Why The Ukraine War Isn't Actually a Stalemate
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 01. 2024
- Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. bit.ly/TheIcarusProjectMH If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount.
Many media outlets have described the war in Ukraine as a stalemate. But is this actually true?
In this video, we examine the actual situation on the frontline, and weave in some context about narratives Russia is trying to push about the war - and why. We find that Vladimir Putin is very motivated for the west to believe that the Ukraine War is a stalemate, but that in reality, the situation is far more complex, and far less hopeless than some have made it seem.
Please subscribe: / @icarusproject
The Icarus Project on Patreon: / theicarusproject
Merch Store: icarusproject.myspreadshop.com/
Selected Sources:
Don't have time to read? Turn any source into audio with Speechify: speechify.com/?via=icarusproject
For unbiased coverage of the Ukraine War, be sure to visit: ground.news/interest/ukraine-...
Ukrainian commander in chief says the war is NOT a stalemate: www.reuters.com/world/europe/...
Original Ukrainian commander in chief's essay. Ukraine needs more technology to defeat Russia quickly: www.economist.com/europe/2023...
Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Ukrainian president) denies stalemate: www.nbcnews.com/politics/poli...
*Some of the links and other products that appear on this video are from companies which The Icarus Project will earn an affiliate commission or referral bonus. The Icarus Project is part of an affiliate network and receives compensation for sending traffic to partner sites. The content in this video is accurate as of the posting date. - Zábava
Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. bit.ly/TheIcarusProjectMH If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount.
Not sure if you know or not but thus far this war costs American's about $50-100 a year per person, thats like 33 cents per day, seems very affordable, not sure why the aid would dry up.
Why are you pretending that the reason behind loss of American interest in supporting Ukraine isn't Ukraine's corruption? Even Zelensky said that Corruption in Ukraine won't be fixed in this decade. Billions of dollars of humanitary and military aid went down the drain already, since a lot of the help is being stolen. You basically pretend that there is nothing that Ukraine could be doing wrong... You didn't even mention Ukrainian withdrawal from a few places in the frontline.
Безопасность Европы и мира в целом это развал MOSCOW Horde (орды 🇷🇺 🌴) ...
@@hybridarmyoffreeworld ЦРУ и Америка не допустит развала России как не допустило развал в 1991 году. Т.к. лучше когда всё ядерное оружие хранится в одних руках, чем в сто по типу Кадырова. Но ты можешь мечтать об этом когда развал Украины уже произошёл.
@@PresidentElectA-AbramsPlus, aid is already in military material, not money. You can't really use already built ATACMs to fund healthcare or education.
Good grief, how many Americans have read in depth about our own Revolutionary War? It took 8 years!
And ALL hostile forces had to cross the Atlantic, slowly, and weren't right next to us.
Amen. The instant gratification seeking is unreal. Took the allies 12 weeks just to break out of Normandy with thousands of bombing runs in support of ground troop movements. How long did Russia cede land to Germany? How much longer did it take them to push the Germans completely out of Russian territory? Idk if tiktok has turned everyone into adhd squirrel-brains or what.. But even with western help, Ukraine is still a feisty underdog in this fight. Shit takes time.
Yes and they were in a FAR more precarious situation.
americans
Yeah but today it don’t take 3 months to sail and ocean
"Counteroffensive is not a Hollywood movie."
Even one of Ukraine's officials said this at the beginning of 2023's counteroffensive when the media started speculating about unrealistic expectations
Even with enough wepons ukraine can't take back teretories
because army needs good training for counteroffensive
@arash9255 how's the weather in Moscow?
@@arash9255 naw. more like an army needs an air force if they ever hope to push Back the enemy (who actually does have an Air Force)
@@adamdudley8736 heard that there are already F-16s in the ukraine already. Dunno what to take if from but good for them.
@@adamdudley8736western media doesn't want you to know that Russia involved 18 old Soviet stratobombers in the bombing of the Ukraine without impunity.
The idea that WW1 ended in stalemate and everyone eventually gave up and agreed to an armistice is not remotely correct. The stalemate was broken in the summer of 1918 by the devlopment of combined arms tactics, the failure of the Ludendorff offensive, and the successful Foch counter-offensive. The German high command told the civilian government that they were no longer able to conduct the war and to negotiate an armistice before the advancing allies rolled into Germany.
Two excellent lectures explaining a) the nature of the trench stalemate and how it was eventually broken, and b) the Foch counter-offensive of 1918 (Second Battle of the Marne):
czcams.com/users/liveCs-18CyxOX0?si=mPeLaxaxGwX2LAyP&t=210
czcams.com/video/Aey6nVhZpcU/video.htmlsi=FyuOvlPeopeLQajO&t=93
I also thoroughly recommend all the video lecture series of the US National World War One Museum channel:
www.youtube.com/@NationalWWIMuseum
The British made such a mess of it that it took the intervention of the US to bail them out . The Germans could see that they weren't going to keep fighting as more and more Doughboys were arriving.
“There is a tendency in many armies to spend the peace time studying how to fight the last war.” - Lieutenant Colonel J. L. Schley, Corps of Engineers - published in "The Military Engineer", 1929.
I believe the mindset described in the quote above, also applies to the comparisons between WW1, and the Ukraine vs Russia conflict of today.
No thats not overly true in this case lol. Ppl are only making the conparison becuase of the unusual static nature. Its not like any recent war at all.
@@godlovesyou1995 I think it's far more likely that people are voicing the comparison because they think it makes them sound knowledgeable, IE: "There's something of a stalemate happening in Ukraine. I know of another war that was famously stalemated. Give me extra credit cos I'm so clever!"
@@samvimes5124 some, probably, doesnt mean there are no similarities though
@@godlovesyou1995 You've gone from saying: "Its not like any recent war at all."
To saying: "doesnt mean there are no similarities though"
Kind of feels like you're moving the goalposts because you're arguing on principle, and not because you actually have a point.
@@samvimes5124 similarities to ww1 I mean, your quote was referring to 'the most recent war'. Theres been plenty of wars since ww1. Yes it is on principle lol
Its hard to watch something so one sided no matter what side produces it. None of this seems to reflect the situation on the ground.
Botski reported, may you soon be drafted
@@paulgibbon5991 you are very low on intelligence.
@@paulgibbon5991 "I dont agree with obvious propaganda" and you react to this by saying that anyone who dosent agree with you is a bot LMAO you are so brainwashed 🤣🤣
@@deadpusik I'm being charitable by assuming you're a troll farm serf.
@@deadpusik that's what wannabe populars do, virtue signal:
"You don't agree with muh popular narrative You - insert bad word-" = NPC 101
I'm here for the clown show 🙃
Greetings
"Today I will make a video about trench warfare and completely ignore artillery and shell production"
Well, does it change anything? Both sides are dug in, whether they fire a shell into the dirt on the other side or not, they obviously aren't going over the line afterwards because of land mines and other obstacles. I'm not sure what e.g. twice the rate of artillery fire would change right now to be honest. If you can, please free me of my misconceptions here.
@@thulyblu5486 If you can't outproduce your enemy in arty production you lose the war. It's simple as that. When you run out of ammo and can sit only helplessly while the enemy continues to pound you into the ground and continue sending you to afterlife, you lose the war.
If one side can shoot only 1 shell for each 10 shells of their enemy and their every fire mission gets quickly counter-fired and those assets defeated like it does to Ukrainians it certainly does matter.
Russians fight war with artillery and produce 1 million shells PER MONTH. Remember that recently EU declared they will be unable to full fill their 1 million shells promise to Ukraine for which they had more than 6 months. ENTIRE EUROPE can't produce or buy in 6 months as much as Russia does in 1 month...
Also, according to Ukrainian sources they themselves shoot from 2000-10.000 shells per day (on best of days due to ammo limitations), according to their sources Russians shoot 30.000 to even 60.000 shells per day. That's monthly NATO production used in a day...
There's also the fact that Ukrainians have to send their artillery pieces to POLAND to repair and change barrels (which wear out quickly), one of the main criticism by UA about the German Pzh 2000 is that the barrels wear out very quickly. They don't have the means nor the expertise to repair them themselves. Meanwhile Russians perform all maintenance behind their lines by batallions of well trained and experienced specialists.
Then there are also the guided missiles. Ukrainian paper Voice of the People in May 2023 noted that 8000 GUIDED MISSILES have hit Ukraine. By June 2024 they expect that number to be 20.000. NATO can't even dream of using much less producing that many. Russia keeps producing new ones. Their production rate is 6x higher than entire NATO together. Recently saw a report that US may not even know how to make Tomahawks anymore and in a fight with China they would run out of missiles in the first half hour.Also, Russia is using hypersonic Kinzhals for high priority target that no NATO air defence can intercept.
