Hypothetical NATO intervention in Ukraine; what might it look like?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 พ.ค. 2024
- Understand the context shaping wars and international affairs with Ground News. Go to ground.news/binkov and subscribe for 30% off their unlimited access Vantage plan or $1/month for their starter package.
This video explores what would be the minimum needed for a NATO intervention in Ukraine to be successful. It explores both a more covert and indirect option with fewer frontline NATO troops and a more direct NATO involvement inside Ukraine.
00:00 Intro
02:49 Current issues and politics
05:37 Air defenses
07:34 Aircraft
11:51 Politics of air bases
15:02 Ammo and manpower
18:57 Finances
22:29 Outro
Music by Matija Malatestinic www.malatestinic.com
If you want to watch our videos without ads, if you want quick replies to any questions you might have, if you want early access scripts and videos, monthly release schedules - become our Patron.
More here: / binkov
You can also browse for other Binkov merch, like T-Shirts, via the store at our website, binkov.com
Subscribe to Binkov's channel for more videos! / @binkov
Follow Binkov's news on Facebook! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow us on Twitter: / commissarbinkov
![ใจเสาะบนเกาะนาคี - อ๊ะอาย สกุณาพร เสียงวิหค [Official MV] | ค่ายเพลงเป็นหนึ่ง](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jbcmGQkfyOg/mqdefault.jpg)
Understand the context shaping wars and international affairs with Ground News. Go to ground.news/binkov and subscribe for 30% off their unlimited access Vantage plan or $1/month for their starter package.
just a small note of correction I think Ukraine actually has two patriot missle systems.
Binkov’s final cope lol
Random note. Do other people also notice clear paralel between this war and Earth-Romulan was in Star Trek?
Nato targets civilians, Russia claims to denazify, yet released azov from Mariupol. This war makes no sense!
Putin would most probably use tactical nukes onto NATO troops near the Donbass or Crimea, just to project strength. He has little accountability in the incipient 2nd gen soviet block. China has ensured the sanctions have mostly failed, and the UN has no flexing power. NATO would not have any grounding for launching ICBMS against Russia if no NATO nations have been attacked.
Do yourself a favor and stay out of the comments.
Too many people believe war propaganda.
Saw this comment before reading others and decided Imma just stop here.
You stay out
Nah come get that smoke
@@thegermanfool8953 good idea German.
Doesn't article 5 only come into play if a country declares war against a NATO member? If a nato member involves themselves in a war, i dont think other memebers are obligated to join. So if Poland, for example, were to send expeditionary forces into Ukraine, no other NATO members need to act.
only if a member is attacked, in any capacity, by any state or none state actors. the precedent is already set by the US when we triggered article 5 against Afghanistan.
@@artruisjoew5473 that's was when the usa was attacked
nato states will do the US bidding. forget 'bout letter and spirit of agreements, they are written not for commoners crowd.
@@palar4195 you mean like the NATO minimum GDP % for the war economy that most countries were ignoring for decades?
You people are so delusional it's hilarious.
They used article 5 in Libya after france invaded
Just my opinion but the world was a bit better when all the wars were hypothetical. 😊
Tell russia maybe you can consider that
@@carlharper557 I tried to email them, but they never responded. Maybe it went to their spam folder. 🤔🤔
@@carlharper557 USA*
@@Su-27_433 both of these suckers. Russia and US both like to start wars they lose
@@Su-27_433definitely, Ukraine and USA should have thought before provoking Russia
“Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire
Yap like the west propaganda , cnn , bbc et
Russia Today and Russia Media Monitor be like
@@discipleofdagon8195 Or Trump. jus' sayin'...
Like!
It would look like mushroom clouds and severe mental illness
Mushroom clouds in russia at least.
