Ukraine turning into a ‘Forever War’
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks: www.masterwork...
Purchase shares in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more. How Masterworks works:
-Create your account with crypto wallet or traditional bank account
-Pick major works of art to invest in or our new blue-chip art fund
-Identify investment amount, there is no minimum investment
-Hold shares in works by Picasso or trade them in our secondary marketplace
See important Masterworks disclosures: mw-art.co/37WwvbD.
#Ukraine has taken out more than 8,600 #Russian assets, including tanks, vehicles, and aircraft. All coming at a price of 18 billion USD in military spending. The cost-benefit analysis of #American support is exceptionally profitable.
Support CaspianReport
✔ TH-cam membership ► / @caspianreport
✔ Patreon ► / caspianreport
✔ PayPal ► www.paypal.me/...
✔ Merchandise ►teespring.com/...
Crypto endorsement
✔ Bitcoin ► 1MwRNXWWqzbmsHova7FMW11zPftVZVUfbU
✔ Ether ► 0xfE4c310ccb6f52f9D220F25Ce76Dec0493dF9aA0
✔ Bitcoin Cash ► 1BKLti4Wq4EK9fsBnYWC91caK7NZfUhNw9
Join us on Facebook or Twitter
✔ Twitter ► / caspianreport
✔ Facebook ► / caspianreport
✔ My equipment and editing software ► www.amazon.com...
Watch CaspianReport in other languages
✔ Spanish ► / historiageopol%c3%adtica
✔ Russian ► / thecuriouscat
#ad #sponsored
![[🔴LIVE] งานประกาศรางวัล MAYA TV AWARDS 2024 : มายามหาชน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nwmWYXXVwBY/mqdefault.jpg)
"USA doesn't lose wars, it loses interest", nothing can be so true than this
Except for Vietnam and Afghanistan.
@@GM-xk1nw lost interest.
@@GM-xk1nw they loose interest to continue that one because of the lack of public support.
lost in afghanistan and maybe vietnam
Mokshama Varma The conventional view remains that the United States lost the Vietnam War because our opponent, North Vietnam, conquered the side we backed, South Vietnam, which surrendered in April 1975, I think you are wrong Mokshagna the world knows who won in this war and in Syria they never get Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad out of Syria remember?
"The United States doesn't lose wars, it loses interest." Very well said.
Vietnam war ?
@@nemzi8969 yes lost interest fighting’s guerrilla war never ends
Losing interests also means cant win the war just like nokor,vietnam,afghanistan,syria and iraq
@@archiearevalo5648 they won in Syria and Iraq, The war was won and Nation-Building was not their problem
@@braynzzthere7923 us and allies didnt overthrow syrian president assad because of russia. They won against isis with combined efforts from west allies and russia dude. You didnt know the stories behind war in syria
"They are about to find out why America has no universal healthcare"
Okay... This has to be my favorite quote of the week xD
That's a lie actually, if we did things more efficiently like the British we could have universal healthcare through taxes for a lot cheaper than we spend on private healthcare. Universal healthcare somehow being incredibly expensive (compared to most private plans) is a lie pushed by insurance companies to keep things from changing.
I once wrote this joke on a reddit thread once! "Russia's about to find out why we don't have healthcare" referring to how Putin miscalculated into thinking the US would stop fueling the war machine. I'm amazed to see Caspian indulging on this type of humor
I don't remember where I first heard it but this is a fairly old joke.
@@joelrebollar7055 Do you have anything to back that up? I'm not saying you are wrong but it's really difficult to compare healthcare from country to country because of so many things to factor in.
@@joelrebollar7055 How's that universal working out in Canada and others ??? It's fine for band aids tho...
The cost benefit of defending against an attack is not the drone vs. Anti air missle, but the drone vs. Cost of it's target.
Shirvan, I would invite you to critically examine continuing your support for Masterworks. There might be huge lawsuits coming up relating to TH-camrs promoting financial investments and you don't wanna get entangled into that
Agreed. It is hard to win a lawsuit for advertising financial instruments but it is really expensive to fight the lawsuit.
Smells like a scam. Better stick with Scottish Royal Titles Sale.
@@TeoBlu 😁😁😁
Do they have jurisdiction over Azerbaijanis?
@@TeoBlu 😂 I liked that
“They’re about to find out why America has no universal healthcare” may just be the hardest line I’ve ever heard.
They cant have it both ways.
Definitely a great line. Not exactly accurate though considering the US spends more on healthcare per person than any other country, by a large margin.
It would be a disaster. The more poor you are, the fatter you are in the US. The people paying into it would have no resources left for them
@@graham1034 yea. It’s really fuckin shitty. It’s a result of (in short) corruption on the part of politicians and the rich.
@@spencerstevens2175 there’s some truth to what you said but the fact of the matter is that if the federal govt consolidated healthcare, each individual would pay less that what they do now. I don’t have a source on hand but it may be of interest to you to google
"They're about to find out why America has no universal healthcare" & "The US... doesn't lose wars, it loses interest"
As an American, those lines hit right in the hard truths.
As an American also he sounds like a Liberal Democrat no?
@@jacksevert3099 Pretty much everyone wants better healthcare, also conservatives
eldar iskender yep and i think the people who dont want better healthcare have never seen better
For real tho
@@jacksevert3099 If you've watched his videos, you can tell that he doesn't lick Putin's boots. So, yeah, he isn't a Republican.
"In practical terms, the new [centralized database] system will allow Russia to raise an army of fighting-age poor people, minorities, criminals, political dissidents, and disenfranchised communities."
It seems to me that these are exactly the people you don't want running your army. Not if you intend for your existing government to last very long.
Let us train and arm everyone who might have a problem with the current regime. This will have no consequences down the line
the whole sentence sounds like nonsense. What does poor people mean? Poor people are attracted by salaries that are 5-10 times higher. What does minorities mean? There is no such division in Russia as in the USA. We do not pay attention to this. if you mean 'gender' and 'non-traditional relationships', then it is currently impossible to get such information, no one will say it. Criminals are indeed recruited in PMCs, but this is also optional and with certain criteria. And there is no point in recruiting an army of political dissidents at all, especially since the borders are open, they have all escaped/ can escape.
@@god_slayer-restart What are you talking about? I feel like you don't know what you're talking about. Russia has dozens of minorities across the land, from Uzbeks to Kazakhs to Tatars to Bashkir to Chechens to Jews to Sibirs and the list goes on and on. One of the original Stalinist tactics that Putin is following to the letter was to throw the minorities and the rural folk into the meat grinder first, because so long as people from Saint Petersburg, Moscow, and to an extent Yekaterinburg and Vladivostok aren't touched, then they won't be affecting anyone with the economic or political clout to be able to talk back or raise hell.
Sounds like the US Army.
Hey, It worked great in WW1! (...)
Rule of thumb: If Russia says they are building something world-beating, they are not.
Yeah. We shouldn't underestimate the fact that they have nuclear weapons, that's the one serious thing Putin and his goons got going, but other than that, I think it has become pretty clear that Putin has been bluffing for a while now.
More like every country
@@AverageUsernames Whataboutism
@ keep sucking thumb
Nukes are world beaters.
One of the issues with "Frozen conflicts" and why the US doesn't have a stomach for them is based on proximity. All the "frozen conflicts" you mentioned vis-a-vis Russia are on Russia's borders. As such, there is a higher sense of urgency from the Russian government and it the people that agree with it. ie. Russia is, or can be perceived to be by the state, as under direct and immediate threat (hence to the "NATO expansion" casus belli for the "Special military operation".) Whereas you can't really sell that with the recent US' wars in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, or more clandestine US ops in the global south... Closest in parallel the US maybe had to this historically was Cuba in 1962 or Mexico with the Zimmerman telegram in 1917... Both of which put the US on edge in similar to fashion to how Russia is acting today.
US have 10-15 times bigger military budget and this with the NATO aliances help give US better and easier way to fight in needed conflitsh far to US. Russia in other hand have different:L its moslty solo and they live in thoughts of ''we live behind the wall''. like romans, but its very different in other meanings.
What I think is too hard for US to stay away when there is too bloody conglict near the NATO borders. + there SWE and FIN gonna help as well as Denmark and Norway as scandinavian countries.
Stop justifying Russia's brutal invasion with NATO expansion. NATO expansion isn't an attack on Russia. It's a defense against Russia. If the Baltics weren't in NATO, they would've been first. To Putin, the fall of the USSR is the greatest geopolitical tragedy in history and one he clearly wishes to "remedy". But to Eastern Europe, it was a blessing that the USSR fell. They became free from communist oppression and gained their de-facto independence. That's why one by one they quickly joined NATO. So they wouldn't be under the Russian yoke ever again. All except Ukraine and White Russia, where Russia put a lot of effort into keeping these countries as puppet states. Just look at where Yanukovich fled when his own parliament ousted him. Not to Donbas or to Crimea... but to Russia.
Afghanistan was invaded for harbouring Al Quaida, Iraq was (initially) invaded for invading Kuwait, and then a second time because Bush wanted to finish what his pops started. Libya was a no-fly zone which was approved by the UN and they did little more than give the rebels a fighting chance and Ghadaffi was killed by Libyans, Syria was to fight ISIS (and if possible help overthrow an authoritarian dictator who refused to step down after he lost the elections, the same dictator who Russia helped stay in power by leveling cities (like Aleppo and Binnish) with the ground much like Russia is doing to Bakhmut now, and the same dictator who is now supporting Russia in the UN). Stop trying to portray Russia's behaviour as sensible. What Russia is doing to Ukraine now is what it did to Chechnya, Georgia, and Syria.
