in comparison to you. These claims are always lies! Manpower, Industry, Military, none of these metrics favour Ukraine. The end result would always be the same, the question was how soon. Our intervention only lengthened the time for the ultimate defeat of Ukraine, not stopped it.
That's a fallacy that Putin is falling for and it's used by russian propaganda to dissuade people who believe in it from supporting Ukraine. This has costed him >3:1 ratio of casualties visually confirmed (~6:1 on Pokrovsk axis visually confirmed) and wiped out most of his modern weapons, causing his army to be most probably incapable of completely defeating Ukraine and definitely unable to stand a chance against NATO for the next few dozen years. Russia does NOT have infinite resources, not one country does, that's why huge powers failed in i.e. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Ukraine.
@@maciekGTR 😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@maciekGTR The Afghanistan (both soviet and American) and Iraq Wars are radically different than Ukraine. Those were counter-insurgency wars, where the powers didn't lose because of lack of resources but mainly because of public perception/ failing to build a stable state. The Ukraine war is a conventional war with defined frontlines where two countries are battling it out with their whole industries and manpowers (again, not the case in Iraq/Afghanistan, in case of the americans they were fought almost simultaneously) Not saying that Russia has won this war already, but it is true that Ukraine is in a very bad position considering the war they found themselves in unfortunately.
@@facundomouly9446 the argument still works because even if Putin somehow managed to achieve the "inevitable", as some suggest, victory, he can't even nudge NATO right afterwards, since his army would be obliterated within less than a year (unless either side uses nukes and the world ends xd), and the Ukrainian army and it's guns wouldn't disappear overnight and he would have to fight a counterinsurgency campaign probably even worse than my examples. So if anything is certain it's that either side can't achieve complete victory. Ukraine's collapse isn't inevitable, and even if it was, armed resistance would consume so many resources and people it would prevent Putin from ever achieving his next step which is to attack rest of Eastern Europe
@@maciekGTR The problem is the Russian army will not be obliterated, in-fact it is only growing stronger both tactically and in experience, the "obliteration" is just the west coping through propaganda because they are failing to release the truth that Ukraine is and will lose this war.
Russian bots vs Ukrainian bots
*FIGHT*
I wish there was Russian bots, or atleast as many as Ukrainian bots, but I saw a study on bots on X where it showed something like 90% of bots are Ukrainian bots
@@Ricky-oc4xcHonestly, it depends on the spectrum. How’d you describe a bot? A propaganda-infected person or just a straight-up bot?
@Jollingo The entire mainstream media is shilling for Ukraine so they certainly lead in both bots and misinformed people.
@@Ricky-oc4xc That study was done by UNI of Adelaide, Australia and was the only study (that I know of) since then because it proved that 90% of pro UA twits are from UA bot accounts. Not that 90% of accounts were bots, just that 90% of twits were pushed by UA bots. This being said, from my personal experience online, is it even a surprise that side backed by USA can afford more bots?
@@Jollingo I wouldn't classify bot accounts as straight up programs (bots) but a real person operating from multiple of "fake" accounts. Good way to spot them on YT is checking out their join date - most have one past Feb 2022 and a generic username user|random|numbers|and|letters. This being said, I'm a proud RU bot, Ork, Putler lover etc (Because it is impossible I'm a real person against NATO and US bs). I was also under hacker attacks 8 times, with most recent one being just last month. Got my address leaked once and got two death threats. Had 150euros spent in a game (one of first hackings) but luckily WarGaming refunded me.
We are winning … said Napoleon before Moscow
So did Germany and America
@hendrx i dont recall america losing in moscow, or fighting there
We are winning...said Russians before self-destructing in 1991
@@PRASANTHTHOMAS-hx3nh no one ever said that, lmao. Everyone in SU knew collapse was coming for at least 5 years
@@rinkashikachi really? Because just 2 years before Gorbachev dissolved the Soviet Union, a Top Analyst at the CIA in a report said that the Soviet Union had atleast 20 years left
Always good to see objective coverage on this war
Wow! Russia must be doing very well if evem Binkov acknowledged their success over NATO
@@lacroix1159 they are not fighting NATO (your just coping with reality).