@@abraham2172 implying you will escape lol
@@abraham2172 russia has better and more nukes that usa
Interesting video, however, I have some criticism for your hypothetical situation. Such an intervention of NATO would clearly create a reaction from Russia. Not a nuclear one, but a reaction that would change how Russia would fight the war. It seems that in your video NATO intervention would strike Russia very little. No further conscription, movement towards a war economy, a recognition of war or anything. In your video, it seems that NATO just sends some troops and fighters into Ukraine and Russia just fights and acts like nothing happened. The only exceptions of course is, Russia declaring war on NATO or starting a nuclear war.
NATO is not ready for a war with Russia.
The real reason ammo and shells have stopped. Isnt political or financial. Its because there isnt much left to send. NATO cant produce the amount of shells and ammo needed. NATO's military Industrial complex is profit focused and cannot ramp up production.
Russia can and is producing enough ammo and shells. Russias military industrial complex is designed for ramping up producation and its state owned.
NATO may theoretical have more military might. But its spread across dozens of armies.
Only the USA is a match military to Russia. But the USA lost its production capacity that helped win WW2. Russia still has that capability.
But the question is what Russia could do? They had riots when last official conscription happened and they have already prompted up their military industry and are having problems because of these two factors. How much more they can do?
Russia is already doing everything they can to win, they are breaking rules of the un and commit war crimes they cannot escalate further
@@darthsidius9631 But the direct NATO involvement would legitimize the war effort and consolidate the population around Putin and it would suddenly justify all the myths of the West planning to conquer Russia.
@@darthsidius9631 America has seasonal race riots over dead criminals, and Russia had no problem raising 400k men.
Holy insanity!!!
Nukes incoming or what.
Yeah to Moscow
No.
The will just is not there for a full scale NATO intervention. At most, Ukraine will receive a higher level of aid than it has to date. I know this is hypothetical, but it's mostly useless speculation imo as so much of this is so far outside the pale.
You know it's a good informative video when Russia send an army of troll and bots imediatly after it's uploaded 😂
At your service 😂
I guess the interview really opened some mines after years of brainwashing
Nice to see NAFO bots like you coping hard. What else a loser do but hurling insult to the winning side?
You are the trolling bot.
This video was so good and informative, that Putin sent me here to tell you it's not.
Blinkov, would you kindly do a Russian response say with NK, Iran, or even China support similar to NATO's?
You don't go in with the bare minimum. You go in with overwhelming force strength so the enemy feels grateful when you pull up on their border and announce you'll go no further.
🤦🏾♂️
And then you get 200+ nukes in your face
Because that worked in Iraq and Vietnam
@@mosesgoldbergshekelstien1520at what point did anyone go in full force in either Iraq or Vietnam remind us...
@@mosesgoldbergshekelstien1520 1. Iraq was never lost and, 2. We never fully committed to Afghanistan or Vietnam
Binkov hasn't been right about anything happening in Ukraine, just look back at his previous videos.
I like Binkov, I've been looking at other videos for accuracy and sadly this is dawning on me.
@@Nick_Zan prop asset? How. In some of his videos, people claim he is russian propaganda and some other ukrain lol. He is just analysing and what he think is needed if x = y. Sadly you people are too dumb to see that.
That’s true, he expected Russia to win very early on.
Yeah like 98% of the people lol. Everyone was talking about how the 2nd or 3rd strongest country would destroy Ukraine....problem is, no one expected them to be this incompetent with there logistics and strategies. Heck some generals didn't even immediately realize they were attacking them lol
Also, like he said pretty damn early in the video. This is a highly HYPOTHETICAL video. Soo it really is only for entertainment like a lot of his videos
one point missed in this video is that if NATO countries escalate the war to such an extent that doesn't warrant a nuclear strike from Russia, Russia can use tactical nuclear strikes within ukraine that can affect the areas in the radius of 100-200 km therefore averting the total nuclear war and also responding to the NATO escalation at the same time
Nato has nukes aswell
You obvious have no clue!!!! Russia WILL NEVER make a first strike, but, when the first dtrike is done by an opposite part Russia will react WITH ALL WHAT THEY HAVE!!!! We all die, you 1d10ts!