The West has lost the war because they simply can't match the sheer output of Russian military industry or their ability to surge production.
@@cya1no Did you see the news the other day "France will send Ukraine 30 missiles every month" meanwhile Russia is firing over 130 equivalent missile everyday. And I suppose when they start sending them it'll be the next wonder weapon like the himars, strom shadow and leopard2 a6.
@@cya1no so what actually makes them win the war? out producing?
@@t3h51d3w1nd3r You do realize the Russian missiles are significantly less accurate, reliable and less likely to go unintercepted. Right?
The video really did everything to avoid talking about the frozen front lines. Ukraine as been supplied with a lot of good gear and its soldiers has been trained to Nato standards. The reallity has shown, that both are not very usefull in a fortified and supervised frontline. The reason for the stallmate are deep mine fields, artillery and trenches. Of course, if you give ukraine long range weapons they can hit targets far away. But that dos not clear a mine field and does not clear a trench. Shooting war ships is exactly what you where blaming the stallmate on. Its just for the media.
Ukraine as all of the equipment needed to clear the minefields (i.e., tanks with flails, demining machines, and explosive rope for sappers), the main issue is more that the minefields are too well-defended to be cleared even with all the proper equipment.
The evidence for this is that demining crews over the summer were killed disproportionately by artillery as opposed to by actual mines or gunfire.
Hitting targets pretty far away is quite useful, as it prevents fuel and ammo from reaching the Russians in the minefields, leaving the minefields defenseless against clearance teams once the supplies all run out.
Ukraine is using the Fabian strategy. Odd how the media's goading them is so closely reflecting a very similar situation to what happened back in the Roman empire with Fabian; getting fired initially for his slow, passive strategy, even calling him a coward. They would lead the army out to attack the barbarian army waiting outside the walls, instead of opting for a strategy of holding on and waiting them out as they starve; the invading army was very far from home and supplies. Though, they did end up going back to Fabian for help after catastrophic losses.
This is an artificial comparison. Most often a siege favors the attackers …. And would in this case as well were it not for outside resupply from NATO.
Yep, they use Fabian strategy but in a situation when invading army is actually closer to their supplies then the defending one...
@@SuperMassiveGrayCat Ukraine is being supplied externally through NATO lines…..meaning nothing for Russia to bomb in Ukraine and Russian can’t bomb the deliveries without giving NATO justification for open war.
@@Matt-yg8ub The longer and worse the supply lines the worse for the army attacking. That is why ruSSia is so military weak and why they try to rebuild anything they can and outfit old tanks to make them explode less often.
Actually, I do think the stalemate/not stalemate debate is a bit overblown. It is not a binary thing, and the proper thing to consider regarding WW1 was that the stalemate did lead to the fall of the German Army, so it could ne argued it wasn't one either, but then, a true stalemate would require both sides to expand exactly as much as they can recover in the long run.
Even the Hundred Years war was not a stalemate, despite lasting for generations.
So I'd argue that a stalemate is just the map borders not moving much, while things that are much harder to notice change in the background (supplies, morale, and even manpower).
Germany collapsed because it was starving to death. Their attempt to blockade the UK failed but we had their navy bottled up and they couldn't import food. 2ndly when the war on the eastern front ended with a peace treaty following the Russian revolution they couldnt re-deploy to the west fast enough to beat the American involvement. Together with the food shortage it was all over.
Exactly, also if the enemy for example is weakened by internal problems like popular protest, lack of resources, morale and a malfunctioning society, then things could change suddenly shift. These things are not linear but when it reaches some breaking point things can collapse quickly.
(It's a propaganda piece.)
@@frida507 does it means that Ukraine is more in danger of internal collapse?
@@MasterPetrik No Russia
Slight correction for Chess: For a stalemate, only the player taking his/her turn needs to be out of legal moves for it to be a draw by stalemate. There are other ways to draw a game in chess as well, such as if a position is repeated 3 times in a row, if neither side has enough pieces to checkmate the opposing king, or if 50 moves have gone by without a capture or a pawn move.
In this video, Putin's playing chess with what appears to be Paul Ryan.
Excellent comment! Thanks.
3 times repetition, lack of material, and the 50-move condition are not stalemates; they are draws. The video is correct in its description of a stalemate.
@@SurfinScientistRead what I said. I specifically said "There are other games to DRAW a game", I didn't say other ways to stalemate. And no, the video is not correct in its definition, at least not a chess definition. At 4:48 he specifically says "A game of chess ends in a stalemate when BOTH sides have no legal moves to make without sacrificing their own king." This is just wrong, not to mention pretty much impossible outside of some bizarre theoretical position. Only the person taking his turn needs to be out of legal moves for it to be a stalemate.
Talk about missing the point!!!!
Channel was created 1 year ago and every video is on russia or china “weakness” and “losing” themes etc. take that information as you will…
bullseye
Your account was created Jan, 12 2024. Take this info as you will...
I can take coffee, snack food and hopefully I can wait (in good help) untill their prediction happen. It will take a while...
The Gaycarus Project is a propaganda channel
Yeah it's pretty much western propaganda masquerading as a nonbiased geopolitical analysis. This war is a super stalemate lmao.
D-Day was a success but it took over a month to break out of Normandy thanks to the hedgerow country there which allowed the Germans to make every mile an ambush. The Allies secured the beaches and landed plenty of supplies and men so the idea of them being defeated was impossible but it took more time than some were hoping for.
D-Day was a disaster, human slaughterhouse. Lucky for US and Britain, USSR already pushed there side so fast and far that it was impossible to continue war at that time on the same territory.
Stalinw as literally begging the west to open a Western Front, world war two USSR would disagree with you very much, the war, the longer it lasted, was more and more Russians dying, to Stalin the D-DAY delay was a western plan to kill more of his own people, because he knew the war would end much faster if the west did attack.
And, "disaster"? Come on bro, D-DAY could have happened a thousand times and more will have died in Stalingrad alone than there. Not to mention the Wehrmacht lost 5x more men in D-DAY than the allies.@@d1namis
@@d1namis Could have been worse. Lucky the panzers didn't hit the beach. Hitler thought the invasion was a distraction from the "real" one at Calais which was due to false information feed to him.
Sure
@@d1namis Erm no it wasn't. Compared to other battles during WW2 Normandy was not a "slaughterhouse" as you so ignorantly put it. Germany was finished by 1944 and It was just a matter of time before the Allies broke out from Normandy.
You do realise that by your definition, WW1 wasn't a stalemate at any point. Not even the western front was a stalemate by your definition. The gains and losses in Ukraine in the last year are tiny compared to the changes the western front underwent at Ypres, Verdun, the Somme, etc.
Maybe for the front-movement criteria the narrator claims. However, the other other criteria, that all available offensive resources and options are already committed, has not been met by the current situation. I don't know if I agree with the criteria outlined, though...
Its more than just taking land from other. Its also about archieving stategic goals, and ukraine has had many strategic victories, like they have managed to push russian fleet away from the crimea. And they managed to kill many high ranking officers, crippling russian war effort. Also they have managed to push back the russian aviation, so they have to go even further away... Destroying and damaging awacs planes is a huge strategic victory that makes russian air defence even weaker.
@@markoliimatainen2565 Can I ask where you got this information? Because currently the Black Sea Fleet is still stationed in Sevastopol and the last few months the Russian air-force has been the busiest since the beginning of the war. Since in the beginning Ukraine had an intact and fully stocked air-defence which prevented the Russian air-force from doing much.
@@markoliimatainen2565 Yea, that's a propaganda. Even I heard russian air strikes, living near Dnepr river. NATO AA was in Kherson in last winter and spring. And now when drone flyes over the city I hear only kalashnikovs. All local AA wasted un summer of counteroffencive.
Hot Take, but realistically WW1 was never a stalemate... Germany and by extension the Central Powers always planned and depended on a rapid collapse of France via a powerful strike because they had no answer to the Allied naval blockade and overall commercial isolation their alliance suffered under. Germany was continually suffering and dying under the blockade. Germany's allies were half liability and themselves could only last for so long.
The narrative of WW1 being a stalemate is a result of Allied desires and ideas around being able to knock the Central Powers out of the war with a decisive victory versus economically starving them out and forcing internal collapse of their countries (something that was a foreign concept to the more battlefield decided conflicts of the early Modern / Napoleonic era but absolutely a factor in total war, industrialized warfare).
Even when Germany switched gears to knocking out Russia and then concentrating on France as opposed to the vice versa they STILL couldn't pull off a decisive and necessary victory on the Western Front before us Americans arrived to seal the deal. A WW1 where America never joins and the Western Front remains a slog fest is STILL a Central Power defeat. If not Germany collapsing than certainly Austria and the Ottomans would have collapsed and thus led to the entire house of cards falling apart.