@@maryanchabursky9148 thousands of NATO soldiers, armored vehicles, military equipment and full reconnaissance support respectfully disagree
@@lacroix1159 facts he was speaking a different tune highly in favor of Ukraine now reality settles 😅😅🤣🤣🍿
@@maryanchabursky9148 its pretty much a proxy war for the US
Was it a mistake to extend your supply line into enemy territory allowing them to engage using untapped reserves that were unavailable for political reason... until your invasion...
Kursk was necessary for MORALE reasons, and to convince the West to keep sending arms. It never made sense from a tactical standpoint especially given that it unlocking of conscript reserves like you mention. But the West was losing interest (which this rekindled), and Ukraine was about to lose Robotyne, so they launched Kursk to distract from the loss of Robotyne & rekindle western support. In that sense, it was a complete PR & Morale success even if it strategically was foolish ("victory" with the Kursk offensive would be worse than a gradual defeat, because the more Russian territory they take, the more overstretched they get, the more Russians they have to spend millions to take care of, etc.). Ukrainians AND Westerners never mentioned the fact Ukraine lost all Robotyne and their previous counteroffensive was now all for nothing (including the huge casualties from it that caused all western defense agencies to classify Ukrainian casualties and stop publishing them, like the Pentagon which hasn't publicly stated any figures since then). What's hilarious about the Kursk offensive is that Ukraine has already had to spend $2 million on taking care of the few thousand Russians living there and will have to spend about $10 million a year to take care of those occupied Russians, which they may very well have needed that money for all the Pokrovsk refugees (50,000 internal refugees from Pokrovsk is gonna cost them about $300 million a year).
@@TexanIndependence Kursk invasion was the worst tactic ever how can they get their supply line protected
@@TexanIndependence In short Ukraine is in the business of using its peoples lives for a PR stunt?
@@TexanIndependence the men and the equipment could have been used for something better. I bet none of those who took part in that mission will come home alive
@@Black_Heritage Ukraine sent their best elite units, so I'd take your bet, probably half will manage to evacuate, the rest will be a mix of POW+KIA/WIA. That's assuming Russia does a decent pincer and cuts off their retreat, if it doesn't do that Ukraine might only lose 1/4th of them, but that's still 1/4th of their best elite units AND keeping them tied up fighting Russian conscripts (who were unable to be used in the war for domestic political reasons until the Kursk invasion, as Russia didn't allow conscripts to go to Ukraine but DOES allow them to defend Russian soil).
The REAL question for me is, will the conscripts who saw action against Russia in Kursk, suddenly be used to push BEYOND the Ukraine border, once Kursk is retaken? If so, that may be a disaster for Ukraine. It's kind of like those conscripts have popped their combat cherry (no longer could anyone say Putin is sending "inexperienced conscripts" if he had them keep pushing beyond the border).
If so, then Ukraine may have just unlocked an extra 50,000 troops for Russia or however many conscripts take part (Russia has anywhere from 600,000 to 800,000 conscripts though many will not take part in the op).
And many of the conscripts themselves may volunteer to keep fighting, since they already started, maybe they lost a friend to the enemy, and now they aren't as scared of direct combat since they've been in it.
That moment when the narrative flips from "we are so lucky the Rus are so stupid" to "how on Earth is Ukraine losing?"
No, the Russians are still incredibly stupid, and it shows in every report.
And we know why Ukraine is loosing ground. It's because the west is twiddling its thumbs.
@@Alexander_Kale cope
@@Alexander_Kale This outcome was inevitable from the start, and only a matter of time. The aid you want to send to Ukraine only prolongs the war and costs more lives. The only way Ukraine wins is direct NATO involvement, which nobody should want.
Alexander_Kale Sending billions of dollars in aid, more than the yearly Rus defense budget, is the West "twiddling its thumbs". Cope sore loser.