@@Nazzyyyy And of course a lot of geunine 1d10ts like you!
A "tactical" nuke isn't going to be very effective against a military unit in the field - they'll be dug in, dispersed, and have protective equipment. So, you're not going to see effects radically greater than what a conventional weapon would cause at the tactical unit level.
Therefore, to achieve the outsized effect that nukes are capable of providing, that means targeting something "softer" and more "strategic" like air bases, logistics facilities, rail yards, etc. Except those tend to be co-located with large civilian populations...
And russia using a nuke to take out an airbase on the outskirts of Kiev or Liviv (etc.) is going to devastate those cities - at least from the perspective of fallout and radiation injury to the civilian populations, even if the fires caused and the blast damage suffered, are limited. And given the cycle of escalation we've already seen, it's exceedingly unlikely the West would not respond in some way to that.
The unfortunate fact] about nukes is this: Ultimately there's no real way to use a "tactical" nuke without causing an escalation to strategic warfare in very short order; with the civilization-threatening consequences that entails. This is why most of the people charged with nuclear decision-making conclude there are no real use cases that make the massive investment in weapons we can't really use worthwhile compared to putting that investment into conventional weapons instead.
@@cosmincasuta486 No we don't all die. We are 1.5 Billion people spreads across three continents.... But all the ethnic moscovites will die - with the few remnant moscovite populations being subjugated by ethnic minorities who have centuries of grievances against them.
So you need a unified coalition response on the scale of the invasion of Iraq in Desert Storm.
That would almost certainly force a nuclear respons. So no !
Russia could easily defeat NATO in a battle of conventional arms. It's NATO who would resort to nukes. That's the only chance they got.
It took months for the US to move its heavy armor, artillery and troops to Iraq for both wars. And both times they had a friendly place to dock their ships in Kuwait and Saudi where they could unload and assemble. Russia would never let these US ships cross the Atlantic.
Also, the US would have to pull its forces and equipment out of Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Persian Gulf countries and from Korea. They can't do that for strategic reasons. In reality the US and its NATO vassals combined could send a 100,000 man infantry force to Ukraine. Putin could handle them with just his Chechens.
Obama knew that the US could not challenge Russia in Ukraine because all the logistics strongly favored Russia. This is why he didn't bother sending serious weapons there. Obama would have never provoked this war the way Biden -- the corrupt idiot -- did. Truth be told, Biden got us into this mess to protect his family's criminal financial interests there.
@@gordonipock9385 then why does Putin screams nuke every time NATO sends anything? sending tanks? threaten a nuclear war. sending planes? threaten a nuclear war. and he never actions on it too. nobody believes him now hes cried nuke a few too many times.
@@gordonipock9385ok but they can simply use European or friendly country's as a staging ground of a land war and use the navy to harass russia in the east with alaska or attack in two fronts I don't know the geography of this I'm just basing this on a simple world map
We already know that their navy is not that well maintained and I wonder the effectiveness of russian subs other than in paper
@@gordonipock9385 how delusional, cope harder
The policy of the Collective West:
Scholz: we will supply
Scholz: we will not supply
Scholz: we will supply
Scholz: we will not supply
Scholz: we will supply
Scholz: we will not supply
Scholz: we will supply
Scholz: we will not supply
Scholz: we will supply
Scholz: we will not supply
@@MuLLeR029 The actual Scholz policy is forfeiting any interests of his own country for the sake of US interests, with zero payoff for himself or his fellow countrymen.
I think what NATO should do is to send their troops to Ukraine but not directly to the frontlines but just to secure fhe borders , at least with Belarus and Transnistria, that would make the situation much better for Ukraine
lmao they are afraid to send too much weapons and you say they should send troops, yeah right, the only way that happens is if anyone they sending will be guarding some outhouse far away from frontlines.