France and Britain just (very understandbly I should add) did not want to pay the extreme human and economic cost to wait/starve Germany out, even if that is basically what they ended up doing in the end anyway.
Edit: To add, it's completely possible the Allies could have convinced themselves to give up / the war wasn't worth the cost but if it's about which side would HAVE to give up before the other, that was 100% always going to be the Central Powers.
Only some parts of the west are getting "bored" with Ukraine. Support for Ukraine in the Nordic and Baltic countries is as strong as ever.
Sure. I believe we need too see how promised fighter jets will reshape the war first, and if the effect is large the partners might become more willing to give similarly powerful equipment down the line.
@@aidarosullivan5269 they will reshape the war like all the "gamechanger" weapons sent to Ukraine like leopards and bradleys? Since Russia is advancing on multiple directions and major Ukrainian cities are burning I doubt it. ALL the airdefense systems failed miserably. Cruise missiles are flying above Kiev with 0 resistance.
I dont why we should be getting bored, literally a lot on the line even for western countries here if putin wins. He is trying to weaken nato by eliminating potential members, even if ukraine would never actually join realistically. We do need to wake up though as I can't see any way ukraine can win without support. Ukraine is a great potential ally and we can seal our alliance with unwavering support, this must be done I dont see how that's so hard for our leaders to understand.
Yes and the combined GDP of the Nordic countries is bigger than Russia. The support is not going anywhere
same in eastern europe, nobody that were next to russia feels ok with this war of aggression
i expected knowledge and analysis, received fluff and semantics arguing
Pro ukraine side in a nutshell :/
Well pietero, the Ukrainian side is devastated by your nutshell.@@pietero.o6792
Yupp, l wasted 20 min.
The WWI stalemate narrative kind of applies to the Western front 1915-1917. The Eastern front was another story. But 1918 was a whole other story - Germany could bring forces from the collapsed Eastern front, but France and the UK could bring in Americans. German had shown that messing with American shipping was one of the great blunders like getting involved in a land war in Asia, but they'd been being ground down by a blockade, what choice did they have but to use their U-boats to the max? Just because there weren't a lot of big arrows on the map 1915-1917 doesn't mean really important stuff wasn't happening.
Exactly.
As long as Russia stays on the offensive, Ukraine should stay on the defensive, as is easier and more productive to do so. Russia is experiencing significantly more casualties than Ukraine, which is obviously a good thing, so Ukraine should keep doing exactly what they’ve been doing. If things continue this way, Ukraine will win.
Basically Russia is screwing up despite the lack of movement of the front lines.
Germany's allies were also being degraded much more severely than Germany itself. Even if Germany could have somehow held out longer on the western front it was inevitably going to have a 1,000-mile undefended border on its south when the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria, and Austria-Hungary collapsed.
No honest observer believes Russian losses exceed the Ukrainian/NATO casualties. Quite the opposite, in fact. The "kill ratio" ( to use the odious term invented by the Americans in Vietnam) is at least 3-1 in Russia's favour. Some put it as high as 10-1. In a war of attrition, without massive outside intervention, the Kiev regime is going to lose, inevitably.@@terjeoseberg990
@@terjeoseberg990 "Russia is experiencing significantly more casualties than Ukraine". What are your sources? "The TV said"? "I saw it on youtube"? "Everybody knows..."? Show me a single reliable source of casualty information
@@Sashulya, I don’t watch TV. What are they saying?
Thank you for this. It's infuriating that Western leaders are still unable to make the right conclusions about this conflict and at least semi-seriously supply Ukraine with what Ukraine needs.
EXACTLY!!! Good grief, THIS^^^
That's not the goal, people like me have been saying it for the last 2 years, it's a drip feed to prolong the war, the goal is to weaken Russia no matter the cost to the Ukrainian people.
Don't blame the Republicans! We still firmly support the Ukraine! Joe Biden is using the Ukraine as hostages to keep the U.S. Southern Border wide open. We are being invaded and need to close this border in order to help the Ukraine. The Democrats are unwilling to budge and want the enemies of our country to overrun us.
He didn't discredit any of the complaints though. He just called reality a Russian narrative. That reality is we've sent everything we have. There's nothing left. The will to fight becomes delusional after that. Russia is only going to ramp up pressure now. They can overwhelm Ukrainian defenders who lack the stuff they need, notably artillery. We're spent. Russia is not. That's basic math. Not Russian narratives.
The west only has so much to give, we literally don't have the supplies, therefore we have to make more, we literally can't, even with our planned increase we can't meet demand. Now I get Ukraine has said that they would pay us back, but you go tell the needy, the sick, the homeless, any xyz that could use it that they need to wait for any potential help because we loaned the money to defense contractors to pump out weapons. Andddd I also get that the gov is useless as is and already isn't helping the people in our own countries but that is literally the problem people have. My very own Justin Trudeau gets to give all of Canada's support on his behalf. My little rant but it's a perspective I guess
how much do you get paid by defense contractors?
Russians malding
@@presterjack9764 Cope harder Fedboi. Nobody cares that your favorite sexual orientation this week is Ukraine 😆😆
are u swedish
@@presterjack9764pro men not dying is Russian propaganda?
Who is winning? Weapons and ammo manufacturers
Zelensky and his close buddies.
@@Kidfry Well if Ukraine does win, it would be a great advertising campaign of Western Arms suppliers to their future customers! So its not bad for their business if Ukraine wins, and good for Ukraine as well. If all western weapons managed to do was stalemate the Russians, that is not as big a sell as an outright victory!
I think part of it, is we are spoiled after the Gulf War, and Desert Storm. Where we ‘ended’ a war very quickly.
Uh, Afghanistan and 20 years.
and Iraq war 8 years and a failure just like the afghanistan war lmao @@TheMulti313
Gulf War 1 was a compromise, Saddam still held power throughout. He lost some of the oil fields in Kuwait, but was still making money and purchasing weapons from Russia. Then America tried again in 2003 with the eventually arrest of Saddam.
No, US actually screwed up from assassination of Kwame Nkruma and Soviet-Afghanistan war. Gulf war and others are mere symptoms
More, America entered both world wars very late, so it appears to us in our history classes that both were over relatively quickly.
I love how the "winning side" needs to announce mobilizations 24/7
neither side is winning now
@@007kingifrit Not quite true, the U.S. are. Everything goes as intended.
@@vladdracul5072It is the main argument for NATO to support Ukraine, they pour guns (and what amount to chump change compared to all those middle-east black holes) into a country that is fighting the main rival from that part of the globe.
If you look at it with strategic eyes (and the "one million is a statistic" mindset), it is extremely cost efficient to keep going as long as neither side ends up actually collapsing (Ukr because it is pro-west, Ru because it would be chaos), and allows the US to concentrate attention around China, the actual challenger for superpower status.
Which is more indicative of having a smaller population and not at all indicative of who is facing heavier losses.
If Ukraine wanted to empty the prisons and throw the condemned into battle, they could, and that would obviate to need to announce mobilizations; Ukraine simply chooses not to.
@@augusthoglund6053 As for June 2023 Ukraine had only around 50k prisoners vs 400k in Russia
"Read the essay, and not the headlines about the essay." Exactly. People need to learn to read CAREFULLY and not just hurry through, seeing what they want to see. Smart people choose their words carefully, and we need to put as much care into understanding those words, otherwise we miss the actual meaning.
That's implying people nowadays want to Learn
Most people don't have this ability, sadly.
And then remember that the essay is propaganda.
@@allydea it's exactly the opposite to propaganda. Anyone who can read would understand that.
@@romandboiko Only a fool would think that a military commander would publish accurate information to the general public in a time of war.
Speaking of WW1, imagine being a soldier who spent those years in the trenches only to learn that the war was won elsewhere, had nothing to do with trenches, and thus proved that all those years of suffering for the men in the trenches was completely pointless.
This is a COMPLETE misinterpretation of WW1. WW1 was WON in the trenches. The war of attrition was won by the Entente which caused the complete collapse of the homefront of the Central powers. Germany WON the Eastern Front which was arguably the more important front. But by the time they did that, it was too late to bring the needed resources from the East to the domestic front. The Entente did not break through the Balkans because they won the battle. They broke through because the Bulgarian army was STARVING due to the war of attrition and the blockade.
War was over because country run out of resources, out of food, out of ammunition, out of fuel, out of money. In the war it is most important is to isolate a country from trades, country will eventually run out of resources to support the war and will be forced to surrender, that was the case with the Germany in WW1 that never lost the war, but they were forced to surrender because they run out of food and ammunition. WW2 was similar story.