@@Alexander_Kale cope
But ukro channels told me russia is losing and losing fast
all pro ukrainian shilld does, this one as well sang this song, just go and see vids on topic from some months ago
@@Legarosss ok thanks. I was just about to ask how trustworthy this channel is. Even by the title its clearly to see. Why even ask that question? Every noob can see that (Why are Ukraine’s defenses failing?), and knows why is that. Does he want to talk to idio..s normally?
Pro-Ukraine channels will claim that Zelensky has surrounded Moscow, and everyone in the comments will cheer on without asking questions.
I don't support either side of this conflict. Yet if I bring up that Ukraine is consistently losing ground and troop at a higher rate per capita they call me a russian bot
yep, so much bots on both sides but NAFO bots are the definitely more in number than Russky bots. You're either one of us, or u're the enemy
Ivan my bot 😂
There's a saying in Russian, a folklore wisdom: " He who shouts the loudest " get this thief" is a thief himself. " . They are doing it as an organization, and are diverging on others(genuine people) what they are doing themselves...
@@korana6308Chinese have a very similar saying
Russa is losing more man and gear? By a lot?
Also how can you be in a conflct i mean this conflict is as good and evial than world war 2.
Thank you for pointing out it's eating up both sides slowly and steadily. Western media and Ukrainian supporters are always talking about Russia is suffering economically and losing men and can't keep this war forever. But they don't see Ukraine will run out of everything before it really starts to hurt Russia.
Economics honestly aren't the problem.
Russia has maxed out its economic credit card for the next two decades, meanwhile, the West had been building its colloquially, debt, for a very long time at this point.
Both will be in terrible positions by the end.
This war will be ultimately be decided on battlefield. The debate to be had is: how pyrrhic of a victory will this be for the Russians?
😂😂😂😂😂😂 sooooo wrong how can you be this uneducated but have such a strong opinion???@@PancakeProduct
@@Dan-jn1mshe’s pro-Ukraine, that’s a prerequisite in their crew.
@@PancakeProduct Russia economically is surprisingly better now than before, even wit additional sanctions. Incase if victory Russia would gain a neutral buffer state in Ukraine against NATO, and gain its industrial and mineral rich eastern provinces. Not to mention the permanent stain on the reputation of the West and its supposed technological and military superiority. Wouldn't be phyrric at all if the Ukranians surrender.
@@PancakeProduct wtf even is an economic credit card? do you even understand what you are saying?
It's very simple, don't have to yap for 20 minutes. 1: Manpower, 2: Firepower.
No way... the msm has been telling me the russians are losing😢.. could they lie to me?
both sides are claiming the other side is losing.
18 mil Ukrainians versus 146 mil Russians.Do the maths.
@@emrecanarduc4378But one is closer to the truth. By far.
@@devansa125Next time you hear elensky whispering numbers into your ear, know that it's hallucinations caused by excessive copium intake.
@@robbob9273 no they haven’t been telling you that since the summer offensive. Get a new line this one doesn’t make any sense these days.
Because ukraine prefer fighting in the media than on the battlefield😂
Facts People still believe russias Military is weak or will loose the war 😂
@@Tobi-wt4sh it's brainwashing at a pro level
Oh is one of these "your team"? Death entertains you? This isn't football, dude
@@Tobi-wt4sh Russia depending on nuclear saber rattling is not a sign of strength my guy. Eastern Ukraine will capitulate but all these events will eventually lead to the balkanization of Russia. The western military industrial complex is making a killing and Ukraine is a cash cow. NATO armaments will continue to flow.
Capturing the east is one thing, holding it is completely different.
@@Bob-kk2vgit’s not just the western military industrial complex that’s making a killing
as a Historian i cant believe how many people mistake skeptical and valid analysis questioning the potential for ukrainian victory as 'pro-russian' or 'kremlin bots'. I did my MA mostly on modern history regarding WW2. The Red Army was notorious for, initially, mistaking correct tactical or strategic (depending on the rank of the 'offender') as 'secret support for fascism' or 'fascists in disguise' aka '5th columnists' who had awaited the german attack and now sought to undermine the soviet response from within.