And to compare Ukraine with the Cuban missile crisis is ridiculous. Do you know what the range of nuclear-bearing missiles were back then? With missiles in Cuba, USSR would be able to hit the populated East Coast of the US whilst the US couldn't hit Russia's populated areas due to most of Eastern Europe being ruled by Russia. But the problem of "proximity" in regards to nuclear weapons has been moot for decades. Both the US and Russia can fire nuclear weapons targeting ANYWHERE ON THE FREAKING PLANET due to nuclear-armed submarines and ICBMs and a little thing called GPS. So Ukraine joining the EU (and/or NATO) isn't an increased risk to Russia at all. Because no-one is going to invade a nuclear-capable country.
Don't worry, America is very good at manufacturing consent. Propaganda machine goes brrrrr...
I think you forgot to mention that whilst the US is the one country that's helping Ukraine the most, there's also UK, France, Germany, Poland, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Finland, Israel, Turkey, even Japan and many other countries are all helping Ukraine one way or another, from military equipment to shoes, vests, financial aid, etc. There are even companies like Amazon and many other helping with financing and logistics. That´s why Ukrainian soldiers are all well equipped and fed.
True! But none of us can rival the American aid.
and it's crazy,
I can't buy a bulletproof vest in Poland to defend from Ukrainian knifes on street but my country gives away arms to Ukraine for free 😂
after pandemic conditioning people are so brainless it's even hard to comprehend humans are able to do much
@@frida507 us aid is good, but lets not forget poland and germany and many other places taking in hubdtefs of thousands of refugees
@@TheSwedishHistorian
Germany seems like juat pretending to help TBH.
Overall since its in USA interest, the other countries seem to be laid back a little :/
Further you are from Moscow, the less threatening they seem to be :(
If US stops, Everyone is... Every country is peer pressured into supporting more.. Germany and France will be the first to Pull out.
Rather disappointed you didn't mention that Ukraine is now mainly using systems like the German Gepard SPAAG system as well as teams of trucks with AA guns fitted on back them to take out the slow moving Iranian drones now a days. The Gepards are perfect for taking these things out as opposed to the missile systems mentioned.
It really felt like this was written last November. The concerns about Shahed drones and the worries about a massive Russian offensive seem like things we were worried about back then.
These are not their main systems don't delude yourself. The amount of anti air equipment provided by the west is nowhere near scalable enough to be the mainstay armament.
Tor, Buk, S300 and old soviet gun systems are the mainstay unless the west gets off it's ass and ups production by an order of magnitude
This video is a bit problematic IMO. First, the US isn’t the only supplier of weapons and aid to Ukraine. Europe has provided just as much as the US yet no mention of European aid. Second, for months already Ukraine has been shooting down drones with the German-made Gepard system, a vehicle that can send dual streams of 35mm rounds ripping into the sky to hit the drones. They are not using $100,000 missiles.
Third, the video doesn’t seem to describe the consequences of all the actions mentioned that Russia is undertaking. The video suggest that Russia could put up with even 10:1 (10 Russian losses to 1 Ukrainian loss) ratio of losses for a long time. Each round of mobilization will make the war less popular In Russia. You cannot use WW2 as an example of how much Russia is willing to lose in terms of people’s lives because WW2 they were fighting to preserve the existence of the country - so Ukraine today would be a better comparison to Russia in WW2. In addition, the video mentions that mobilization of the poor, minorities, and disenfranchised communities wouldn’t pose big problems for the Kremlin. But it will, certainly for the minority regions where approval for Moscow is lower than the rest of the country. This could lead to potential revolts.
@@error-xn7hn I think even though the Russian winter offensive was a failure it doesn't mean that Russia can't muster a larger offensive in the coming years. The video talks about a system which won't be ready for years to recruit people into the military and Russia has a much larger population, so it's still technically possible that the Russian military could outnumber the Ukrainians by over a million if this does turn out to be a forever war.
Also Russia doesn’t have a big supply of Shaheed drones either and production takes time. Shaheeds may be an effective weapon but Russia just doesn’t seem to be able to get them at the needed scale.
It has only been a year and everyone is calling it "forever war". Well most wars go about 4-5 years, it is just that modern attention spans now are akin to that of a goldfish.
Forever war can mean many things, a long territorial stalemate with some clashes like Syria, or Yemen. Also a long war with no peace and a low level of conflict like Afghanistan war during 2012-2020
I am not sure you are completely correct about the drones cost analysis. I have seen Ukraine use small crews using AA technical trucks. Using simple radar, mobility and numbers, to counter small drone strikes. I am sure its not enough to cover all strikes, but it is already widely used, and is expanding. So now the cost is looking more like the price of .50 or 20mm ammunition to take down shaheed drones. Thank you for the video Shirvan.
Germany sent Gepards to Ukraine, and those are AA gun. And even though using rockets to destroy Shahed might be “pricey”, but that saves more money in terms of the rebuilding energy infrastructure and humans life
@@spacemonkeylp The whole point is Russia can infinitely produce those drones while Ukraine cannot produce those AA systems.
@@DarthVantos Ukraine also have cheap drones, so this goes both ways.
@@DarthVantos .. I think you are right that they will need a new technology to get those drones down. It might be that Ukraine has to send their own cheap drones into Russia.
There are no any gun in calibre 20 mm on the theatre of war so far. There are 23 mm.
Majority of Iranian drones are taken down by MiG-29 and Su-27. Stories about machine guns taken same drones are just propaghanda s**t. And in that way destroyed drones have much more chances to hit non-military object.
You do now there’s more than 3 countries involved in this conflict right? It’s not just Russia, Iran and the US? For one thing Ukraine had a rather large role to play. For another there’s a lot of European countries offering considerable assistance to Ukraine. The likes of Poland and Estonia might even send personnel in the right circumstances
Only way Poland and Estonia send troops is if they know America has their back. Those countries are so weak they don’t do anything without knowing the US will defend them.
The US provides the majority of the security assistance to Ukraine, by a large margin. And according to Ukraine, it's still not enough.
US is also a global leader, and other countries tend to follow suit when the US acts. So if the US lost interest in funding the war in Ukraine, they would lose most of their security funding resulting in a massive material deficit and other NATO countries are quite likely to follow US precedent, compounding the problem.
Finland has sent military experts to teach and guide the ukrainian forces.
It's highly doubtful that countries like Germany and France would've done anything to help Ukraine without US leadership. If the US gave up on Ukraine tomorrow, would the rest of Europe really continue to do everything they could for Ukraine? I doubt it.
@@sleeplessdev7204 Really doubt the EU would just not fund Ukraine just because the US said so
“They are about to find out why American has no universal healthcare”
That one got me. 😂
That's because he knows emotional thinkers don't actually know what the US system is. It's tied to insurance. When the US is at full employment 80% of adults are insured and that covers their family. If you can't afford insurance or become unemployed you go on Medicaid. And hospitals cannot deny you care. That's something the 30-40 million illegal aliens know too well. It drives up insurance costs. Nothing is free. You either pay through taxes all the time or when you need it.
that meme has been floating around
I laughed hard
Got me too haha
I don't get it...🤨
"Why the U.S. has no universal healthcare" . As an American, that hit hard
Its true tho.
Your citizen get ruined when they get sick. But your enemies also get ruined if you f*ck with the US.
That's a lie actually, if we did things more efficiently like the British we could have universal healthcare through taxes for a lot cheaper than we spend on private healthcare. Universal healthcare somehow being incredibly expensive (compared to most private plans) is a lie pushed by insurance companies to keep things from changing.
@@joelrebollar7055 doesn't the US have a way higher quality of healthcare compared to universal healthcare countries? And like way shorter waiting times too because doctors and surgeons get paid more which equates to more people wanting to become them. So we don't have to ration surgeries like some other countries do. More people to do the surgeries and whatnot.
@@joelrebollar7055 Yeah, healthcare spending per capita is the number that tells the true story. Perhaps because of unregulated insurance companies forcing hospitals to charge an insane amount of money.
I once wrote this joke on a reddit thread once! "Russia's about to find out why we don't have healthcare" referring to how Putin miscalculated into thinking the US would stop fueling the war machine. I'm amazed to see Caspian indulging on this type of humor
it is very convenient to fight the whole world against one state and then consider it a victory for America.. This country does not know how to fight honestly
Shahed drones don't have to be shot down by NASAMS or S-300. They can be shot down from anything, starting from WWII anti-aircraft guns to AK-47.
And this is also the reason why there are 30+ German Gepard systems in Ukraine, which Shirvan failed to mention.
You need all 30 to cover Kiev properly, because It has only about 5 km Range and you need to cover all directions
@@guillem998 They don't have to cover all of Kiev just the infrastructures that Russia might target.
@@patricebertrand1146 which is everything.
Big delusion
There are tons of videos how both sides trying to shot down a "staying still" drone with AK, wasting 1-2 magasines and failed, in one video operator is saying "keep wasting ammo, sucker"
And Shaheds are moving. And they're above so you need to count gravity.
Both, russian and ukrainian fighters hate this lie from corrupted paid experts like "how to shot down a drone". Because these fairy tales are excuse why soldiers don't have anti-drones rifles.
Shaheds are actually not that easy to deal with. They fly low and at low speeds, this makes them very hard to see with traditional AA radar. Anything low flying is basically uninterceptable by patriot PAC-2, since it relies on the ground radar to 'illuminate' targets (PAC-3 is not as bad in this regard). WWII guns also don't do well with low flying targets, and good luck trying to hit it with a rifle, anyone who has done trapshooting knows it is much harder that it looks.