If we talk politics yes all wars are waged because of the criminals that want more, criminals knew how to make money, they always wanted more, they got powerful and they entered the politics rest is history. UK had biggest criminals that run the country, they are well organized to this day and they provoke two sides to wage war so they can profit, it's that simple. It gotten to a new levels today, they plan like 50, 100 years ahead, they rise future leaders in the labs and they use propaganda and teachings to spread the hate between two opposing sides so when the time comes they can use it in their advantage. Whole thing is a stage, and you would be a fool to involve yourself in any of the wars, because you would die for the interest of some rich people that wont care for any of you.
All soldiers should learn that war is about stealing and that the bankers are the boss. "War is a Racket," by Smedley Butler, 2 X winner of the Congressional Medal of Honor.
That is true for every war ever. It's a losing proposition for anyone on the ground.
@@dennisyoung7363 I find most people who reflexively reference Butler and war is a racket regardless of the specific conflict to by and large be idiots or disingenuous.
Effing HELL. I have up with 2 minutes remaining. Way to make a 7-min video 22 mins long by having a robot repeat the same point 537 different ways. The real stalemate was my patience vs you finally wrapping this up.
22 mins gives more ad rev
"Young men dying so politicians can save face"....so it has always been and ever will be...
i'm guessing the reason why Russia is defending the Mariupol region so staunchly while Ukraine is making several attempts to push in that direction is because it would create a pincer situation for Ukraine - being able to attack or pressure Crimea from two angles at the same time, both of which would avoid the hell hole that is likely nowadays the the narrow strait leading north of it...
It's pretty clear that you read some BS articles 8 months ago, and that you based your opinion upon that.
Ukraine didn't try nothing nowhere near or towards Mariupol.
Their "spring counter offensive" concentrated on Zaporozhye (and they literally took one village of pre war population of 500 people there).
No matter what this bozo says - it's a complete stalemate.
Bombing some Crimea bases is same as when Russians are bombing Kiev. The difference is Russia is doing it much, much, more than Ukraine does.
@@inemanja Your comment isn’t great either tbh. It’s not really a stalemate in a traditional sense and you’re just wrong about some things. Don’t know where you get your information but id get it from somewhere else.
우크라이나 전쟁: 러시아의 피를
흘리기 위해 우크라이나의 생명을
희생하다
@@inemanja Ukraine has also crossed the Dneiper and keep wasting tank units despite having no tanks in that area themselves. They are far better soldiers than anything Russia can drum up with two weeks of training, and being told to bring their own body bag.
"Bombing some Crimea bases is same as when Russians are bombing Kiev."
Utterly false. For one thing, when Russia bombs Kiev its a war crime because they're bombing apartment buildings, hospitals, churches, schools, and anywhere else civilians might gather. When Ukraine bombs bases in Crimea, those are legit targets as they are military. Also, Russia might send a lot more bombs at Ukraine but they usually miss because the Russian Artillery Doctrine is to use it to carpet-bomb not to hit specific targets. So they don't have artillery capable of hitting a target and they just bomb a city hoping to war crime its people into surrender. But that has never worked. When the Nazis did it to London it strengthened Londoners' resolve. When the US/UK did it to German cities, it repaired the bond between political Nazis and regular Germans, because they faced life and death together. Putin will never get Ukraine to surrender through his terror bombing campaign. All he does is make Ukraine hate him more. Those in the "Russian Speaking" parts of Ukraine: some of them wanted to be Russia, but no longer do. Its amazing how murdering all someone's friends and neighbors can get them to hate you. Putin, apparently, has not yet learned this lesson. He has made Ukraine hate Russia so much that even if he defeats their army, civilians will go to the Kremlin and get rid of Putin. They speak Russian and can blend in. They know how to survive in the cold, thanks to Putin bombing their electric grid in the Winter. He has created millions of ticking time bombs all headed in his direction. If I thought he was smart enough to understand the consequences of his actions I'd guess he was suicidal. But he isn't that smart and so is instead homicidal.
@@havable What's really going on is that NATO successfully ran a coup in Ukraine in order to eliminate Russian influence from the region. Russia obviously can't allow that, as their entire navy is based in Crimea. There was a civil war that resulted between the Russian regions of the country and the Ukrainian regions, in which the Ukrainians were actively attempting to genocide the ethnic Russians. The Russians obviously decided to back the ethnic Russians in order to maintain control of the strategic regions in the East that are necessary for their national security. Eventually, after the Ukrainians took further steps toward joining a military alliance that is designed to counter Russia, the Russians decided to prevent them from having that ability by annexing the breakaway regions and beginning a hot war. Putin is not fighting a war of aggression, he's fighting a war to protect his national integrity.
The Americans and NATO are trying to diplomatically annex territory on his border and position weapon systems that can easily reach Russian cities. A good analogy to this situation is the Cuban missile crisis in the 60's, where the Americans made it clear that weapons in Cuba would trigger invasion. The Russians are defending themselves from aggression using force because they failed to win politically. The west knew they would do this if they were put into this situation, but the west doesn't care as long as Russia is weakened. The west's plan is arguably backfiring, however, as Russia has now transitioned to a sustainable war economy and is arguably more powerful as a result of this war. It's delusional to think that the Ukrainians have any chance to have any strategic victory here. The Russians are going to take anything they want, because they have comparable military capabilities and an inexhaustible manpower pool.
I doubt MyHeritage would know anything about my family tree. Since my family came mostly from the mountains of the philippines lol
So you're saying you have a family mountain instead of a family tree??
My family are still living in the tree
Oh, who could've thought that throwing everything you have is "more conservative" if all you have is less then what your opponent is willing to use.
Yet here in the states the conservative party is trying to test taking taking weapons away from one side by filibustering aid. Is the conservative party about conserving life? Money? Or it's own agenda?
Would you consider American defense spending conservative? Or the 150 missiles we shot @ the houthis in 1 attack? Were not even at war with the houthis, were just defending navigable waters. Just ask the Somalians, they're right next door, they know what America is about. You don't see them firing drones because they know they'll get missiles up thier butt. We've sent seal teams in there that cleared entire villages that captured our civilians when we could. That's was also the conservative party. George W Bush.
What utter nonsense. The rate of production of weapon system in Russia has sky rocketed. Previously ukrain used to claim to shoot down 98% of missiles and now barely 20%.
You've correctly gleaned the gist of the general's message: Give us the ability to decisively win this war now or we face an unnecessarily drawn-out situation that will be much more destructive.
Indeed.
The narrative of having a chance to beat Russia is absolutely ridiculous. The U.S. and Europe have understood that they cannot continue to squander resources that are required to meet the needs of their own citizens. The elections will "speak for themselves" this year in both the U.S. and Europe.
They need to spend their old artillery first so that they can get financed by tax payers in order make profit and more modern missiles. I'm saddened that we Slavs have been played like this so our brothers and sisters are dying on both fronts meanwhile western politicians are filling their pockets
problem is: there's either no material, or it has already been given to them and they're now closer to a decisive defeat than last year.
@@TheDunestyler "they're now closer to a decisive defeat than last year"
How so? Russia net lost ground in Ukraine again this year, despite half the year Ukraine was running on empty when it came to ammo. Russia can't even gain ground when Ukraine is out of ammo. They're not going to defeat anyone aside from themselves.
As an Ukrainian myself I have to confirm the very accurate facts enlightenment in this video. We are continuing our fight for freedom and democracy for safe future of our Country and Europe with hope and deep appreciation for the international support provided by our partners. Glory to Ukraine! 🇺🇦
You are fighting for nothing. If your dumb leader zelenski didnt become the USA pawn, then russia wouldnt have a reason to attack you. The reason russia attacked is because zelenski let the USA convince him to join nato and put nukes on russias doorstep. The ukrainian people are just pawns stuck in the middle. You are not fighting for freedom or democracy, but for the usa to pressure an adversary.
You should be fighting on the frontlines
Meanwhile people's concerns about Russia potentially attacking NATO persist due to inadequate military funding allocation by European countries. Despite Russia's economy being smaller than Italy's, the concerns about its potential aggression towards NATO remain.
What is Italy's manufacturing capacity within its borders? How about fossil fuels? What percentage of Italy's economy is tourism and financial instruments vs real material goods? GDP alone is terrible way to measure the economy for anyone who exists in the real world and not in derivatives spreadsheets
The reason Russia did not collapse despite Western sanctions is they are self-sufficient in fuel and food, and retain heavy manufacturing capacity, and remainder of consumer goods can be substituted with Chinese versions.
@@Milorada7375 Those are indeed insightful and compelling points.