Even if generals were not accused of 'collusion' during Fall Blau, there was a public perception in Germany that 'Fall Blau', and by extension Stalingrad, was the only correct strategic response. Doubting this could only come from secret admiration of the enemy, or support for 'bolshevism'. Pretty much the same '5th columnist' story.
I recall the centrist/liberal historians we used for the subject would mostly chalk this up to the hysteria and paranoia inherent in totalitarian regimes. They would of course also point to the circumstance of total war.
What has shocked me - even being quite far left and always skeptical of the liberal/bourgeois portrayal of western morality and superiority - is how quickly and naturally this same paranoia has reached the centre of public political opinion, even despite not being in a condition of total war, despite not even really being at war, despite our 'free' media and 'diversity of opinion' etc.
Personally, I think this is a consequence of the development/evolution of mass media and its political deployment as a tool of propaganda. At the end of the day we will think as we are told. We are told to support war, so we support war. You dont support the war? Kremlin sympathizer!
Both the West and the East is engaged in an 'information war' the likes of which the 40's never even thought possible. We all know the Russians is engaged in this, but few outlets talk about the NATO/EU institutions specifically designed and purposed for the creation of fake news and the utilization of media to bolster political support for foreign policy goals. Namely NATO's 'Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence' (StratCom) based in Riga or GLOBSEC in Bratislava. The European Left group commissioned a report on the subject written and published by two german academic historians. Its freely available if anybody is interested in the subject.
I'm Slovak. Can you tell me more about GLOBSEC in Bratislava? Thank you.
Don't leave out Great Britain. They have had several centuries to prefect their propaganda technics. Why did the British population support Turkey during the Crimean Wars? Were France and England really the good guys in WWI?
@@PeterKoperdan I haven't read the report in more than a year, so you're better off reading it yourself. IF you google 'rhetoric and reality of disinformation in the european union' you will definitely find it. search 'GlOBSEC' and you'll find the parts specifically designed to analyse GLOBSEC activities in Slovakia :) cheers
@@larrycable1948 historians generally dont separate the world into 'good' and 'bad' guys. A monochrome revision of history where we simply switch from lauding anything the west has ever done like liberals do today, and instead to making the west - or Britain in particular - the 'antagonist' of early modern/modern history, is just as analytically and empirically wrong.
I find the self-congratulating 'centre' of western historiography very naive in that regard. The 'counter narratives' favoured in many third world countries or in China and Russia are no less irrational and self congratulating, however. China and Russia has a penchant for teaching their school kids how any historical wrong, atrocity or war is due to western imperialism. The supposition being that *they* would never have acted like that, were the roles reversed.
The insight here is not to simply switch out your irrational protagonist/antagonist interpretations of history and turn it around, but instead to realize that historical analysis is manipulated to serve the foreign policy goals everywhere, and that we should be skeptical towards the 'official narratives' of any nation including our own of course.
@@gustavalexander8676 In my opinion, most modern historians try to judge history with a modern "morality" that simply didn't exist. I mentioned that Britain had centuries of practice at propoganda and they are pretty good at it. As for their Imperialist tendencies, no worse than most of their contemporaries, and if nothing else, did end most of the African Slave Trade. I'm not only skeptical of "official narratives", I'm
skeptical of most historical works since most historians work for the University systems and are by definition, part of the ruling class. If you look at the American Civil War, the original histories were largely written by the losers and gave a false impression of the conflict that has only recently been seriously challenged.
NAFO shitting their pants rn
Yeah lol😂
Nafo?
@@Augusto9588 with laughter. What the Kursk doing?
At the end of the day, a smaller country can defend itself against a bigger country for only so long. Eventually over time. the bigger military and economy will overwhelm the smaller country.