Stinger missiles are probably the best counter, but it is not easy to cover a large area with those, and that is ukraine's current issue.
One main issue there is with the idea of this war turning into a forever war is that of how high intensity the conflict currently is. At it's current rate losses on both sides could easily surpass a million in just a few years. And as of right now it seems to be only getting more intense meaning it's very possible that a combined total of a million casualties could be reached before next year. By then the shear amount of losses for such little gain will be very hard to hide from the public and could start to see more people turning against the war.
about 16000 killed for russians and the same figure for ukraine according to kiev independent.
@@JL-tm3rc those numbers are way too low, US estimates about 120,000 casualties for the Ukrainians and the UK estimates about 175,000-200,000 casualties for the Russians, the numbers you have are about the casualty numbers for the war in Donbas from 2014-2022 before the invasion.
In WW2 Soviets lost at least 8M soldiers and even more civilians and it didn’t make them look for a settlement 🤷♂️ With the current rate of casualties they could run the war for decades 🤷♂️
@@janlanik2660 that was a defensive war, not a war of conquest. People are willing to lose a lot more to defend their home, but not so much when it's to take away someone else's home.
@@janlanik2660 That is true, however the desire to fight is also a factor, Russian morale in WW2 was signifyingly higher and a war for survival against an external threat. Russia is the invader this time around and thus needs to justify the war to it's people, which is why we hear crazy things about American bioweapon labs in Ukraine making supersoldiers to fight, or "combat mosquitoes" to spread disease. It remains to be seen, but I think if we see Russian casualties top 1 million, we'll start to see extreme unrest on the home front for the Russians. 1 million casualties is enough for everyone in Russia to know a casualty personally or know of one through someone else.
Interesting you showed T14s, and T15, because Russia is pulling put T55s and BTR-50s and BMP-1s from storage.
Yeah and Russian tactics are not sustainable.
Indeed and also replacement. Ukrainians are getting A education in UK and Russians just drink alkohol all the time
@@andrerothweiler9191 Why? What would be unsustainable in dragging next year T-34? :D
Hes on the payroll. And for some time already.
@@andrerothweiler9191 you must know nothing about how theyre fighting this war then
I think a lot of people are misinterpreting the “The United States doesn’t lose wars, it loses interest.” Quote. I think it’s a good description of HOW the U.S. loses wars, because as a superpower the nation isn’t likely to flat out lose in a traditional way, it’s more likely that the costs outweigh the benefits of winning a conflict. If caring about civilian casualties, financial cost, and manpower cost were not a factor the United States would probably have rolled through to its military goals in every conflict since WWII. But that didn’t happen because many of those wars had an end goal that wouldn’t justify a full mobilization. You win a war against a superpower by making it too expensive.
Yep; you'd think their populace would be more aware of it given that exact process is how their country exists right now.
The US caring about civilian casualties? You must be the most naive person on the internet.
@@NoOne24definitely cares more than countries like Russia. Not out of the kindness of its heart, mind you, but because of its more democratic nature. Any war crimes are a bad look for the ruling party which can lead to a loss in the next election as the opposition is gonna drum it up. Its allies are also democratic nations so if it conducts a huge number of visible war crimes then its allies' publics are gonna vote to leave their alliance.
Autocratic, nearly isolated regimes like Putin's Russia have no such issues.
Exactly, America’s military strength is blinding it from seeing its weaknesses.
There is a joke from the GDR (old east Germany) and it goes like this
teacher: what is a capitalist?
student: a capitalist likes money, so he keeps his money locked up.
teacher: very good. now what is a communist?
student: a communist likes his people, so he keeps his people-
teacher: that's enough!
Russia might not be communist any more, but they sure "like" their people
Lmaoo 😮💨😅
This is somewhat meaningless really, anyone capable of doing harm to the state risks imprisonment and this is not restricted to Russia, I mean, look at Assange, look at how the Yanks persecuted him for exposing their crimes. Implying the Rus treat their people worse than the Westerners only prove how ignorant and bias one is, the truth is no gov gives 2 shit about their own people and would gladly lock them all up if the elites' interests are threatened
It’s hilarious because in ww2 it took the Germans 2 weeks to capture the same amount of territory as the russians. 6 months into Operation Barbarossa, they were already at moscow. And the russians right now cant advance more than 100km into ukraine after a year of fighting
They’re wannabe commies
@@UFCMania155 Yankeestan lost a 20 year war with a few thousand Taliban wearing sandals, armed with AKs and riding motorcycles 😅
"The United States, the lone superpower doesn't lose wars, it loses interest"
True statement
To be fair it’s matter of framing. Did the US lose a war? Yes Afghanistan due to a reducing amount of interest and support and financial was not viable.
Wars throughout history have had similar situations. From Roman failed expansion or long term hold of lands or the First Russian - Chechnya war.
No it also has lost and will lose wars, the comment is clever though.
JESUS is SON of ALMIGHTY GOD KABIR--- SAINT RAMPALJI MAHARAJ
Americans have an extremely difficult time even electing competent politicians, because we don't care enough to ensure politicians are even doing their jobs well. We SUCK as "the world's police & premier superpower."
USA be like: Oooh I'm gonna go check the fridge & see if there's anything good to eat!
Also USA: didn't you just check the fridge 5 minutes ago and see there was nothing in there?
USA: yes but maybe this time... oh wait, you're right nothing in here, back to watching tv it is then
I'm a little skeptical of Russia's, for lack of a better term, "conscription score," system. Given how utterly corrupt the the Russian systems are, I expect a ton of bad data and pocketed contracts to plague it. Sure the idea seems effective on paper but the Russian system has shown itself time and again to be incappable of pulling it off.
And just because you "know" someone is able to be conscripted is very different than running a train all the way out to Siberia to pick them up. Logistics will still be an issue at that size
you heard about Graff and his company with links to Schwab
don't worry the tech is there.. they go digital because they fk up anything real machines aren't making mistakes
but it happens everywhere now
they gather our data to use it against us in future
The systems of the Russian government are really effective, try to read the articles about public services system 'Gosuslugi' and tax systems.
All it really needs to do is avoid drafting influential and economically important people, while grabbing everyone else, to be effective. I'm sure as all of their other initiatives it will run into many problems, and some corruption, but I think the concept is more simple than it appears.
The idea that it will be ready and effective in time to influence this conflict is absurd, and it’s concerning that Shirvan made it one of the central points of his video
This analysis is more relevant than ever with the failure of the Ukranian counteroffensive, Western fatigue, reports the US & Germany want to pressure Ukraine into negotiating with Russia.
Let me push back on some of the claims you made Shirvan, for the sake of broadening the discourse and offering alternatives or added information to your video:
1) On the Digital ID project that Russia is supposedly working on for 2024/2025: Who is to say this is something that will be successful, or implemented quickly enough--if at all? Russia is not like China, they do not have a centralized government with an Iron Fist like China's CCP top-down capitalist authoritarianism. IF Russia succeeds in creating this, it will run into issues that A) already one to two years away, which already is straining their economy and war efforts given the current trajectory of the war. B) logistical issues of implementing ANY widespread new technology across a large country and bad logistical implementation by members as well as non receptive populace (which only becomes worse the longer the war continues). Finally C) The longer Russia suffers economically and the popularity for the war drops in Russia, due to its military blunders and continued rift growing in the Kremlin, even MORE dissent will be sowed across Russia--even the criminals and bandits that were at first eager to join the Wagner PMC, before realizing they are expendable cannon fodder.
2) On the point of USA "losing interest" before Russia does: You omitted the SECOND crucial player--and arguably more serious to this conflict, aside from the USA: that is being EUROPE. Yes, the USA is supplying heavy weaponry and billions in aid, that is true, and America is known to be unpredictable with its "promises" of "continued unwavering support". However, unlike any other conflict that had the USA as a key backer, the Ukraine-Russian war has the virtual entirety of WESTERN EUROPE/EU backing Ukraine as THEIR shield and investment for their sovereignty and safety, while Ukraine is in direct conflict. Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Germany, UK, etc. All of these countries unanimously agreed to take GDP hits in order to fund, manufacture for, and supply Ukraine with heavy weaponry and defensive technology too, THEY are not going to LOSE INTEREST as USA could/might--because Europe's interest is SECURITY and there is no security if Ukraine loses--especially not when they already invested so much and staked so much on Ukraine winning, to a historically unprecedented level.
Hopefully those 2 points offered an objective rebuttal to those two claims made in the video, as I offered two counter-claims that is neither pro-Russian or pro-Ukrainian, but simply a fact of Russian logistical failure (as proven by this war) and the stake interest by EUROPE which is actively and economically invested in Ukraine JUST AS AMERICA, but unlike America, is also emotionally and future-thinking in their investment.
Aside from that, another great video Shirvan. I hope you make more videos on Ukraine-Russia war, as it seems there is too little from you on it.
Those are some great points you made. Especially about Caspian reflecting USA as the only and decisive player in support for Ukraine, but we really cannot underestimate the support from European countries. Me myself living in one of the Baltic countries, I can guarantee that people here will not lose interest in this conflict and will do everything possible to support Ukraine until the war is won.
Yeah as soon as he framed it as a US proxy war I knew it was going to be all the familiar tankie talking points :/
True. Imagine that the avarage russian has to register in another system. Their corruption level wiil be in its way to success.