This video reminds me of an illustration of the work of the media, where some cover one thing, others another, and the truth is somewhere in the middle. This video is definitely not the truth, but one of the sides of the coin.
This is a blatant NATO propaganda channel.
honestly this video should be a reminder that most people no longer believe ukraine is winning, and all efforts to convince them otherwise is a massive cope over being lied to by the US government and media establishment
Given that it's so INSANELY biased, yeah...
What’s funny is the western media has been very biased in favor of Ukraine. And then this video complains about the media repeating Russian talking points.
The war is obviously in a stalemate. He basically refines what a statemate is so he can say it’s not a stalemate.
there is this interview at corbettreport on propaganda. the guest was a university professor who analyzed propaganda.
this video and some of the commenters are complicit in spreading biased narratives based on false assumptions.
also the fact that they label you a kremlin troII just by saying anything slightly bad about ukraine is telling....
Jesus christ this video is 5 minutes stretched to 20.
yep even I, the real Jesus, thought that.
@@UltraRealTrueJesus blessings upon you.
I made it to 4:08 including skipping the advertising. Got bored, hit up the comments section, chatted a few chats, and then hit play while I went to take a dump...
By my best assumption. This is a ww2 documentary. Based off the interlude.
Go to settings playback speed, and speed it up to a comfortable speed for you. I watch at 2x speed Makes a 20min video a 10min watch.
Absolutely.
This has to be the most egregious displays of non stop talking and saying basically nothing I've seen
I didn't make it out of ww2. I'm paused on a black and white picture because the comments section is more entertaining.
Pretty sure this is a lame inglorious bastards remake.
seems like the trappings of classic propaganda and agenda driven material....
Most icarius projects are like that. Feels like a CIA media campaign, like so many others.
the chess board they show from 4:55 is funny. the ones who made that have no idea how chess works. The white king is in check by the black rook and two knights yet they play on. The white rook meanwhile is looking at the black queen, yet the player reaches for the white pawn all of pieces. It would be hard to make it make less sense
Who friggin cares dude? Did it even really matter? The maker oof the video is trying to express that people are being my brutally murdered by oppressors you simp!
The white king is very brave and the white rook is chivalrous.
Chess has set rules war doesn't..
@@Fiasco3 illegal moves = ✨it's never a war crime the first time✨
The attacker must win.
The defender merely must not lose.
It sounds obvious, but the implications are significant.
I believe it's more complicated. In this case, right now, the attacker has won some of what they wanted, but not all. The defender has lost some of what they started with, but not all.
Hands up, who thought this was a RealLifeLore video based on the thumbnail?
:P
"We're winning, please, please help us!!!"
Your analysis is based on "if only Ukraine had better weapons, they could break through".
Please make an root analysis how you come to this concept.
He was implying that if the US supplied half of the USAF and two army corps they could've broken through. Essentially it was a ridiculous proposition.
"Simple answer is often the best"
This vijeo is prop-a-ganja 🙃
@@IR-xy3ij its funny how everyone hates USA intervening in the foreign affairs until the US intervention is supporting the side they like
1:12 to be fair, it wasnt like national leaders could just "not war" after the invasions had begun. Many of the nations in ww1 saw the war as an oportunity to gain land and therefore resources... but even less talked about is that these nations saw ww1 as a chance to lose land, resources, and people to surrounding powers.
It was literally a case of the prisoners dilemma. No country could afford to look like they weren't at least WILLING to fight, otherwise they would be attacked and annexed.
Sounds like Russia truly is trying to pretend it's the Soviet Union again.
Germany had no legitimate claim over Belgium which was a key point in negotiations. They wanted to control this state.
Antante however did not pose any territorial claims over Germany
Then why did they take territory from Germany after the war?
@@Mothball556 because they won. but France had no claim of Lorraine neither in 1914 nor in 1916 during the attempted peace talks. Kaiser and his military top brass were stubborn about Belgium.
but none of those countries had nuclear weapons! If we place nuclear weapons in Ukraine that would stop the Russians!
Why is it when I clicked on this video, I was offered a bunch of videos about trad-wives and think pieces criticizing women's liberation and extolling traditional gender roles?
It's genuinely confusing because this video has nothing to do with that.
By the definition of a stalemate in this video, WW1 was not a stalemate, either. There was still movement, even on the western front, which this video seems to focus on. The Western front would have offensives where the front would move kilometers at a time. Destroyed towns would be taken. The withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line, too. That's not even counting the movement on the Eastern front, Turkish fronts, Balkans, etc.
Because stalemate doesn't look like first world war stalemate....does not mean it is not stalemate!
Yeah, those 2 points in the video are laughable. And then a stalemate never happened irl.
Let's not forget ww1 is no longer going on.
When I say it I mean I want peace negotiations and I don't want to fund an army to take back the land that was lost.
The army is now full of men forced to the front. To say Ukraine wants this is crazy. The government and military industrial complex want this. Prove me wrong and see how it will go without forcing these guys to fight.
Also the area was in civil war since 2014, the government failed the people. And Russia is even worse for invading, but things can be fixed. We don't have to keep going to the last dead person
The reason why I believe it is not stalemate, Ukraine lacks an actual Navy yet are able to repel Russias Black Sea fleet with the use of sea drones. Ukraine also lacks a modern airforce while Russia has supposedly a top of the line fighters, helicopters and bombers. However in spite of this Russia doesn’t have air superiority. Ukraine is training pilots in other countries to be able to operate and maintain the F16. if Ukraine is able to have these much more modern aircraft they could easily turn the tides of the war and could gain air superiority. Ukraine is also keeping their losses to a minimum unlike Russia and is giving proper training to each soldier and not just 2 weeks with no live ammunition like they are in Russia with their mobilized forces.
Never use the word 'easily' in war. There are never guarantees.
@@arash9255 would you like to enlighten us then, General Comradesky?
@@michaelthompson9548 you’re right, I should’ve stated that differently.
@@arash9255 Please explain how this is nonsense, Ukraine destroyed 3 raptor class speed boats, Saratov a Russian navy alligator class landing ship was destroyed by Ukraine, Moskva a Slava class cruiser had been sunked after anti ship missles struck the ship causing fire and munition explosions. A Russian submarine (Rostov-on-don) was hit with storm shadow missles and was deemed economically unrepairable. These are just a few examples of the Russian sea losses. The Russian airforce has lost between 84-130 aircraft due to Ukrainian anti air defenses, fighter aircraft and MANPADS. Keep in mind that’s about 10-14% of the entire Russia aerospace forces they had 900 at the start of the war. You can’t hide your losses when each one is documented
The trollbotskys never have any facts to back up their wild assertions. They just drop pathetic punches that do nothing but help this channel to be more visible to many more people. That is a win for Ukraine 😊
Thank you for your analysis and powerful message!
Feel like I watched a 5-minute video in 20-minutes.
"Battle lines that barely moved"-while still showing the right side of the Dnipro, and Kharkiv oblast in red
That's a weirdly convenient definition of a stalemate that makes the WWI stalemates barely qualify. What the video says is that Ukraine, without further Western support, can't make any sugnificant progerss and Russia, despite its best efforts can't either, making it.......a stalemate!!! As it is said in the video, this means the West should provide more support to Ukraine to fix the problem despite russian efforts to convince us otherwise. Also, I would hardly classify the Bakhmut offensive differently from the Ukrainian counter-offensive. They were both efforts with high losses and little in return in order to show results, also calling russian attacks mindless slaughter, while Ukrainian attacks are highly calculated efforts designed to keep loses to a minimum doesn't help seem unbiased.
Yeah the creator of this video is quite biased, but a lot of people just can't help themselves on the topic of Ukraine. As the video mentions, the war doesn't have to be a stalemate if Ukraine had the resources they needed at their disposal as demonstrated in the black sea, but the undeniable reality is that Ukraine can't materialize more military aid than what they are currently getting, and the dwindling public support in the west probably means that without escalation and a subsequent shift in opinion they will continue to be under-supplied and doomed to maintain the status quo.
@@qrzone8167 "the undeniable reality is that Ukraine can't materialize more military aid than what they are currently getting"
Just about every day another aid package is announced. Germany just tripled the amount they had intended to spend on keeping Russian Nazis in Russia. I don't think the problem is "public opinion" per se. Russian Nazis are cheered in conservative media. That isn't our "public opinion" its just well-connected conservative propagandists convincing their easily duped base that since Putin is a white nationalist he is on their side. The problem isn't "public opinion" the problem is the republican party and tech bros like Elon Musk doing everything they can to hamstring Ukraine so the Russian Nazis they cheer for can have a chance to win. Ukraine is highly capable, and when they have weapons they kick the crap out of the "2nd Army in the World" pretty easily. They're still doing so, but its harder because of the GOP starving them of ammo. They've made more gains in the Krynky area than Putin's Wagner Nazis made in Bakhmut. And Putin no longer has Wagner to fight his battles for him because their leader tried to do a coup and was executed for it. So now Nazi Russia has no decent military units to do their fighting for them.