Western countries: LALALALALALA IM NOT HEARING YOU LALALALA
@@theWACKIIRAQIdo you seriously think that the West cares? The big thing that occurs is that if the war continues past 2026, Russia will run out of stockpiles, meaning that the Russians will start to lose power projection globally and even inside its own territory following 2026. And if Ukraine wins even better.
Unless the smaller nation is given outside support. Eventually, the bigger nation runs out of tanks and jets and starts having to rely on weapons from the cold war era
@@Kokoda144 Aren't ukraine already supported mostly with cold war era weapons?
@@daaw74If you learned something from the past , the only thing that the Soviet Union and Russia can is mass production . They produce more artillery shells than the US and EU together , you are not beating them by thinking they ran out of weapons .
The objective of an army should be to destroy the opponents army, not capture territory. Russia is destroying Ukraines army, and as a result, defenses are collapsing and territory just coming by itself.😅
Yup 👍🏼 I said the same exact thing
this channel is a westoid simp like many others
not really true, ukraine has only lost about 80 thousand men. of course, russia has a population overmight, and it isn't 1940 anymore, where spamming tanks will win you the war. still, if ukraine gets a good number of f-35s, russia would be pretty screwed.
@@adamelghalmi9771 keep telling yourself that, there's no magic weapon to win the war, it's just the western propaganda to keep Ukraine burning so that it weakens Russia as the west desires
@@adamelghalmi9771 if if if.. whats happening on the ground paints a different picturr
Finally a war video that isn't biased to one side or another.
Fucking tired of hearing "Russia/Ukraine is done for!" every single week since 2022.
The NAFO side was silent from 2014-2022. There was no reason for them to go pull propaganda until the stalemate was broken by RU's increased material/Air support for the DPR and LPR.
Okay so the CIA finally let Binkov open the cope folder? I thought you guys were winning? LMAO
In regards to the eventual siege of Pokrovsk, I don't think we will see much of a grind if Ukraine aren't willing to sacrifice just as many soldiers. Why? Because like you said Russia now has a superiority in basically everything AND they now have access to large FABs that can literally demolish large commie block houses, so there's nowhere to hide.
During the siege of Bakhmut you still had a large amount of veterans on the ukrainian side that could easily hold out for months against what was then Wagner troops, however now those veteran brigades are very rare. They're so rare Ukraine had to send the veteran brigade from Vuhledar to plug the holes in the Pokrovsk direction, which has now led to Russia advancing on Vuhledar, and on-top of that they had to deploy four national guard brigades from different parts of the fronts to Pokrovsk aswell.
Ukraine clearly has a gigantic issue with manpower if they have resort to these things, so are they actually willing to defend Pokrovsk against superior firepower? Maybe, but judging by the reaction from Ukraine's leadership, they obviously expect this to be very very costly, there's no 5:1 or 3:1 kill ratio anymore.
Also a key point about Backmut is that it was meant to distract Ukraine (more specifically its 6 new assault brigades) and make sure they couldn’t launch a large scale offensive while the Russian army was still in a very bad position (recovering from losses and trying to fix its terrible NCO corps). If Backmut fell earlier the great spring counter offensive might have actually been successful and the war would be completely different by now
@@privatebandana as a Ukrainian it’s both sad and amusing how out of tough with reality your analysis is. No Ukraine doesn’t have a man power problem we have a weapons problem (we have 10 brigades that can’t be deployed due to a lack of equipment). Ukraine has superiority in drones and the general quality of troops (otherwise we would have actually lost). Veterans are no less common than before. You don’t hide in building or even trenches the war has moved into a phase of bunkers that’s why advancing is such a man power drain. There absolutely is a 1:3 kill ratio (otherwise the ruSSians would already be in Pokrovsk).
@@maryanchabursky9148 Brother, your own president has literally said you have a manpower issue, western generals have said you have a manpower issue and your own commander of the military has said you have a manpower issue. It's so bad that Ukraine are forcing Poland to mobilize and train the male refugees that are hiding in polish territory.