From your Baltic perception I can totally see that. The more I learn about those countries the more I’m impressed with them in terms of rigor, values and standing up against evil. However, the more you move to the west, (except Britain), the more cozy the lifestyle is and the less threatened countries feel. I surely hope countries like Germany truly woke up this time. but let’s not forget how quickly both Macron and Scholz jumped on a plane last year to befriend Xi, knowingly annoying the USA. The EU could really be a global superpower, but to me it’s like that rich kid who never really got to work for their money, has high moral standards but doesn’t really act upon their big mouth and in the end bows to the next sugardaddy who will promise them a comfortable life
@@epicboy14 Thanks Eddie. And yes, the Baltic countries are also on board and have vested interest in the successful/positive militaristic result from Ukraine against Russia and Putin's regime.
Even Serbia, which is known to be very pro-Russian historically after the Kosovo/NATO incident, Serbia as a nation is also leaning towards Ukrainian support--at least on the political front (I know many individual Serbians who are still ardent Putin fanatics).
Europeans more than anyone know what it means to have their sovereign borders encroached on by Russia or drawn into conflict. Ask any Georgian or Chechen also, how they feel after their conflicts with Russia--and you will see why even "negotiating" or "concessions" on Putin's terms is a losing game.
However, now that the point of no return has been crossed by Europe (in terms of cutting off their gas supply) and investing military hardware, regardless of what the future now holds, Europe cannot afford to pull out now--regardless if USA eventually does.
7:08
You mentioned that it costs Ukraine up to 7X the cost of an Iranian Drone but this is the wrong metric.
It isn't the value of the attacking UAV that matters to the defender, it is the value of the assets protected. No army compares the price of the enemy’s bullets to the cost of their body armor.
And even that calculation was bullock. They don't use missiles against drones. The Ukrainians are fast learner and they already shot most of the drones despites the NASAM and Patriots having not yet arrived in Ukraine.
When deciding to shoot down yes. But if you look at it strategically. The side that can throw less money and force the other to spend more money, wins in the long run.
But reality is much more complicated than that of course.
Actually, all capable armies do. It's basic logistical arithmetics.
@@kingace6186, loss of public support, difficulty recruiting, training soldiers and paying death benefits is more costly than body armor.
@@sananguliyev4940, following this logic Hamas wouldn't Hamas be ruling Israel by now?
You missed it on this. The new weapons and training will put Ukraine at huge advantage.
Plus, sanctions are really biting now.
Russia will not be sble to continue the war to 2025 at most. Likely end this year.😊
Eh. Not to give the Russians too much credit, because I don't think they will be in any position to turn things around at this rate, but wars are a slog, it has already been a slog for the past year, and I figure it will continue to be, I don't think it will end this year. The soldiers will entrench themselves in positions that are difficult to dislodge, and so they will all just sit in their holes, trading artillery shots of various types for months and months on end. Won't last forever, of course not, but it will always be a slog.
Call me pessimistic but I feel you're being overly optimistic. This war seems destined to continue for years on end and likely well into this decade. The Ukrainians won't waver in the defence of their nation, but the Russian's are so stubborn they will do anything to ensure they don't lose the war, they will do literally anything to avoid losing face and that's concerning.
At the very least, I expect something big is going to happen this year.
@@RabbitShirak Shervan is great at geopolitical analysis. I would not trust his military analysis.
Apparently, he thinks that no movement of the lines is the same as stalemate. When one side is losing 5 to 7 times the men as the other, that is NOT a stalemate.
Ukraine is grinding Russia down, while training, equipping and preparing their counter-offensive, which will be a war of movement.
Russia fights like its WW1.
Ukraine will do modern warfare.
The Russian army will collapse in several regions, I expect.
Far from a "forever war".
@@craigkdillonkraine has 100000 killed and wounded ,30000 civilian deaths: Russia has 180000 killed and wounded. Not even close
Yeah but let's not forget that the US aren't the only country supporting Ukraine. The western alliance that supports them dwarfs Russia both economically and militarily and while I certainly agree that shooting Shahed drones with high-tech missiles isn't a great long term solution, it's a solution that this alliance could theoretically afford.
Also, even if Russia can mobilize a lot more troops, it still needs to supply them and that might be tough given the lack of equipment it already suffers from in certain field. Add to that that these conscripts have proven completly useless aside from performing the most bascic kind of operations. They can barely hold a trench, they certainly aren't able to storm a city. This means even if Russia can inflict heavy losses on the Ukrainian and is unlikely to suffer a devastating defeat, I don't see how it can win the war. At most, it can hold the gains it already had, but even with Belarus joining the conflict I can't imagine Russia managing to take Kiev.
And so at some point, Russia will have to call it quits, because even if it can afford to continue the war, it still costs it a lot. As long as they understand that neither Ukraine nor its ally will give up, they will have to retreat even if they could have continued.
You misunderstand Russia's economy. When you subtract all the useless service sector nonsense it's actually larger than Germany's. Western leaders always fall into the GDP trap. It's far more nuanced than that and it's why Russia survived sanctions. They pull resources out of the ground and make things. Much of Western economies are people sitting in cubicles answering emails.
This global reshuffling happening right before our eyes has a lot of people whistling past the graveyard. We are led by idiots who are more concerned with bringing the gay pride flag to Africa.
Over time Russia's just going to bleed out, right you are... They're still making cars, but they're based on designs that are 80 years old. That's how primitive Russia will become. Except that there might be a Civil War there.
@@tunahxushi4669 A civil war would be good for Russia because the side that favors democracy will be the side that America and friends end up backing and then after some growing pains it will be a more pleasant country.
but why are western couintries spending their money on ukraine? it makes 0 sense. USA has huge benefit in helping Ukraine cause now they are selling gas to whole europe with much higher prices and on top of thath they are weakening their arch nemesis. Meanwhike country like germany has nothing against russia but now has to play more than double for gas and oil and they still are helping ukraine? wtf?
I'm glad someone had the patience to point out the problems with the arguments of this video. This is not going to be a forever war. Russia is either going to withstand the next couple years of economic challenges they face coupled with increasing military might of Ukraine or they will not.
Before this war started, I described playing as Russia as playing on "hard mode". Sure they had a lot of nukes, but are surrounded by enemies, have a terrible economy with almost no diversity outside of fossil fuels, and are poorly run. I still thought they'd win in Ukraine due to their sheer size and Ukraine being the poorest nation in Europe, but I was wrong. It is just further proof to me that playing as Russia really is playing on hard mode. This war has made it all the harder for them. If Russia even exists a few decades from now it'll be amazing. If they do win in Ukraine, it'll be the very definition of a Pyrrhic victory.
I guess we'll see how it goes, but I'm still of the opinion that we've got two years left in this war. Either Russia holds out and the world gets bored or Russia faces a military and economic collapse and loses.
does this man wake up in the morning and come up with the best quotes I ever hear in my life cause I am just amazed at the quality and content of the video every time thank you for everything!
"US doesn't lose wars, it lose interest"
Thats a way to sugarcoat "Defeat"
I disagree because the US fought several large scale wars since world war 2 more than any other country but remained the sole superpower. When the Soviet Union tried to do the same in Afghanistan 🇦🇫 in the 1980s, its entire system crumbled but the US had the Korean War, Vietnam war, Afghanistan and Iraq wars and yet its economy and force remains largely intact. Yes in the end the US lost many of these wars strategically not because of lack of resources like the Soviet Union in Afghanistan but because they lost interest and withdrew with their economy still functioning effectively.
you're wrong except Vietnam all were military wins but the political/ regime/governing side of things ,afterwards are another thing
Witticism aside, the military budget, vast as it is, is only 3.4% of GDP. Healthcare is 18.3% of GDP. For comparison, healthcare is 11.1% of French GPD. The US could double the military budget and still fund universal healthcare if it wanted to. If.
This tho. As has been pointed out in numerous comments, it's a cute line but the reason isn't budget it's political will. Lots of money is flowing into private care propaganda and lobbying.
Lol no USA military budget is 4.5% of their GDP
@@widodoakrom3938 Your inaccuracy aside, do you really think that if it were that number, it would alter my point?
@@westrim wrong USA can't increase their military budget anymore it will cost USA debt to skyrocketing besides if the other countries accept yuan as new international currency it will destroy USA economy
This so much this, it's a meme and shouldn't really be repeated by people claiming to provide actual factual information like this channel because it's utterly false.
Oh, that last statement that the US never loses a war was wrong. The US has lost quite a number of wars. Vietnam, etc.
@@AndrewStevens-to3nr Vietnam became a communist country. So that was a total defeat. Call it whatever you want, but that's what the entire war was about.
I disagree with the contention that this will be a forever war. There's too much motivation on the Ukrainian side relative to the Russian one for that to happen. Russia made huge errors by torturing, deporting and abusing the civilians in the territory it occupies. The reaction in Ukraine is that they will fight to the last Ukrainian. This is the attitude amongst people who were previously pacifists. Russia's error turned pacifists into fanatics. Never abuse the civilians, there are tremendous costs and no benefits.
Wow. You didn't pay attention. Don't let your emotions lead you astray.
I second that, There is more on top of it: it would be unfair to say that only in the US the elites are getting tired of the war. In Russia, there is growing discontent with the government which can be seen from the public videos of the so-called "war correspondents, e.g. Igor "Strelkov" Girkin who in his recent video told Putin directly to "shut up and not humiliate the people of Russia". Russian regional elites are hastily creating their own PMCs of some sort as if preparing for a possible disintegration of Russia. And of course, never disregard Russian omnipresent corruption that can inhibit any "advanced" electronic system of mobilisation.
And Russia isn't acting like they even want the territory. Those terror tactics make occupation more difficult and levelling cities is leaving unusable rubble. At this point it seems like inflicting as much suffering as possible is Russia's win state.