How are the comments still a battlefield here lol
Nafo seething that
A) the war is lost
B) normal westerners have no appetite for escalation
Russian web brigades seething that
A) people are scared and coping with what happens next so the best way is to be rude to everyone else
B) normal easterners don't like human rights and freedom of expression and just about everything else like democracy
Dude get down it's not safe here
@@boom-wj1gt, LOL
All the paid trolls are out at full force.
The initial preposition that funding and equipment have been adequate is incorrect. They have been slow, insufficient and lag Ukraines own assessments of needs.
Ample??? You might want to do more research.
What's the use of NATO when it is reluctant if not refusing to help, indecisiveness will bring it to its downful.
Good.
Binkov, I don't understand: for two years we have been told that Russuan troops have poor morale and low training levels. In addition lots of Western reports have said that Russia is running out on missiles and artillery shells. In addition, both Jens Stoltenberg the Nato Secretary General as well as Anthony Blinken the US Secretary of State have repeatedly said that "the Russian Army is the second best Army in Ukraine". Now you are discussing deploying NATO forces to Ukraine??? We have been told repeatedly that Ukraine is winning! Surely then the logical conclusion is that somebody has been.lying to us! Does that include you Binkov?
russia has solved these issues to a high degree unfortunately. poor morale they have not, but they will murder their own troops if they dont fight as if they hard morale
ukraine is still winning. however the US infighting is making munitions extremely difficult. ukraine is more effective, but russia has more men, equipment, munitions, and money. that ukraine can hold russia off makes it the "second best army". yet that is more than a meme than something to strategic value
Clearly Binkov has an agenda. You are precisely correct in the sense that all his previous videos are anti-Russian...and pro-West. He's been wrong so many times.
Every Ukrainian retreat is a tactical victory and every time Russia advances it is a strategic loss. 🤡
You may support anyone just don’t fall for the propaganda. Obvious stuff is obvious.
@@sirati9770In a war, with the martial law, it's pretty normal to face consequences, even getting shot, if you disobey the orders, that includes both Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine is not winning the war at all, they're holding the Russians, sure, but they clearly have no chance to retake everything that was taken from them. Ukraine will win only the moment they retake Crimea, which is impossible. Russia cannot be defeated there and NATO cannot expand to Ukraine as long as it has territorial disputes. Russia is winning on almost every aspect, their real big loss was the inability to overthrow the government and install their puppet regime (like Belarus), and for that we should prop to Zelensky who proved to have balls of steel, regardless of what we think of him
Because they have been lying to you the entire time. Ukraine has been lying to get western countries to waste more money on the war while the leaders in Ukraine stuff their pockets with it and get rich. The government has been lying to you because the money they are printing is going to thier donors in the military industrial complex making them rich producing more weopens for a losing war. The media is lying to you to manufacture your consent for running up debt and if things go really wrong to send you to die fighting over a useless country in Eastern Europe. Ukraine and its borders mean nothing to anyone in the west and noone should stand with Ukraine. This is all about making the rich richer at your expense and possible death from politicians who don't fight wars. The Russian version of the senate voted to start the invasion Putin did not just start it. Only American presidents can illegally attack countries without consent of congress or the public Russia cannot
If NATO gets involved, then that will be the end of everything. Let us hope and pray that never happens.
5 b21s 25 b1s 50 buffs 20 F22s 16 more patriot systems 75 F35s 100 F15s 250 F16 260k support personnel 80k fighters and the armor/artillery to support them. Oh and 200billion give or take a trillion. Takers???
Регулярно вся Европа хочет российскую землю и Россия ее дает - по три метра каждому. Тевтонцы, французы, немцы не дадут соврать.
I’ll save you all 23 minutes and tell you what it would look like with one phrase: WW3
Lets not start WW3
Nah it is time to remind the russians that their only victory was ww2, not one other great victory in their history and it will remain that way
Dude, Tzar Alexander got into Paris
@@nicolasmella8450 what did us won btw?
Why? Scared of Russia 😂
Thank you for this update.