Veterans ARE less common, that's a fact that has been told by ukrainian troops on the ground. In the Pokrovsk direction they're being told that the men coming in are all newly mobilized that doesn't have the moral or know-how of how to fight, so they're more of a nuisance for the veterans that are on the ground there. And again, Ukraine had to pull their only veteran brigade from Vuhledar to fill the gaps in the Pokrovsk front because they had no other veteran groupings to pull from, and now Vuhledar looks like it's falling.. so if Ukraine had enough veteran groupings to go around, why did they potentially sacrifice Vuhledar? Why didn't they at least send parts of a veteran brigade to defend Vuhledar if there's no issues with veteran manpower?
There's zero bunkers on the Pokrovsk front, you literally just made that up. Russia advanced from Prohres to Novohrodivka in ~5 weeks, something Ukraine did not expect, there was no time to build bunkers around that area in such a short amount of time and they took Novohrodivka almost intact which wouldn't have been the case if there were bunkers and massive fortifications there lol.
Sitting here lying won't help with anything.
Ukraine is failing simply because Russia has more of everything and now significantly better commanders.
They have better commanders now? Who are they and when did they change?
idk about better commanders, but they are definitely better than those that were before them
Ukraine spent their resources on PR moves. Russia spent theirs on grinding down the Ukranian army.
Because ukraine could not reform its army structure and logistics. Territorial battalions are thrown into open fields without any support while all the manpower and equipment goes to newly formed units
Due to Kursk invasion UKRAINE will loose a lot more land
But how many people. Human lives >>>> land
Most young Ukrainians are in the West in Poland, Germany, Great Britain, etc.
They tried to leave poland, Poland planned to shipped back able body men to UA
@@janrudnicki6111 lol no
Russia doesn’t measure success in territory caught.
They measure it in demilitarisation (of NATO) and denazification of Ukraine forces including paid international mercenaries.
Where they situate their meatgrinders doesn’t matter to Russia.
how does that working out for you now that Finland and Sweden are part of NATO as a result ?
@mithridatesii6925 Irrelevant countries, no one is scared of those two lol
@@xReLentLess213 Irrelevant country with 1/20th of the population that kicked your ass during the world war 2 ?
@@mithridatesii6925
I mean I am european, and you speak nonsense. Finland lose war. I don't get you really, you just speak some nonsenses from propaganda. Educate yourself first.
@@mithridatesii6925Those countries are laughable now, LGBTQXYZ++++--- who knows what more hubs, full of immigrants which dont give a flying duck for those countries, and weak native people. And Russia doesn't have any reason to attack any of those countries. Unlike country led by nato n a t zz is and smol gib mani kokainski.
Binkov: _*Mentions any point negative about Ukraine or positive about Russia_
Bots: "He is pR0-rUsSiaN" 🤡
You just can't be un biased in this war without getting jumped
@@IK_MK what is there to bias about. Its clear who is an invading force and who is defending their sorvereignty.
@@markienl don't be silly.
@@mugenmugen9632 i am not though ? Perhaps you were reading another comment ?
@@markienl I'm talking to you. Neutrality is supposed to be the default approach to coverage on wars, otherwise it's just propaganda. You can't force anyone to pick your side. Get over yourself.
Only Blackrock wins this war
Don't forget Raytheon.
The main losers are the Russian and Ukrainian people.
Did you see the increases in wealth for the Russian elites involved in military supplies? Substantial to say the least
They can't get away with it 😢😢
@@amadeokomnenus1414 so black rock owns no arable land in Ukraine.
The only things I’ve seen them putting up investment money into is reconstruction when the war ends.
Black rock along with JP Morgan and others hopes to have $15b set aside for reconstruction projects.
Not if Russia wins if they do then Blackrock goes belly up
defenses?? you mean relying on soviet architecture? hmmm wonder where all that money went then...
A lot of keyboard warriors here that know nothing about the war. Go and volunteer in ukraine and you will change your mind very quickly.