Also who cares about manpower when they're rolling out tanks from the 50's. Their production capacity with a dead economy is not good enough to wage a "forever war'.
This is a particularly bad take, you're watching a geopolitics channel about greater national strategies and you think that some civilians being mishandled is going to have influence on how states act?
you realised that those ukrainians that have been taken to russia are russia descendants? these were the same people who voted victor yanukovych in the first place? im amazed with lack of general knowlegde from westerners.
Dude, secret weapon, because they can communicate issues. That is some pretty low grow geopolitics. THEY ARE WORKING ON CENTRAL DATABASE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER. This is some pretty low brow analysis Caspian.
First Ukraine did not use NASAMS or any other systems with expensive rounds to take down Iranian drones and that was stated by Ukrainian military officials. There is no secret "super weapon" in Russia that can help them mobilize more troops. That's Russo-Ukrainian war but not proxy war against Russia. All that said this video actually feels empty and unprepared as a clickbait name of the video.
P.S. Gas and oil prices have fallen to the pre-full scale war times. That's a note for your ads in the beginning of the video.
P.S. Gas and oil prices have fallen to the pre-full scale war times.
and where is that?
Yeah the vid felt weirdly pro Russia. A lot of the same talking points that you hear from tankies. It tugs at left sentiment and then suggests that the solution is appeasement by feeding Ukraine to the wolves. The fascist wolves with nuclear bombs.
The video is designed to create insecurity. The question is why?
so you are saying that they took down the drones with AKs and small arms fire? of course there is no "secret super weapon" since if you listened to the video it isnt implemented yet. also, it is a proxy war. it is so obvious that i am baffled why you think it isnt.
>proxy war against Russia
Russia started it in 2014, and can always end it with one simple trick
It's funny how advertising works, because from repeatedly seeing the Masterworks ad I absolutely hate it.
If Russia's Great Plan to win it's war of fascist conquest in Ukraine is based around manpower, I think they will find the cluster munitions has a way of dealing with most of those issues.
Russia can handle it. They are already winning.
@@yurichtube1162 how they can't even encircle bakmut
@@Hamburger2005 Uhh, Bakhmut is 70% taken and almost completely encircled. This is a war of attrition, no need to hurry up with an inevitable victory.
@@yurichtube1162 Is that why they are still trying to take Bahkmut? Winning seems to be a very slow thing for Russia, while losing tens of thousands of loyal orcs.
@@maghambor the total casualty rates of Russia during this entire war has been between the 14k-16k. It's a war of attrition, the goal is to inflict maximum damage on Ukraine. And it's going perfectly, close to 300k Ukranians KIA, and a very big number are MIA not to mention wounded. Russia is winning, going slow is the entire point. Russia doesn't mind giving up land if they can grind down the entire Ukraine army. Once finished, whole of Ukraine can be easily conquered. Nato will be kicked out, and Russia can force its will on Ukraine and whole of Europe. Nato won't save them. And the rate this is going, the war might end this year and if Joe Biden wishes to continue he will sent nato soldiers in to prolong it for another year. And once Donald Trump returns as president the war will end. America might even leave Europe, considering them a waste and just focus on China. (China is a whole different beast and topic, won't get into it).
This masterworks really sounds like a massive ponzi scheme.
Agree. If one doesn't outright own a thing and has it with them/has access to it (ie. land, property, etc.), it's dodgy in my book.
"The United States doesn't lose wars, it loses interest." Excellent quote and analysis! Thanks for sharing!
People forget America has been engaged in war for the last 35 years
@@jacksevert3099 Yes, but it lose interest in all these wars. Militarily, the US won all wars. It was the citizens and politicians who stopped it.
Huge cope. Loses interest just like someone gets tired of a board game they're losing.
@@cow_tools_ killing 1.2 million enemies at the cost of only 58k in Vietnam? Killing a million at just the cost of 7K in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria combined? If that is losing, I do not want to win.
@@dartfather Hilarious! I suppose you play Call of Duty and think "winning" is your little KDR score. Everything you said doesn't matter. War is about outcome. America won all the battles, but still failed to win the war.
The thing is Russija has made this mistake before, sending poor people and political dissidents to the front that is. Last time the boļševiks radicalized the army of people that that nothing to lose and saw it turn on Russija, I dont expect any different outcome this time.
There is an important thing often missing in Air Defence price equation: not drone price alone BUT drone price AND the cost of a potentially destroyed target should be compared to Air Defence munition price. Not speaking about potentially injuring / dead because of a non-intercepted attack.
Согласен, зачем делать бронежилеты если пуля дешевле во много раз ?
Good point. The cost of NOT having the drone cause destructions is never factored in, although it should be.
noticed that too. he makes ridiculous arguments in this one. totally biased, unsubscribing from him
That's a useful metric when determining whether or not to shoot a drone down. But from an economic attrition perspective it all about the balance of costs between the sides.
If a drone is $20k, an interception costs $100k and the potential damage is $1m, it's inaccurate to say that the balance is $920k in favour of Ukraine. It may be money well spent by Ukraine (assuming no cheaper alternatives exist) but it's still a bad trade.
Video doesn't take one thing into account. Ukraine start making own versions of Iranian drones and they make already few spectacular boings.
The cost benefit ratio of shooting down a cheap drone with an expensive missile should include the value of the target the drone is after. If a $30k drone is heading towards a $50 million hospital, then a $100k missile sounds reasonable.
The real effect of cheap drones is to saturate and deplete an air defense. However, both sides can play that game.
Agreed. It is only a matter of time before the Ukrainians also jump into the drone game too.
And it will be really fun if Iran decide to supply these drones to Ukraine too
It's an American war, who don't know how to end wars.
😂😂 america isn’t even in the war just giving weapons 😂 Russia started it dumb muslim
whoever is the attacker in a forever war always seems to lose. At least in every forever war I can think of
yeah like us invasion of vietnam and many others
the amount of brutality required to win one of those wars is pretty much impossible in the current global system. you will just get dog piled by everyone who is in utter disgust. We will see if attitudes change after we lose the last people who remember the great bloodletting of the second world war. I pray not
Are you thinking of any that don't involve the US?
@@hurgcat every one from that time is like 80 years old or older or dead. They're already insignificant in terms of their influence.
@Last Word yeah but their children remember. When the boomers go the last ties to the bloodshed of the 20th century go with them. more will be revealed on how it shakes out
What is your source about the new "unnamed weapon", the social Credit system for military recrutement? You seem to be the only one reporting this so far.
He made it up
@@STFUGOOGLE420 Do you have something to back that up with or are you speculating? I am actually genuinly interested in reading into it.
1:25
"They're about to find out why America has no universal healthcare"🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂
I'm dead bro 😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Shivran: Russia is preparing a never seen before system of intelligent mass conscription and is building huge industrial capabilities to win the war through sheer perseverance.
Reality: Russia is calling up tanks designed during ww2 (t-54/55s).
But seriously. I doubt Russia has enough competence to do things like that at this point. Till now, everything they did so far war quite a shit show. I'm also doubtfull this will change. Yust look at their series of disasters around Vuhledar, and then keep in mind that the commander responsible for that was actually awarded for it.
It is what is called a "Kakistocracy" aka. "the rule of the worst", since Putin values loyalty over actual performance.
Lately I've been questioning his integrity and moral stance. Feels like a large chunk of the video is kremlin propaganda
An attrition war does not benefit Russia. The USA had a much larger population than Vietnam. The USSR had a larger population than Afghanistan. The US kill ratio against North Vietnam was more than 10:1, still close to 5:1 when you factor South Vietnamese losses. Soviets had about an 8:1 against Afghanistan. Larger population and a favorable kill ratio and still both global powers lost because their adversaries were more willing to absorb the lopsided losses. Russia has turned that model on its head. Even though it is supposed to be the stronger power in this war, it is also the country absorbing the most casualties. The Ukranians are more willing to absorb losses but the haven't had to do it. Essentially, the Russians have invented the dumbest version of this kind of attrition warfare in history.
Exactly, the people of Russia are not Putin nor orcs, they will be extremely unwilling to take losses long term. Many of them have relatives in the Ukraine, this is not some distant unrelated country. A magic formula to send low cost people to war without suffering mass riots or mass migration, in this time and age??? I don't buy that either. The analysis seems biased and overestimates the will of the Russian people to fight this. I doubt this is a serious analysis.
The US will pay for the war, what do they have to lose?
Maybe they want those people dead
Yup, they are g3tting rid of the undesirables... But on top of that they won't ever rebel against their rulers, so it's just RAW numbers against RAW numbers ..., of which they in fact have more of. Ukraine has to have an overwhelming advantage in ratio, in order to pull through
Russia is not USA, Vietnam is not Ukraine.
Ussr is not Russia.
If Vietnam shared a border with USA and 40% of the population of Vietnam was American, you'd realize what the American intelligence reports have realized, Ukraine will lose this conflict.
Attrition benefits Russia b/c Western economy is collapsing, Republicans are cutting off funding for Ukraine, American media is already turning to its next war in Asia [Taiwan/China], Russia borders Ukraine, it is not 1/2 around the world running long supply lines, support on the Russia side for the conflict is high.
USSR did not "lose" in Afghanistan, the Marxist gov't of Afghanistan successfully withstood all US sponsored attacks on it from American funded Pashtun extremist known as the Taliban and Al- Qaeda and managed to push them down and limit their influence to Pashtune only areas. Marxist gov't of Afghanistan lasted longer than the USSR by several years.