@@qrzone8167 You are watching a propaganda piece, picked up that the creator is biased, but not the other bits...
Ukraine made serval mobilizations, while Russia did 1, who is losing more? - Russia obviously, right? They did meat waves or whatever... sure, so why was there a leak that Ukraine needs 20k new conscripts to maintain it's forces/front and 500k for a new offensive? Obviously lies, can't be true, listen to media. 1984 was a manual. Freedom is slavery.
You can see the info about mobilizations easly, You can put the puzzles together whose losing more... just don't talk about it? - Ye coz' U see that's the narrative, Ukraine is winning. End of story!
If You want a diffrent source of info try HistoryLegends...
- way less preachy and makes more sense, in My very "wrong" opinion 🙃
Greetings
Russia does not manufacture anything, even wood screws, hence Russia needs Western support as much as Ukraine.
Your reasoning in the end on "unbaised" is obviously too wrong. It is obviously unbiased. There is no argument needed on the point. To simple and easy. You just need to check your brain to find your problem.
Stalemate?!....it was done in Russia's favor when it started, but some are still not "conscious" of what "crazy stone" they've stepped starting this with Russia. Ukrainian forces are all the time between 960,000 and 1.2 million not including tens of thousands of foreign fighters. Russians never went over 360,000 in the last 2 years...but now will start to grow fast when they gain momentum.
Don't even need to watch to know
I always remember the "Wait until Putin unleash the 99.7% of his army he is holding back to avoid civilian casualties" :S
if you think that is the reason why the rest of the russian army is "held" back then you are as copium as people consuming this copium video
@@zjpdarkblazeso true russia has obviously held true on their promise and managed to invade ukraine in just a couple of days ;)
@@Ultimeymate ah yes the narrative that russia is only gonna invade in a few couple of days and failed is even more copium than the original comment. no one in russia ever said that. its as if you attended the meeting where putin planed this war. 😅
@@zjpdarkblaze The question is, why did he called that a "Special Military Operation" and made it a criminal offense with prison sentences to call that a "War" whereas any casual observer can see this is a war of attrition worthy of WW1 position warfare ?
you are the definition of copium. @@zjpdarkblaze
There's been a lot of doom and gloom regarding Ukraine recently. It's great to see a video on this. Btw, it is great to see you again.
It's great to be back!
Second your thoughts! The gloom is warranted but people have been mistaking why there's reason for gloominess - it's not that Ukraine's counteroffensive suffered some epic failure or that they can't keep making key progress, it's that allies have increasingly failed to deliver and are missing huge opportunities.
Doom and gloom sells better than good news.
@@icarusproject Better video title: "How To Make a Five-Minutes Video Last Twenty Minutes."
@@ettoreatalan8303Agree. The media is fickle and goes after any sensation.
Thanks for the video
Thank you for the information!
That was a waste of my time. As soon as you flipped the casualties any credibility went through the floor.
"Some areas are seeing slow progress due to a lack of firvor from their partners." This entire video you addressed the issues but never really went further on how things are currently not Ukraines favor. All out wars are almost always won by industrial capacity and manpower, Ukraine is worse off in both. Im aware Ukraine is increasing their industrial sector but the truth is that most of the significant fighting is done with sophisticated weaponry given by the west. So the fact that westerners, primarily the US are getting tired of financially supporting wars and are getting roped into potential conflict with china over taiwan is a point that you should've addressed more thoroughly. You also talk about the fact that this will likely be a much longer war than we in the west would like and while I agree, you never talked about how this makes things even more worrying for Ukraine. Of course alliances and support from said alliances can change in an instant but to act like things arent looking a bit grim for Ukraine in the long term (at least right now) seems like an actual diservice to the Ukranian people themselves.
You're failing to see some details about how Ukraine is getting it's weapons (and running it's economy). Ukraine has turned it's economy in a war-time one, and therefore every aspect of it's economy has been repurpoused to serve the war effort. This has, of course, bad effects on the overall economy of the country, but it means that Ukraine has become able to use every resource it has against Russia. That's the important keypoint you missed: while yes, Russia has the bigger economy, industry and army, it is not using all of the possible resources they could use to win the war. This is important, because it means that Russia is very limited in what they can invest, make and send to the frontlines, and meanwhile, Ukraine (which fights for it's existance) is able (and forced) to use everything they can get their hands off.
Russia cannot do the same as Ukraine, because to turn their economy into a war-time economy, they would have to sacrifice every other aspect of their economy. This would, therefore, make Russia go broke, just like Ukraine. Not only that, but Russia, as isolated as it is in the world economy, would spend it's money and resources extremely fast, without the ability to recover them. Meanwhile, Ukraine (even with the little money they have) has the backing of the entire EU, the US and their allies. Their help is what makes the difference between total bankrupcy and the ability to fight on.
So yes, for as grim the situation is, Ukraine is in a good position. While excessive optimism about the current situation is stupid, neither should the public view the current state of the war with pessimism.
@@dalius6633Well the Congress still hasn't approved any further funding and probably won't for a very very long time. The situation in the Middle East and West Pacific are more important for US interests and at some point the decision needs to be made about which region should be focused on.
@@dalius6633 when a nation shifts its entire economy into a war economy to make weapons it still has to import things like raw resources and it still has to pay its troops. In order to fund this nations have to either print insane amounts of money or find someone to give them (or at least technically "lend") money to them. Neither of these are sustainable for Ukraine without Finical support from the west they would already be on the rocks even with the amount of weapons they have received. Thats before we consider that things like fighter jets and long range missiles are simply beyond Ukraine's manufacturing capabilities at the moment. Also Russia already is shifting to a war economy and its likely China will lend them money to prosecute the war.
@@dalius6633 As has been already said, Ukraine can't last without external aid, which seems to be diminishing. Russia has a lot of of issues and it's not even a shadow of the USRR, but it's still the biggest country in the world by territory, with much better access to resources and raw materials, and they can count with China as long as this war diverts the US from Taiwan.
@@dalius6633 1) Russia is also in the war economy, they've increased the production of their shells, drones and other equipment to equal or surpass the amount of the equipment supplied by the West and produced by Ukraine. I think this has been stated many times even by the Western officials. That's why the Russian GDP have increased in the last two years despite the overall drop in the economy.
2) Russia is far from being isolated, most of the countries are doing business as usual (all of Asia aside from Japan, Latin America, Africa). The only major trading partner that was lost is the EU and while that was definitely a big blow to the Russian economy it's also far from being isolated and can sell the same goods to these other countries even if at a lower cost. And countries outside of the EU that put sanctions on Russia like USA, Canada, Australia, etc. were not their large trading partners to begin with, so I doubt they even cared about them.
"Our support will continue to be withheld until you achieve the results that would only be possible with our support" (18:37). You nailed it. That perfectly sums up the lessons of the ill-fated counteroffensive. I wish i could force Mr Biden to watch this three times a day.
As much as I hate the insane left, I don't think Biden is to blame for suspending the aid though.
Dude actually made a 23 minute "well ackshuyally" video.
"The West will support Ukraine for as long as it takes" meaning for as long as the patience of the West can take it
or while Ukrainians have youth to sacrifice for Western interests.
as long as we supported our "friends" in Vietnam and Afghanistan perhaps.
People here love to swim in the sea of their own delusions.
😂
It's quite funny, indeed tho' I wonder how/why You're 'here'? same reasons?
I came to see if it's propaganda, and if it is - to laugh at it and it's viewers, I'm not disapointed 🙃
I love that he says that many more sources can be cited but fails to cite a single source. I wish it was that easy for me when I write my essays. I would love to just say trust me I know what I am talking about.
Very interesting And informative thank you .
Another reason Ukraine wants to preserve their men is because they have less than a third the population of Russia. Also, I do believe if Putin felt there was no alternative to defeat, that he would use tactical nukes. Everyone said he wouldn't invade Ukraine and start a war in the first place. They were wrong about that too.
Pushing the Nuke Rethoric again? The problem with Nuke is, they aren't exclusive to any one country. You launch a nuke against your enemy, you have also just commited suicide.
Putin also understands his life line is the Southern Neighbor China, who still refuses to provide any Military Equipment to these day, and have a No first Strike Policy.
Let also not ignore the massive Chinese Migration legally and illegally into Manchuria for the last 2 years, and the Chinese Media has been calling Manchuria by its original Chinese Name lately.