Nato should donate more old equipment to Ukraine they have a ton of it Germany , Norway and Denmark 🇩🇰 are an economic powerhouse theh can donate enough weapons n money
Operation Barbarossa 2.0
Because last one went so well.
@@iamaim2847 some people … Western European people specifically … don’t seem to learn from history it seems.
@@iamaim2847 Dude compared NATO to Nazis and thought them to be in the right, you can't make this shit up.
The main thing is just move NATO forces into Ukraine with the simple
mission "defend yourself from attack".
Genious plan, i'm sure nothing will go wrong.
Quite the extensive overview (as always) of hard to predict potentialities. Thank you very much!
50 airfranes a year refusbished i think we need to get real if russia goes without nukes total war were licked
TL;DR: Not going to happen. Beautiful fantasies, though. ;)
Why click the video then lmao
@@donpedro00769 To find out what it's about?
Ukraine flying missions that start from NATO countries' bases is not an escalation. Russia already did this very thing when it invaded from the territory of Belarus in 2022.
Exactly, its rules for thee but not for me
but it is an escalation? literally using the airports of countries that arent fighting in the war
Then what’s stopping NATO from doing it? They’re afraid they will lose all their aircraft and airfields, that is what will happen.
Yes and Ukraine tried to engage them, which means Russia could then engage them inside NATO countries.. if you don't consider that an escalation you're just delusional.
Yes, it is. It's all been escalations from NATO, starting by the coup d'etat they financed in 2014 "for freedom and democracy" (who believes this BS anymore?). It's clear NATO wants to weaken Russia to tear it apart and take its fuel and mineral resources. Whoever thinks otherwise, maybe its time to turn off your Netflix a little and live in the real world.
the amount of cope NAFO channels have been putting out since 2 weeks ago is pretty insane. You guys okay?
The Ukrainian front line has fallen. Russian gains can be measured by the mile.
and russian loses measured by what?@@MrLougarou1000
hopefully not zelensky, i'm pretty sure he cant count or add up@@4inNashinal
LOL, pure projection. Love it.
@@MrLougarou1000 Been hearing that for two years now, vatnik 🤡🤡
NATO needs to start supplying Ukraine with NATO designed shovels.
Persoanlly i dont think any country has the ability to fight wwii style, least not anytime soon. If you look at numbers of aircraft, ships, and tanks back then compared to todays, while much stronger, they are two few in number. Plus the population has changed. No countries population would support a full scale war for long. Excluding dictatorial ones like n.korea where they dont have a choice. The current world stage could be compaired to trench warfare or hitlers moves before the invasion of poland. Having said that, these are truly terrifying times we live in. Where idiodic would leaders could send us all to our deaths, over what, oil? Land? A legacy? Stupidity in its finest. I think we can all agree, no matter where we are from. We all really just want a way to provide a good life for us, our families and children and to live in peace. Sad that our leaders, in all corners of the globe, seem to incompetent to do that.
Putin started the war in Ukraine so how are all world leaders incompetent?
8.30 ‘a few hundred F16s wouldn’t be enough?’ You’re talking 100s of F16s and F35 is nuts!
I think NATO should take over logistics and supplies via mercenaries in Ukraine. This security could also mean mercenaries would want to fight on the front line. The logistics support could also mean support for field hospitals and aviation assets. The latter could involve mercenaries flying reapers at the front line as well, supporting attacks along the front line. This would be limited NATO involvement but hopefully be enough for larger groups of mercenaries to want to go there and fight. Some of the US groups are over 200k members. That could make a difference.
The one aspect missing here is the realistic Russian response. NATO has been holding back overwhelming force as a threat to control Russian options. If NATO plays those cards, they no longer restrain that Russian option.
For example, if Russia uses tactical nukes, the USA has suggested they would wipe out every Russian position and vehicle inside Ukraine.
The end result would still be Russian loss, but definitely an analysis worth doing.