Russia is not absorbing the most causalities, which is why support for the conflict is so high in Russia currently. It is Ukrainians of Russian heritage who live in Novo-Russia like Crimea, DPR, LPR, Kherson etc. who are doing all the heavy fighting and taking all the causalities and they are willing to die b/c if they don't win the war their families will be hung in the street and burnt alive by the SBU and Ukrainian Nazis.
Whatever the situation now. I’m for the win for Ukraine and think the alliance should invest in Ukraine to break the stalemate.
then it will end in the fallout universe. for the Russian Federation, this is the problem of existence, they will use nuclear weapons if there is no other way out. and the government has nowhere to run.
Ukraine is destroyed and Sheevan is just bia ms in his reporting
@@god_slayer-restart total bs, nobody's going to invade russia, because nobody cares about that shithole. That apocalyptical rhetoric is aimed at impressionable westerners who don't understand anything about russian imperialism and fake bravado.
@@god_slayer-restart China wouldn’t allow it.
@@TheSteinbitt I hope
*No counter offensive for several months*
Caspian Report: "Ukrainian war is turning into a forever war"
😂😂😂
Meanwhile, the Russian offensive is going so well, they call Bakhmut "the meat grinder".
@@nothere4089 they didn't
Rasha will be able to wage war untill their hard currency and gold reserves run out; the rouble will turn into bolivar, and when the payments stop, the economy stops, and the army goes home by itself. Manpower is useful as long as they are willing to attack, and that is why the generals pushed Wagners at the threat of being skinned alive, because most mobilized are unable to go forward and just freeze under fire.
It seems Biden admin is getting support from the OG guy🤩
The Russians have no will of their own. Their only dream is to die for their leaders.
please stop promote this scam Masterwork, a lot of people will lost their money because you.
This gyppo is a scammer why would he not shill scams
Bro Gas prices reached a lot higher than $5 dollars in California
That's cuz your state is greedy AF and taxes the piss out of petrol. Even if the oil companies charged nothing at all gas would still go for nearly $3 bucks in Cali.
@@Matt_from_Florida Of course floridaman does not understand the excise duty on gas. You guys deny the existence of climate change.
every thing will be expensive as hell in CA even if world will be peaceful
To anyone who is a fan of Caspian Report or Geopolitics in general I would recommend a documentary series by the BBC called Holidays in the Danger Zone: Places That Don't Exist. It was made in 2005 and they visit all the places that Shirvan mentions. Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabach, South Ossetia & Abkhazia.
Thanks for the tip. Is this on streaming anywhere?
@@TravelWithMeGadget Yes. Simon Reeve has them on his TH-cam channel.
th-cam.com/video/_ykJaN0Q9PI/w-d-xo.html
@@LulaJake oh that's awesome. Thanks for the info
Places that don't exist for europeans, South Ossetia Abkazia and others ones are very touristic places for Russians and other non europeans . When the West didn't ever mention, that doesn't means is unknown
Yeah, you could say that Shahed drones are less expensive than AA missiles. But maybe it's more realistic to compare the cost of a Shahed to the price of three or four bursts from a Gepard, which is what usually takes down lawnmowers. Maybe also compare to the cost of century-old water cooled Maxim guns, which I've also seen manned as AA defense against drones. Perhaps the SAM-3 would be better compared to the cost of a Su-25, a Ka-52 or a Kalibr missile.
The problem is temporary. West and Ukraine work on effective way to deal with the drones. Actually Russian missiles are true risk. Most Iranian drones don't even reach the target, being taken out by cheap assets.
I think in this conflict you shouldn't exclusively focus on US contribution since EU NATO partners spend a roughly equal amount
He practically ignored the entire continent in his analysis. It almost borders on Russian propaganda that considers NATO to be a nothing more than a puppet of the US whenever it cries about "equal treatment" and dismisses the autonomy of millions of Europeans and their governments.
Thats a joke, EU contributions dwarfed by American
@@MarxAlex Not by percentage of their GDP though, the US only pays more because it can.
@@Sparx632 but which measurement would you expect the Ukrainian military to care more about -- percentage of another polity's GDP, or total amount of support their own polity received?
@@Sparx632 I don't think that really matters. What matters in this regard is raw numbers, not effort.
“The US doesn’t lose wars, it loses interest.”
Damn that’s dark.
And incorrect
@@tavernburner3066 that just your opinion
Mar 6, 2020 - As former U.S. Defence Secretary General Mattis put it, “The U.S. doesn't lose wars, it loses interest.”
It's the same thing. If you lose a war, you lose a war; lost too much manpower, economy, territory or intrest- its just the reason for a lost war.
That’s stupid. Don’t worry the Chinese will show us.
This isnt WW2... sheer numbers don't mean what they used to mean. Throwing 500k under equipped and untrained conscripts into battle only means more bodies. Not necessarily significant gains
I'm not sure about the Shahed part, Yes Ukrainians used S-300 or Buk System to down Shahed down, but that's not the majority of the case. Shahed flies low so most of the time they are downed by manpads and AA heavy machine gun like the hundreds one they've put on pick up with thermal sighting so I wouldn't bet on that strategy for Russia
3:05 after the advertising crap
It is one thing to "lose interest" in a place like Afghanistan where no clearly defined U.S. national interests exist. The consequences of allowing Russia to absorb Ukraine are orders of magnitude greater for the U.S. and especially Europe. The U.S. led coalition has less than two years to force Russia out of Ukraine before American politics becomes a serious issue. The American public supports the effort in Ukraine by a sizeable majority; one which could cost the Republicans the White House and Congress in 2024.The consensus is that Russia has asperations far beyond Ukraine. We shall see whether the Europeans, especially Germany and France, appreciate the threat that a Russian victory in Ukraine presents.
Being a Ukrainian soldier myself I found your video quiet depressing. I feel the vanity of my efforts and I'm not sure like gonna make through it. But thanks for telling the truth, even if it is an unpleasant one to hear.
Get along with russians
Mobilizing unwilling soldiers has a lot of problems, morale, and readiness, to name a few.
Russians are very patriotic. The western people are not able to understand that.
What pisses me most about International diplomacy is that calls for moral action depend upon the power of the perpetrator. I'm tired of Russia's friends (including my own country) calling for "bilateral talks" when one party is CLEARLY the aggressor! This is like asking a kid who's getting bullied to talk it out with the bully. Sick of this war, and sick of what is is doing to common people worldwide.
Everyone only cares about their self interest. That's just the nature of this World.
That doesn’t seem like the perfect system to avoid war fatigue. It sounds like the perfect way to get mutiny and insurgencies…
02:00 Gasprices in Europa are already back to normal (or got even lower) to prewar Prices.
07:00 Iranian Drones are not shot down by expensive missles. Ukraine says the, use Handweapons or they also Airdefence guns like German Gepard is usefull (Gepard uses only twelve bullets 35 mm for one target attack.). The Iranian drone is slow enough for guns.
Pootie is trying to have his orcs fight with ever older and more ineffective weapons. Hell, even his troops are getting older and more ineffective. Meanwhile, Ukrainians are training on M1A1 or A2, A-10 Thunderbolt ll, F-16s, F/A18 Superhornets from the US and a slew of modern, deadly hardware from Europe, Canada, and Australia. There are volunteers from nearly 50 nations fighting the Rooskies. Pootie is taking citizens up to 65 years of age! He is now about out of criminals and mentally ill people flushed from prisons and hospitals, is recruiting women prisoners now. If you compare the two trendlines, Ukraine is on the rise, Rusha is auguring in.
Despite that Russia are doing far better and advancing with shoval 🤫
the limit of an age of 65 years is present in many countries. Ukraine's is 60 years old
None of those weapons will be in this fight.
@@quartermaster1976 Well that depends on how long Ruzzia can hold out. If they fold now, no. If they can scrape up some more cannon meat, then it's likely they will be gradually fed into the conflict. The escalation of the level of effectiveness of the materiel we provide has been to avoid jumping the level of western involvement a lot and rapidly. The slow incremental increase in the numbers and lethality of the weapons we provide has been to avoid having a sudden increase in capability which could trigger Pootie to do something really rash. As we increase our support after each escalation or war crime perpetrated by the Ruzzians, we have a rationale for each incremental escalation.
@@kimweaver1252 Ukraine can't keep up they've lost 250,000 from the battlefield dead and wounded they're enslaving their own people to fight
This is just too good of a return on investment for the US. So I don't think aids will stop anytime soon
How? A better investment would have been peace.
@@AndyFromBeavertonThat's what the us is doing.
@@AndyFromBeaverton I agree. That’s why they are investing so strongly in Ukraine becoming strong enough to force Putin to accept peace. Can’t have peace without justice, can’t have justice while 1 country is occupying another’s lands while suppressing the language and deporting its children, while screaming about how the other country ‘does not exist, has no historical legitimacy and should just accept they are just lesser people’
Peace is more expensive for the US because it would require more spending on military deterrence to counter a stronger Russian military. Assistance to Ukraine is the lowest cost option even if you put aside all the moral and political considerations.
@@AndyFromBeaverton they got it and it only cost them some last-gen equipment.
War has gone for one year
Westerners: Ukraine turning into a ‘Forever War’
Ukraine has around 6 months tp win a decisive victory. If they don’t do so, they will start to suffer under heavy attrition. In that way it’s already a forever war. Russia and west also expected this shit to be over in a week or three. Thus its safe to assume that its going in that direction.
@@muratbayraktar5035 and might I ask how exactly? And as far as Russia goes, they don't mind this being a forever small scale war
@@vadimuha how what?