Unless Putin completely gone mad, pushing the Nuke Button is just a mutual assure destruction by turning the entire world against him.
Also out of Ukrainian on paper population around 20% were and are loyal to Russia making their situation even worse.
I as Ukrainian remember in first month the only question was: how fast will Russia overtake most Ukraine.
After a year question became: How fast Ukraine will push Russians out.
How is that actually working out?
@@hamish1309 Slowly but surely.
@downstream0114 That's actually how I would describe the Russian progress.
@@hamish1309 trust the plan sister
@@hamish1309if you compare ruSSian occupied areas in 2022 and now .....
How is losing huge areas of territory 'ruSSian' progress?
you misunderstand the west reasoning. The goal is not not to scare Russia into going nuclear, that's out of the picture fortunately, but they afraid to weaken Russia to the point of collapse and meet yet another big country with nuclear power falling apart and requiring a huge effort to keep all nuclear weaponry in one hands as already happened 30 years ago. So they provide weapons just enough for Ukraine to not loose the war but deliberately not enough to win the war.
Frontlines never move at a politician's pace
Politicians are the scum of the earth
I haven't heard copium this pure in many moons
Britain and France have given long range cruise missiles, top of the range tanks etc. Are we scared if Russia?.. Hell No!.. we give as much as we can, armourment production is ramping up, so we can give more in 2025, France to is putting its production onto a war footing. Now everyone else needs to do the same.
germany is donig the same.
without allies russia cant do much
ok but how is ukraine going to use all that shit with lower troop numbers?
@@liquidsweg4858 I think Ukraine have lowered the conscription age so boosting their numbers. Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts!..
@@jamesclayton3388 so their solution is throwing teenagers into the meat grinder, wouldnt call that courage mate
Ukraine and Russia should have listened to Erdogan when he told both that it is only the West who is gaining from this war.
They were close to sign a peace treaty in Istanbul but than came Boris Johnson to Kiev and we all know the result.
Thats an easy question. Whoever the main stream media says is losing.
stopped at 7 minutes . . . Russians are retreating from some key areas, maybe he is watching another War
he is stuck in 2022 when things were actually looking dicey for Russia for awhile there.
Actual content seems to start at 5:30.
Damn... only made to 4:08...
Thank you so much for this.
Fortunately, what is written in some newspapers or internet blogs is not what the professionals dealing with the situation are knowing and thinking. I don't think that NATO falls for Russian disinformation, however significant portions of their peoples might, what could create problems on the political plane when elections are due.
That's a real danger. We need strong leadership to explain and to show resolve to give Ukraine what it needs to win. They are fighting this war for all of our freedom and future security.
You're absoluetly right. We recently had elections in the Netherlands where I live. The absolute winner of the Dutch general 22:55 elections is a party which wants to stop all fundings for Ukraine. On top of this, they want to get out of NATO. Also, the war in Ukraine was not a subject in the election strategy of all the political parties involved in the national elections... it's a bl**dy shame!
The reason why the war has largely been a stalemate has been the drones which can see everything when you attack and which can then break up any attack. This has meant that attacks have had to be small scale units of soldiers, baked by their own drones or artillery, which lead to small gains or losses by both sides, accompanied all the while by a steady rise in the number of casualties on both sides. Ukraine has less manpower than Russia so they will lose a war of attrition. A game changer would be a drone that can shoot down the other side's drones to gain drone air superiority!
Hmm if we are being a purist by definition, a war of attritioned either side is something neither can win.
The hard reality is, once a nation has several million in population, a literal war of attrition cannot work for either side.
Russia has 120 something million if I'm not wrong, Ukraine has a little under 30 million. Yea no, that's a recipe for disaster. Russia couldn't man that amount and willingly have them die without horrible repercussions and Ukraine cannot afford to ever allow that to happen, but it's more likely to be a reality due to the fact it's literally being invaded.
China however can win a war of attrition against most of its neighbors except India with little repercussions for it domestically.
Yes yes we all know what most means when they say "attrition" but if we are talking about purely just amounts of bodies in each nation, it equals out despite the fact Russia has more.
Russians are apathetic, but not suicidal enough to be okay with now a far more tangible affect of the war
@@commiemeth the thing is that wars of attrition are not generally about manpower as much as the economic ability to field large armys and keep them in the field for long periods of time. Ukraine isnt going to be able to recruit and sustain 1-2 million fighters in the field for more than a few months without going bankrupt unless it receives constant bailout by the west. Its not much talked about but the west has already provided billions in financial aid to Ukraine alot of it through the international monetary fund. It seems unlikely that the west will keep throwing tens of billions a year at this conflict for long. Russia is a pretty broke country but between cannibalizing their economy and taking loans from China they should be able to continue to fund their war machine. tanks and planes are flashy and sure they are important but alot of wars are decided by which side can pay their troops and keep food in their bellys.
@@leojohn1615 also valid and accurate good sir.
@@leojohn1615 The west certainly can if motivated. For example my country is contributing as well as the EU without it affecting our day to day lives. We still have food, heat, roof over our heads education etc. Compare that to WWII with food and energy rationing and many men had to be away for readiness service, even if we weren't participating directly.
Europe is by no means reaching the limits of what we can afford. The main constraint I think, at least for Sweden, is that it takes time to produce arms and our own military has to be expanded at the same time.
@@leojohn1615 As we are disussing, the meaning of "Attrition" is a word that can mean a lot of things, same as the word "Funding".
In the Acient time, Kings has to actually find Golds to raise and army to fund the war, and the also need to Tax the peasants and confiscate their crops to fund the war effort.
Modern economic changed some aspect of that. When we sign off 100 Billion Dollar to fund Ukraine, we aren't just pulling dollar bills from US citizen and hand it over to Zelensky. Most of the money stays inside the US (western) economy that goes into the Military Industrial Complex, and Lockheed Martin will lobby as hard as they can to keep the money coming in. We ran out of money? Just Print more, and let Inflation take care of it. Is not something I agree with, but it is something that is happening world wide.
If there is an economy down turn, modern economic theory tells the government to increase spending, cut interest rate, etc... rather than practice Austerity. Which translates to, if there is an economy downturn, it means we need to make MORE bombs and Missles, not less too keep the Assembly line working.
Everyone needs to see this! ❤
Agree.
Brothers are killing each other because the little one remembers the big one slapping him when they were little.
This isn't gonna age well.
I typed 'delusion' and this video popped up.
HAHAHAHAH spot on
😂😂😂😂 you are joking, the moment you said russia lost more men in assaults than Ukraine who didn't lose men. I wonder who wants 500K men and 20K men a month
the number of people that take the lowest western estimate of Ukrainian casualties they can find and believe its completely unbiased really surprises me. It shouldn't by this point, but it does.
man this just a cheap propaganda an only talking point it has is just conspiracy theory that says more then likely facts as russian propaganda to milk people's pity so they continue believing that ukraine can win and they arent wasting money so russians have to kill more ukranians..... truth is as always betweeen the 2 arguments but i have to say its more on towards the sde that this is just another bs propaganda to get ukraine more money and to make people believe everything that says anything bad about ukraine's ide is a lie.
5:13 "there is no tightly enforced rule book"
Geneva Convention: "Am I a joke to you?"
USA: "Yes."
Russia: Geneva Convention? Never heard of her.
@@tremedarthey heard, only they treat it as their bucket list.
western powers allowing israel to genocide the palestinians shows that everybody, including the russians, see the geneva convention as a joke. Western powers cant use that excuse anymore because everyone has caught on to the hypocrisy. Which is unfortunate because it is a good idea to actually have rules for war, but when you only care about those rules when it comes to your enemies breaking them, everybody, including your own citizens, become disillusioned and more massacres happen across the planet
Great Video!
In my country there used to be saying: "Live horse and you'll get grass." That is the situation in which Ukraine has been placed according to this podcast.
OK, had to look that one up. There is an expression in my country: "Made you look."
Really good video. Just one small thing: Ukraine is not a small nation. It covers a huge amount of land, and has a big population. Pre-war, it was 40+ million. As far as Europe goes, that is definitely not a small nation.
Compared to Russia, Ukraine is in fact a small nation.
not really Russia is only a little shy of being 3x bigger @@GreenknightBrola
@@ThunderFarter Only in population. Now compare their GDPs, territory, energy reserves, etc.
Ukraine is covered with rich agricultural land, and lots of other resources, and no tundra. Russia stole a huge chunk of Ukraine's resources in 2014.