Are you in Ukraine?
I did volunteer & back home how about yourself. Did you volunteer for Russia is that why you think you know so much
@MrJones-yq7wm no, not my show nor my monkeys, but been somewhere and seen enough . You do not know what being in a trench is like while shells are flying all over the place, and these days with drones, i believe it's even more horrific.
When your best friend is turned into minced meat from waist up in a split second before your eyes, you start to question everything.
@@lewissmith-t4b The issue is people are mad because the guy in the video said the truth about the reality of this conflict, hence the invitation for them to go check for themselves
@@lewissmith-t4bwhy.. why you back home?
Bonkov is pretty terrible but at least he is starting to admit the obvious reality.
Just imagine how bad is the situation for binkov to admit these things
@ Yea a lot of the hardcore pro Ukrainian to the point of delusion analysts seem to be rolling over. I honestly always figured Russia was going to take it eventually. The Americans don’t really understand attrition warfare so many of us are interpreting slow gains in territory as strategic failure. Ofc we also fail to understand that taking territory is actually not one of Russia’s primary objectives, one could argue. I wonder if NATO will hold the L or mobilize some eurocucks into the grinder ostensibly (because they are ofc already there unofficially).
Its not a race - if it takes 5 years then it takes 5 years
There now- isn’t it better to know the painful truth than to be misled by comfortable lies?
Why? Ask Cokensky about why he ordered incursion into Kursk while the frontlines in the East was crumbling LOL
It's called Chess move, different approach out of desperation
@@ConflictedYouth It's called a checkers move while RU is playing chess.
@@evilleader1991 how is taking Pokrovsk going?
@@maryanchabursky9148 Simpletons like you can only think of 1 thing at a time, while people like you were busy celebrating the Kursk offensive the Russians propelled forward towards Pokrovsk. After a few weeks of celebration your mind finally had the capacity to see that Pokrovsk was in a sh*tty situation so now your mind is glued on Pokrovsk city. Meanwhile Russians start encircling Vuhledar, move north of Staromaiorske and Urozhaine, move into Chasiv Yar, 2 km from cutting off the Ukrainians near Oskil river, start retaking Kursk and here you are bragging about Pokrovsk . Your cheap one-liners wno't work on me, probably in 1-2 weeks your idiotic brain will start focusing on Vuhledar meanwhile Russians advance in 10 other places
More like Zelenksy gamble.
High risk, low return.
Fun fact, most people who cope hard in this comment section are mostly Americans not Ukrainians
Kursk was a reasonable gamble for Ukraine to take, but now it's done and nothing's come of it.
But what was Ukraine supposed to do? What they did before was have their professional soldiers run from place to place like a fire brigade to stem the Russians, but it only delayed the inevitable fall of these defensive works.
Now we see a faster collapse of defenses because you have Ukrainian troops who, by no fault of their own, don't know what they're doing and so are just giving up ground to the Russians.
I think the biggest failure of the AFU can be attributed to the abysmal performance of their officers and lack of accountability. If a Russian commander makes a mistake and gets a lot of people killed for nothing, they're fired or rotated, if they're caught stealing from the army and soldiers, they're fired and probably prosecuted. The AFU has very little accountability for such commanders
The big mistake the Ukrainians made was getting into this conflict in the first place. They never had a chance of winning and should have negotiated.
The problem is Ukraine either doesn’t want to, or straight up can’t, admit they have corruption problems. Zelensky has stated he got rid of all corruption in Ukraine and everyone who claims otherwise is called a traitor
@@yarnickgoovaerts exactly and this attitude leaks into these mid level officers, where they treat their own little areas like they're kings of their own little grid squares and they don't really want to work together.
Not to say all the time, the professional army brigades definitely work together better, but now most of them are in Kursk.