@@muratbayraktar5035 Ukraine starts to bleed over heavy attrition. What I see is Ukraine moving Leopard 2 to the front lines and Russia moving T-50s and is obviously crumbling under heavy sanctions, even Putin admit they bite, it's that obvious
@@vadimuha yes so you agree that this is a forever war now, right?
The statement that we use C-300, NASAMS, or other expensive weapons to shoot Shahed is wrong. Maybe it is used but in very rear cases. The main weapons against Shahed are machine guns and Gepards.
Could you make a video on the acceleration of investment in renewable energy in Europe as a direct result of the war? Great content, keep up the good work!
😂😂😂 you still believe the renewables grift? 😂😂😂😂😂
@@tonyromano6220 You are following Lauren Boebert and other Grifters. Shit man that says everything about your mental capacity 😂😂😂😂🤡🤡🤡🤡
Oh it sure did accelerate renewables, especially opening dozens of previously closed coal power plants in Germany
@@tonyromano6220 You still believe the fossil fuel grift? The US donates $20bn/yr to keep big oil in business, and other countries donate fairly significant amounts as well.
Even if you're too short-sighted or just too stupid to understand the problems climate change has already started to cause, fossil fuels are simply no longer competitive with alternative power sources. Natural gas still has a bit of life left in it, and there's a few things like airplane fuel that we simply don't have a replacement for regardless of the cost, but in most cases its simply more expensive to keep setting shit on fire. Up front costs are often still lower, but the cost of fuel more than makes up for the initial difference over the course of a few years.
And fossil fuels are proving themselves to be a major national security risk as well, as much of Europe has discovered over this past year. If you can't supply 100% of your own energy demands, you are necessarily beholden to the whims of others. The US can get away with that because they have a sufficient stranglehold over the middle east but even the US can't escape the fact that oil is a global market and losing just one major producer in the world - such as Russia - has a massive impact on domestic prices. The only way to protect against that is to be 100% self-sufficient, and that is simply not possible with fossil fuels. Shale oil helped the US a lot but its not enough, and other countries don't even have that.
@@altrag what alternative?
Ukraine has not only used missiles against the Shahed drones, but a lot of anti aircraft guns as well.
Especially the Gepard has been proven very effective against them, with 1-2 bursts of 3-4 rounds they can take down a drone. Their issue is of course a much shorter range compared to missiles. Rheinmetall is producing ammo again for them and even more interestingly the Skynex systems are already in Ukraine.
You are 100% right, they can shoot them down without missile sometimes. The only shocking thing is how much that Swiss anti-aircraft ammunition is. It's gotta be a couple thousand dollars a burst... at least.
@@tunahxushi4669 i have no info about the price but from a logistics and supply perspective its very much worth to use anti air guns against these drones instead of missiles.
@@tunahxushi4669 A couple grand or three is still cheaper than a missile.
What's the source on Skynex?
@@Firahun .. Absolutely, just saying AA ammo is not free that's all... Be better if the sites producing the drones could be targeted directly.
I would love to know if Caspian Report genuinely just has a total blind spot around Ukraine, or if he's been bought. I'm hoping it's the first, but we'll see.
Many channels like this seem to avoid the obvious factors and connections, because muh... anti-semitic etc.
Honestly the propaganda from both sides is insane. Both sides frame the war incorrectly for their own domestic audience. It becomes "pick a team" mindset when in reality both sides share blame for different things. In Russia you get arrested for protest. In the west you get cancelled or not even allowed on main stream media to be critical of Ukraine in anyway. Seems like most people cant play devils advocate and put themselves in both the Pro EU Ukrainian shoes that saw his friends shot at Maiden or the ethnic Russian Yanukovych supporter shoes who saw his President removed as head up state by what they perceive as a western backed coup.
Every information must be taken with a pinch of salt.
@mitch C yes, but some more than others.
What made Caspian different before, was he presented the two sides of conflict based on what the two sides said and then looking at the relevant history and land/economy factors etc.
For this whole Ukraine thing, he's just totally taken the western line 100% hook, line, and sinker ... apparently having no idea whatsoever about what the Russians say, their history in this, what they see as the situation etc. etc.
Caspian has gone from trying to be fair to being absolutely blatantly totally and completely fully biased, simply parrotting narratives of one side. It's very sad.
I don't know if the emotions knocked out his reason, he's under threat, or he was only ever impartial as long as it got better views and it was always just about money ... I don't see many other options but I'd like to see him address his failures after the war.
@@tinkeringtim7999 what 2 sides? Get the full out.
1:27 ouch! That hurt me.
russia is developing a database, we are developing a counteroffensive, we are different
So did the Nazis until the west broke their back and turned them into Germany.
You are overestimating the capability of the Russians. They mobilized, they fought, and pushed hard, and as of today this hasn’t taken a town greater than a population of 10k. They have suffered casualties far worse than thought possible. They cant win
Little piss mommy boy talking
Defense contractors have not seen these kinds of profits since world war 2.
Russia's winter offensive died in Vuldehar and Bahkmut. I have to disagree with your assessment this time around. But, as always, I appreciate Caspian Report!
Agreed. The talk of what Russia is preparing materiale wise is hand waved at. I don’t but they are making more munitions in the way claimed here.
Name one Russian source that claimed that there would ever be a "winter offensive", you heard that from the West.
So by default, it obviously failed.
Looolll...500k Ukrainian dead...russia is making a war of attrition, not conquest, and is winning by large numbers!
There hasn't been an offensive on either side.
The ruskies can barely hold their men together during an attack, I doubt they can get an offensive done.
Despite their increased production of certain weapons (like loitering munitions), we've yet to see russia manage to scale up production of essentials such as tanks and artillery shells anywhere close to what they need. Have you noticed they pulled T-54s out of storage recently?
Conversely, NATO militaries have still significant stockpiles of game changers such as the ATACMS and HARM which are only suspended to diplomatic decision at the moment, and scaling up of arms production capacity is already in progress in some NATO countries. Ukraine itself has also become very apt at manufacturing and using loitering munitions using hardware easily available from across the EU border, the strike on the railway junction in Crimea a few days back used one of them.
So, while the war can be prolonged, I highly doubt russia will be able to mount large multi-front offensives anywhere near what they did a year ago. There is no way they would get anywhere near Kyiv again, when it takes them months, tens of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of armoured vehicles to capture small ruined villages. I'm more worried about the political will to expedite this process than the end result, any delaying costs lives and causes untold suffering.
I believe I have mentioned it in here too.
Russia can nab poor people and minorities off the streets to send to the meatgrinder, they cannot keep pulling tanks out of storage forever.
They have already lost (visually confirmed) over 1000 T-72’s already (with the number probably being anywhere from 400 to 800 more that we haven’t seen).
The T-72 was their most numerous tank in both active and reserve storage.
They can only manage to “upgrade” some 40-90 a month, but they lose twice that in the same time frame.
As more western systems enter Ukraine, the more effective they will be as Russia will have used up the majority of its good equipment and will be using base model T-72’s, T-62’s and even T-54/T-55’s.
Что вы скажите, когда Китай начнет поставлять оружие и технику в России?
@@ЯрославВладимирович-м3т China not going to invest in a sinking ship.
The potato and vodka team has been pulling tanks and armor carriers out of museums lately, not a joke...
@@ЯрославВладимирович-м3т considering how Chinese tanks have a lot of barrel wobble I doubt they’ll be any good.
The fact that this war has not stopped before it even started (or without hindsight since at least summer 2022) is gravely disturbing to me... I don't remember where i first heard, but i always get reminded of this quote: "history doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes"
Well, Zelensky wanted to negotiate with Putin back in early 2022 but the UK and US put a stop to that (Russia has proposed 3 more times to negotiate but the UK and US are calling all the shots here). The West wants this war to continue in order to harm Russia but unfortunately, that means hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians must die and continue to die in the process.
2014 is when the war began
@@smokedbeefandcheese4144 the war started when the Ukrainian national feeling began. In the late 19th century.
The same here. That war should stop before it started. But it is not in US interest. I just do not understand how Russians get hooked on it.
@@gergomarton5194 And it will end by them waving the rainbow flag in surrender 😁
Very interesting analysis, but i think that you're underestimate Europes urgent need to end this war quickly and with Russia as a defeated Nation because of geography and economics as well. America and Russia can play the long and hard game, but as you said, Ukraine can't and so Europa can't also. So the EU and Nato will force the US politicly much more to grind down Russia much faster, if the war goes longer than to the end of 2023.
At this point what influance does Russia have over Europe? Gas? I don't Europe giving up on Ukraine.
@@erikthomsen4768 That wasn't my point. Europe supports Ukraine financially too and because it's the same continent, a defeated Russia is a vital security interest.
I wish the war ends and Peace 🕊️ will prevail. Amen.
That line about universal healthcare had me laughing for 30 seconds. Very well done!
I saw that in a meme like 10 months ago lol.
Cheap joke for simple minds 🤡
I've heard it too many time tbh
Except it's an extremely old and unoriginal joke.
This myth needs to stop being propagated. 3.5% of GDP being allocated to defense spending is not in anyway related to the US healthcare structure. We have more than enough money to spend on universal health care if we chose to, we already spend more per capita on healthcare than anyone. Political lobbying and a general dislike of entitlement programs is why, not defense spending. This myth creates the impression we cannot have both which is false.
"They are about to find out why America has no universal healthcare" man your humor is top class, i really laughed at this because it is so true and yet in a dark way also funny .
With demographics like today, Russia actually does not have alot "extra", they loose population even withouth war, so even withouth war they are loosing population and with war it is a disaster, not every Russian is young and healthy .