UK military Intelligence has estimated it would take 4-6 days (depending on the weather) for NATO to destroy 90% of the armoured vehicles in Ukraine using airpower alone. This would involve 750 bombing sorties per day. Russia knows this, which is why they keep babbling about nukes. And Russia has been told (back in 2022) that if they use even a small nuke in Ukraine then NATO will do the above. Putin is in an impossible position, his only hope is a conventional victory, which simply won't happen.
Ukraine is just next door to Russia, I still can’t get over how Russia failed to take over it.
It was never there intention to take it completely over. Hence the invasion only began with 180,000 troops. Putin expected negotiations to start, which were at the beginning stages in March of 2022, until the west ended them.
@@realpolitiksanta5980 🤡
@@realpolitiksanta5980 Ah yes, an entire armor column closing in on the capital of a country isn't trying to "take it completely over". Fortunately, the Russian army showed shocking incompetence and the Ukrainian people impressive resilience.
@@PhysicsGamerare U dumb enough to believe that an armour column of 25000 troops and few armour vehicles will take a city of population more than 2 million
First turn off CNN and BBC. Second, understand what their military objectives are.. Taking and holding land is very different than completely pulverizing a nation. Russia technically, without nukes, could absolutely level every major urban center in ukraine through overwhelming air bombardments, but that would be heavily counterproductive politically. But ukraine is winning, so you got nothing to worry about :)
"If ukrainew as in NATO, Russia would never have attacked"
and
"After ukraine, Russia will surely attack NATO"
quickly shows that one side is fear mongering and eager for war at every step, and the other has been offering diplomatic solutions for the past decades.
Russia has only dared to mess with countries outside of NATO, and was pissed that that could end when Georgia and Ukraine wanted to stop getting messed with. Now they are all in and perhaps delusional. If they do attack a NATO country it will not be a long war, neither will the existence of the elite that started it.
Exactly, russian imperialists always eager to start was in Eastern Europe and now Ukraine. When will russia stop?
@@2hotflavored666 How can something the size of a truck fly over your head so easily is beyond me, a clear victimhood mentality of "THIS IS TO BLAME, THAT IS AT FAULT, EVERYONE IS EVIL EXCEPT ME, HELP ME" Just open your eyes. You seem like the type to say "Lmao Ruzzia can't take down ukraine in 2 days, such a weak army, pathetic" and then turn around and scream "RUSSIAN ARMY IS SUCH A THREAT , WE NEED EVERYONE IN NATO, WE NEED TO SEND ARMY TO EVERYWHERE, PANIC PLEASE"
also almost all sentiment against Russia is based on rambling about the alleged past crimes of the Soviet Union or going back several hundred years. None of it is based on the status of Crimea or the actions of Putin. This makes NATO clearly the aggressor because its whining grievances are based on psychological instability and frustration about past historic events
Russia will attack, it doesn’t have to be directly, can easily repeat Crimean scenario with units using no sign on the first stage. Then propaganda will do the rest, to assure the sleepy west that it’s not quite certain what’s going on, maybe we should do nothing. By the time people realize they will come to bargain to bite it off piece by piece, like they did in Ukraine. Surely, they won’t need let’s say Italy, but a controlled puppet (purchased to be friendly) government why not.
Video is already out of date considering the amount of Ukrainian air intercepts of A50, Su34, and Su35 the past few days.
Yeah with no confirmation
@@zayedbinimran957 does you questioning oinkraine reports? r u a putin's orc-bot?
They have literally not provided any footage of what they claim LOL and we know very well the Ukrainians publish every single thing they do on the internet, I prefer to not believe in the words of compulsive liars LOL
@@zayedbinimran957 except for footage and reputable Russian Telegram channels like Fighter Bomber confirming it, yeah, no evidence whatsoever
@@palar4195 ??????
How where the deliveries "ample"? Ammunitiois running out alongside other important supplies.
Because they cannot keep production up
It is interesting that western powers did support Ukraine with lots of money, but only very small numbers of equipment. Everything larger than an ATGM usually was limited to (very) old equipment and to even smaller numbers. I wonder why they didn't even activate their own arms industry production capablilities? All manufacturers are still in standby or in peace time mode. They didn't even try to increase anything so far, except the ammunitions industry pretty recently (also a very late choice). Why is that?