This is ignoring issues of supplies and industrial capacity to continue the war. Regardless I think a post Ukraine western world is going to be very interesting
@@gabrielseth5142 and let’s not forget many officers are afraid of showing initiative and risking demotion or other forms of punishment if they fail, and the fact that NATO training only focuses on platoon (and occasionally maybe company) level manoeuvres and you get an army that’s (except for a few good officers) incapable of any large scale operations
still this analysis baised and pro ukranian
There aren't many unbiased well known war sources on the internet
war problem both need to hide weakness, so normal to well know real truth
Excellent vid! 👍🏻 I don’t buy propaganda from both sides.
Ukraine simply running out of man, not ammunition.
maybe ukraine has an excess of men that they want to get rid of? thats the only way to make sense of it.
@@esphilee then why do we have 10 brigades that can’t be deployed due to a lack of equipment? How is it possible to run out of men when we haven’t even started conscripting under 25 yet? The answer is that Ukraine is not running out of men anymore that it ran out of men when ruSSian propaganda claimed this a year and a half ago.
Did just binkov realized copium overdose is too great to cope?
The amount of NATO bots crying is hilarious
Binkov is one of them 😂😂😂
Actually they are mostly Russian bots
@@Floridaboi-pe3fk I think a pretty large number of the people in this comments section are actually flesh and blood manchildren. The bots like more visible venues like CNN and BBC reports.
About 90% of the casualties (dead and wounded) are due to indirect fire - artillery and bombing. It is not hard to get the losses ratio using the firepower ratios. No wonder why Ukraine is performing forced mobilization, while the Russian have a steady flow of volunteers that are signing professional contracts with the army.
Those areas are held by conscripts.
And russia has had massive artillery superiority in the whole war. Bro they were firing 32 times the amount of shells as Ukraine was in the first couple months of the war
@@doublehelix7880 indeed it is quite easy to be completely wrong. Drones play a hushed factor in casualties (no artillery is not inflicting 90% or anything close to that). Also how accurate the artillery fire is matters. Ukraine has an advantage in drones and it’s on the defensive, Ukraine is suffering far fewer losses than ruSSia as a result of this. ruSSia is still performing mobilizing men as is Ukraine. They are just not doing so in the same numbers as they used to. The ruSSia volunteers are signing because they are being offered the equivalent of $200,000 signing bonuses in some parts. Many ruSSin military have been calling for another wave of mobilization for a while due to ruSSias own manpower problems.
@@maryanchabursky9148 Your naivety is adorable :)))
@maryanchabursky9148 hey, hohol, how about joining up? 😊
or maybe russia is moving so slow because they dont want to take high losses?
Yeah I think you're right, I think they want to keep their troops inside electronic warfare safe zones as they move mile by mile.
That’s ridiculous. Advancing slowly causes higher losses than advancing faster and breaking the enemy.
That's the point of attrition warfare. LAnd can be recaptured. Manpower will not respawn tomorrow. So counting sq.kms is just wrong.
@@eliasziad7864 it can't be either or. You can advance quickly because you achieved a breakthrough of the enemies front , by exploiting some new weakness or throwing a lot of bodies at the problem to overwhelm the enemy (example of the latter is soviet rapid advance into Germany in late WW2 where they suffered heavy losses and advanced quickly because they were using their numbers). As well the front can grind to a halt or slow pace if there is high attrition (like in WW1 western front) or if both sides are being too cautious (like in early WW2 western front where Germans and French practically stared at each other for months , or how the allies were advancing through France in 1944, cautesly and slowly, not suffering huge losses, while soviets were taking huge chunks of their territory back using their superior numbers).
Correct, this is Russian attritional warfare doctrine. Don't want to push through and over extend leading to logistical issues, it's why Russia tactically retreated in 2022 because they didn't have the logistics in place.
if you refuse to admit you're losing the correct steps needed to fix the problems will not happen and winning is impossible
Damn it you’re telling me Ukraine ain’t winning?! Whatttttt!!!!!
There were no obtainable operational goals to the Kursk offensive.
I think the main objective may have been to take the Kursk Nuclear Plant?
Obtainable or not, there was only one way to find out.
Slow n steady wins the race