Plus US is not the only cpountry supporting Ukraine, also dont underestimate Ukranians, they can also produce things
I'm sorry but Ukraine basically has no significant domestic manufacturing capability
@@Prometheus7272 How sure are you about that?
@@stipe3124 Very, why do you think they totally rely on foreign aid
@@Prometheus7272 They don't totally, but consider that Ukraine was Soviet Union industrial Center and they have "know how"
@@stipe3124 I was under the impression that much of their 90s & 2000s brain drain had seen Ukraine's entrepreneurs and skilled workers jump out to other countries (particularly Canada)
I’d like to pre congratulate BlackRock Inc. on winning this war, also shout out to honourable mentions Lockheed, Grumman, Raytheon..
So they started the war?
@@rogerforsman5064 I said winning not started ;)
@@rogerforsman5064 Who funded communism?
Majdan was funded with 5billions USD
Russia is not USA
it can't tolerate Kuba until the moment it deploys nukes...
Hey man, might as well cash in while you can.
In this case it actually seems like it’s a win win win (lose) situation.
They American public doesn’t have to go and die, the defense contractors get paid and the Ukrainians are able to keep slaughtering Russians at an unprecedented rate.
(Russians lose though, and that’s entirely fine with me!)
@@rogerforsman5064 No, the US did by reneging on every agreement it made in the 1990s with Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union and instigating the Euromaidan revolution, which the state department openly admitted to being involved in. Prior to 2014, Ukrainian and Russian relations were amicable before the US decided it needed to cut Europe off from Russian gas, which is why it started the revolution in Ukraine and why it tried to start a proxy war with Russia in Syria to gain access for the construction of the Qatar Turkey pipeline around the same time. This war has been brewing for decades. Every time the US interests have been threatened similarly in its own spheres of influence in its backyard, it has responded with force, i.e. (banana republics, Panama, Cuban missile crisis, which was a Soviet response to the US placing missiles on its borders first, mind you.) Russia fired the shot, but the US loaded the magazine.
"they're about to find out why America doesn't have universal health care" that was chilling
also a worn out trope - America spends trillions on healthcare
Wastes. *
@@EYDuff America spends trillions on healthcare, yet has the worst healthcare outcomes and the worst life expectancy in the developed world.
@@Volatile-Tortoise yeah exactly
That alleged system to automatically identify and conscript "undesirables"... will they actually stand and fight? Would they not turn their weapons against recruiters pretty damn quickly once it's made clear that the state sees them as disposable/expendable cannon fodder?
i hope the russian people do
nipe, russians are slaves
All governments including yours sees the people like this.. Russia is not an exception..
@@steephanroy8461 If my current government dared to give guns to the people right now, they'd all get shot immediately.
@@bc-cu4on It depends. Russians are generally not known for their opposition to authority. Historically speaking, Russia has employed behind the lines troops with the purpose of coercing frontline soldiers to fight until the end, even in unfavorable conditions. They would give them a choice, fight until they die, or attempt to retreat/run away/surrender and die. That is the purpose of the Kadyrovites in this conflict.
This has not always been the case, as exemplified by the military mutinies during World War 1. But that happened because things got so bad for the average soldiers, and the Russian army and state was so weak that set the stage for a mutiny to actually succeed. Would this become the case with this war? We don't know.
The issue with the forever war argument is that the minorities, the unwanted, the prisoners and the disidents are "safe" because they're not armed. There is a very high cost to arming people who see that you're throwing them away. They will quickly begin to see you as their enemy and suddenly you have a well armed, equipped and organized fifth column, that's also the bulk of your armed forces.
Russia tried this in WW1, it did not end well.
Russia can't use competent commands because they're a threat to Putin. They can't send loyal troops to the front because they need loyal men alive and at home to keep the peace and they really can't arm disloyal men and expect them to fight for Russia.
Sadly for Russia, the US will not lose interest. Sure, the vote base may prefer something other than maintaining the support. Still, the wealthy ruling class, notably the military Industrial Complex, finds this war a natural profit giver. So until the MIC does not see them profiting from the war, they will lobby to keep the support going
It's also not against a nebulous enemy hiding underground of dubious religious motivation. It's against a fully fledged country, open warfare, highly documented and visualized, of obvious intent and strength. Not to mention the lingering ghost of the Cold War in the older generation's attic.
Talking about drone attacks from Russia as a cost effective way to exhaust air defense systems is not the best example because such attacks don't affect the battlefield and were designed to terrify the population and destroy critical infrastructure, a terrorist tactic. On the battlefield however Ukrainians are much more inventive and flexible in fighting.
Same goes about manpower pool, I can twist the same calculations a bit and say that yes, Russia has 3 times more men but it is also losing 5 times more than Ukraine on the battlefield.
Also American interest can't be a proxy war to kill 25 million Russians, nobody wants that. It is clearly defined as a defence of a Democratic state that was attacked because it was weaker than its autocratic neighbor. So imagine the Pandora box of conflicts that can sprung out if Russia gets what it wants just by using force
you believe that sh"T? who helped overthrown a democratically elected ukrainian president back in 2014 again? its only democracy when the results fit your own interest huh?
Bull crap...
Don't live in the Matrix.
Ukrain is as much as authoritarian corrupt and oligarchic as Russia is.
It's the big bucks.. the ruling class people with real Power the people who manufacture this big guns.. the donors of your president.. they want this war and it is because of the profits that they make this war is being committed..
American intrest is to create a market for its weapons of mass distruction. The people in Washington doesn't care if 25 or 200 million people have to perish for it..
Just have the time to look at the performance of lockheed or Boeing stocks.
The claim that this war is just another benovelent act by the Americans to protect and save a fellow democratic nation is as much if not more baffonic than the russian climing the Ukrainian war is a fight against modern natzies.
Could you name those future conflicts please? Russia, even if it will achieve pyrrhic victory like in Soviet-Finnish war, will be devastated for decades. Other authoritarian regimes are drastically weaker than the west, except for China. And Xi will be in the cold war with the West whenever Russia will win or lose.
*military pauses between massive successful counter attacks*
"This is shaping up to be a Forever War"
Interesting video as always though it would of been nice to have an explanation of the difference between traditional wars, forever wars and frozen conflicts.
It's a stretch to call Karabakh a Russian conflict. Russia would gladly take away their forces from there (which it already partially did) if it didn't spiral the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan
This is unlikely to last that long. The battles are very intensive most of the time, and both sides can't sit idle. And Russia's manpower is pretty much overstated, it's a country with big demographic problems which had already been serious prior to invasion.
Not yust their manpower, but their available amount of military hardware too.
Russia has a real demographic problem, but Ukraine’s is worse.
Yeah, if you see the official statements from the Kremlin, they keep hinting/saying they want peace talks, especially in their joint statement with China after Xi's visit just a few days ago.
@@user-uf2df6zf5w that too, stuff remembering soviet era. Russia is a paper tiger which were able to wage a prolonged warfare in other parts of the world because it happened in very poor countries with guerillas taking minor damage, bit by bit. Ukrainian military is way more powerful and experienced, it's a dragon Russians have created (I mean 2014/2015 Crimea and Donbas conflict) and can't slay anymore.
@@uchicha666 Ukraine has already lost it's trained military.
Can't Ukraine also buy low cost drones as well . If this tactic is known why the Ukraine forces not also employ cheaper drones if they are so cheap and effective? That's a pretty vague description. They have just as much access to material then why would they be limited to expensive drones and artillery. This doesnt make sense .
I do think the video tried to stay away from "theoreticals" down the line. But you do have a good point, Nato as a whole is certainly capable of out producing Russia and Iran. Whether they can produce drones/Surface to air missiles CHEAP enough for the cost benefit equation to shift... depends. They might think it wise to stock up on some themselves if they've learned anything from this conflct
@@edwardsantiago9109 it's about selling top choice weapons. Cheap drones don't fill pockets. Maybe contract obligations .
@@jamiebizness1 maybe, if the west had tons of their own cheap drones. But our drones are not cheap even to ourselves, if we could I'm sure we would.
@@edwardsantiago9109 they said theybise more expensive more advanced weapons to the detriment of Ukraine because Russia uses cheap Iranian drones that have been more effective and cheap. Why is Ukraine aka the USA using expensive weapons in Lou of the fact that cheaper less sofisticated weapons are more effective. 🤔 this is counter productive and dangerous unless it's by design . They've been beeking about the cost of the war more than the human cost . Yet they insist on using more expensive and less effective weapons . This is what's the shady part. Somwone is getting paid while all these poor innocent young people are dyi g so assholes can sell weapons and oil . This is a crime
Maybe these governments and armies act like banks and the loan out 20 times more weapons than they produce. That's why these deals take years cause their banking on the idea that they can always control the narrative. Now both Russian and US army are talking about stocks being depleted meanwhile we all know they been making weapons non stop for the last 100 years straight. Lol but still pretending like they are scarce . Its quite the balancing act to keep all of us on the edge of chaos . It's kinda beautiful in the way of its effectiveness and design for the subjugation of an entire planet . We gotta give it to the over lords . They are pretty crafty
Also it's not just a spend for the U.S. economy. Most of the systems they're sending or made in the United States, so it's money they're paying American companies which gets re-invested in the American economy.
Shirvan, this has been an amazing video on the matter.
If you’d have interest in making a video about the frozen region of Transnistria and the turmoil created in Moldova considering the current state of affairs, that would be amazing.
Word flows around that the UAF are ready to elibarate the region from Russian “peacekeepers” as long as the Moldovan government gives their consent.
1 year is not a forever war. Even 5 years is not a forever war.