It's not a good video, it's just unashamed Western fascist propaganda
This has been an excellent analysis and explanation to westerners unrealistic expectations of a fluid situation. I do not view this as a stalemate. BUT I do see more and more RU desperation. Thank you very much. Glory to Ukraine! and Condemnation to Russia!!!
I see it the same way and trust in the AFU. I admire the General very much.
i despair on youtube n ppl lik u
Biden: I don’t want you to lose hope
@@VVV85650did you know trump was actually the first US president to give Ukraine weapons? And if he was president when the invasion did happen I’m sure he would have given more than Biden as he has already said he made Russia respect the US.
@@averymemorablename329 I think if Trump becomes president, he will be focused on the internal problems of the United States and revenge on the Democrats and their interests for political persecution against him and restricting access to social platforms. Since the elite of Ukraine are completely pro-democratic dolls who said a lot of bad things about Trump, he will tie a knot around their neck first.
Western partners aren't "growing weary". The UK, France, and now Poland have signed mutual support treaties with Ukraine. Germany, despite slow commitment, has promised a new and much higher level of support.
Weariness isn't even a good argument for flagging support from the US. It's political gamesmanship. The current administration wants to support Ukraine, the opposing party wants to make the administration look ineffectual to increase their chances in upcoming elections.
As for why it's not a stalemate...despite apparent stagnation on the front lines, Ukraine is still scoring consistent significant strategic attacks on Russian targets that aren't at the front lines. The Russian Black Sea Fleet has been rendered a non-factor in practical terms, withdrawn so far the only contribution they can make is launching cruise missiles which are largely shot down short of their target. Ukraine continues to erode the Russian command structure with strategic strikes on behind-the-lines headquarters with high-ranking generals. Ukraine has been quick to adapt new technologies and has turned weaponized battlefield drones into a mainstay instead of an emergency resource. Russia has largely settled into a tactical rut. Their offensive measures come down to "Send a lot more of the same."
And Ukraine doesn't have hundreds of soldiers posting videos about how they were lied to, and sent to the front under false pretense or pulled from their trained specialization and turned into ill-equipped infantry.
That doesn't sound like a stalemate. That sounds like one side biding their time and exploiting the mistakes of their enemy. Ukraine has, unfortunately, been a victim of their own success. After the runaway reclamation of Kharkhiv, much of the world was expecting them to continue to bowl their way through Russian defenses through the rest of the country. But circumstances don't allow for that. The eastern regions of Ukraine have bern occupied for almost a decade, now, and defenses have bern well-entrenched. Access across the Dnipro is still too questionable for any kind of breakout maneuver warfare to be viable in occupied Kherson Oblast. And Russia had enough time during last winter to securely dig in along Zaporizhiya to Donetsk. Those are bad conditions for any sort of fast-moving breakout battle.
So Ukraine is playing the long game, letting Russia continue to shove men and materiel into a grinder. Putin would be wise to look at history, because he's creating many of the same kinds of conditions that led to the Bolshevik Revolution and the overthrow of the Tsars. It's not unthinkable that such an event could be the actual ending of the war in Ukraine.
The battle is between Russian and Western economies. Ukraine's war machine and domestic economy are entirely organized, funded and commanded by places that are not Ukraine. Having Ukraine mentioned as being a side in this conflict completely ignores reality. Ukraine ceased to exist as an independent state 10 years ago.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Actually russia gaining more grounds slowly while ukraine are withdrawing from some parts of the frontlines
i cant remember the source but i believe Russia gained something like 200 square kilometers from the start of 2023 to the end. Although in fairness they did lose more territory than that in 2022. But Russia hardly entered into this war expecting it to be a dragged out war of attrition so it makes sense that they have shorted the front line while they change gears.
Yes they are gaining more in areas but they have more casualty than Ukraine. Russia has a sher number of Army Ang equipment.
7:17 Your logic is funny: 1) Russia retreated from key areas in Autumn 2022; 2) Russians barely gave any more territory to the Ukrainian in 2023, while managing to progress in other sectors (Bakhmut) and essentially defeating the much-touted Ukrainian counter-offensive; 3) by completely neglecting the trend of 2023 and only focusing on the retreats of Autumn 2022, you magically declare that Russians retreating from key areas is the main trend; 4) ???
Your oil is burning
@@user-ym9qw3gg3j Your oil is burning
Out of a leopard's engine.
Yes, because the best predictor of a retreat from key areas is whether those area are depleted of soldiers and supplies, and the trend in 2023 has been of heavy Russian losses in soldiers, equipment, and supplies and the constant severing of Russian supply lines.
@@augusthoglund6053And do you know what is an even stronger predictor of Russia NOT going to retreat from further key areas in the near future? Actual offensive operations which have been happening all over the front-line (see Kryky, Marinka, Avdiivka, and the territories east of the Oskil river in Kharkov oblast), intermittently, over the past months. It's kinda hard to perform offensive operations if you're out of manpower, equipment, and with severed supply lines, don't you agree?
Thank you for the video.
Ukraine is literally losing on all fronts, this guy is insane lol.
Only time can tell
Americans generally buy the myth Russians fight with “wave tactics”, just throwing massive numbers of men into a battle to die but winning through superior numbers. Some of that is because Germans who fought in WWII but then ended up consulting the US on how to fight Russia in the Cold War were in denial. They got their butts handed to them by a Russia they thought was weak and stupid, and the “wave tactics” myth was a way to save face. Americans were too ignorant to realize what an absurd lie the embarrassed Germans were telling them, and we’ve based our military theory on that nonsense.
The result is that any western analysis of what is going on in Ukraine is moronic. We don’t actually understand our capabilities (and how deindustrialization has impacted the US military), & we don’t understand Russian capabilities and tactics. Sun Tzu knew that is you don’t know your enemy or yourself, catastrophic loss is inevitable.
It’s beyond obvious to anyone that isn’t a gullible dope that Ukraine (and therefore NATO & the US) is getting humiliated right now - and that a massive butt kicking of NATO is on the horizon.
@@darknessinc.5360
They are running out of time!
NATO Americoper
Fantastic video, this is such an underrated channel.
Thanks! Glad you think so!
This is western propaganda. Just as russian but made for westerners.
its full of propaganda
낱 게오 러시아에 무슨 일이
일어났나요?
There are 2 realistic scenarios.
1. USA completely disarms itself in the face of upcoming war with China, and transfer their weapons to Ukraine.
2. Ukraine uses these weapons to retake all of it's territory.
3. Russia continues to shell ukrainian army's positions.
4. Ukraine runs out of manpower.
5. Frontline collapses, and Russia occupies the whole of Ukraine.
1. USA keeps supporting Ukraine at minimum level.
2. Frontline is staying still with ukraine's army slightly retreating from time to time.
3. Russia continues to shell ukrainian army's positions.
4. Ukraine runs out of manpower.
5. Frontline collapses, and Russia occupies the whole of Ukraine.
You can counter anything, but there's no weapon against the fact, that your enemy have much larger manpower.
The US has given Ukraine mostly old-gen weapons they had in storage, and yet the Russians have been consistently beaten back by the army of a 3rd world country. America it's not running out of weapons any time soon, much less when they have the ability to make more of them (something the Russians can only dream of as of today).
@@dalius6633 We give ukraine all our intelegence, our best planners and NATO officers are at their disposal, we give them all the weapons they need, ect. Who do you think would win? The Polish army, or the ukrianian army? Face it, Ukraine has the most powerful military in all of europe, (by far!), and only #2 to Russia. Ukrainians GDP has gone down like 80%, their population dropped almost in half, and they are never going to recover from this war. They have been losing since the kherson and kharkiev offensives, their army has stalled, they have been slowly retreating, they stand no chance. And BTW, we give them the best equipment we have to offer. Atackams, HIMARS, 3rd gen thermal drones.... Even Abrams and Leopards... Our best air defense systems.. We have sent more $ to ukraine then the entire russian military budget of 2021. Thats nuts
Excellent summary!
As a western voter, I am fully behind Ukraine and it’s independence
Russia was never losing at any point.
Crazy to believe otherwise
It was told that the counteroffensive would smash Russia, in fact, it only costed Ukraine about 30% of its military potential, without any significant territorial gains. These "think-tanks" are often proved to be wrong, in the reality of things.
Труханов, йди десь серед своїх коментуй)
"Costed" 🤣
Cope further, vatnik
Conveniently imagined "facts" really help spreading desired narratives.
well, in that case, what they nowadays call Ukraine is an insane product of a deranged imagination))
Just because the Ruzzian media told you this doesn't mean it is true. But most likely you won't even read this, will you Ivan?
WW1 is closed when Serbians Army break through German, Austrohungarian and Bulgarian Armys in Thesaloniki front
That miracle breaktrough is a reason why Germany sign peace with France and GB