Incompetence
@@YwhMusic The west should have no business in Ukraine in the first place, besides if that happens China which the so called west also hates will provide 100% support to Russia, the entire west cannot outproduce 1billion Chinese people under any circumstance.
So the fact is, the US should be start expanding production line capacity today. Even in WW2 it took a few years to fully expand US production capability. The US has seen a significant loss in manufacturing capacity as a result of business decisions from the 80s to increase short term profits to shareholders. However, it would still take 3-5 years to widen pduction capacity.
A great example of this is the adoption of the new 6.8mm cartridge for the Army's new rifles. It's going to take the US Army a few years to add those new production lines at their ammo production facilities. Some production lines are so complex they can't really be widened any further. Like the F35. Something like 1000 us subcontractors across the country supply parts. Some of them are actually rather small companies that really can't double production.
As for supplying Ukraine with older hardware, part of that was mutual spendthrift ness. If Ukraine spent it's company money in the US company weapons store, they could "buy" a lot more older equipment for cheap. It was still better than what they or Russia had, but it didn't hamper US capabilities. It's also worth pointing out, Ukraine isn't fully trusted with US secret technologies. They're not "in the fold". Part of it Ukraine still has a corruption issue. That hasn't been resolved, and it's even caused trouble for Zelensky in the last year. The US is not going to give Ukrainians unfettered access to and F35 or even the latest Gen radar on the newest F16s. It's not going to happen. Russia and China would have access to the data within a month.
The reality is, and this sucks to say, it's not in US interest for the war to be fast. The war weakens Russia a lot. The issue is Russia is starting to form a wartime economy, and I'd be curious how much China has widened production. The US is lagging behind, pososbily in naive hope war will not break out like PREWW2 Britain. Let's just hope the US has its Mosquito figure out properly before the war.
@@dosunmupelumi7845lol china will not suport russia against NATO on this matter , since it would broke the globalization who is the only way to survive for china , they would even take siberia from russia after they loose for sure 😂 they are not russia friends at all , they just share some interest and when those interest will change china will dump russia like an old hookers😅
@@granatmof You cant expand production with out recourses ,In WWII in USA no single civilian car was produced ,no single civilian building,all recources went to war production. Are you ready for that just for sake off some land where 99% off Russian live and was actually Russia before communist give it to Ukraine in 1954
напоминаю, самое большое венгерское кладбище - под Воронежем
I like the general concept of Ground News... but it listing CNN as a highly factual source tells me all i need to know.
Ukraine seems lacking industrial equipment necessary to build secondary line defenses.
I don't know if a Nato involvement would trigger a nuclear war. I'm not an expert about that, and there are militaries who have the experience, the knowledge and the training and obviesly should decide that. But honestly: I'm so sick and tired of this nonsense right now. How long will this war continue if we keep supporting them like we do now? How many people will keep dieing every day? Maybe a Nato involvement is the way to end this war once and forever.
I think a Nato involvement would be the worst thing to happen. Because a direct Nato involvement would mean that the russian folks really would feel like they are fighting for their lifes again. Right now, I am sure that its hard for putin to mobilize more troops for that war. Russian people are not all invested and definitly not willing to participate, at least the majority isnt. But as soon as it goes official that Nato is fighting there, its all hell loose. It means full mobilization. And majority of them are going to participate in that war more willingly. It always has been like this with the russians. And I doubt this time will be different. Which only then means, that Nato also has to send more and more. And this will spiral down and definitly start ww3 and involve more than one country. And probably go nuclear. Right now, the best thing is to try to freeze that conflict. Just freeze it for a while or forever, and start negotiation or at least start talking. This will stop the useless bloodshed. Aint no way russia is backing down an single inch, aint no way the whole world should suffer because of ukraine. Its not worth it.
The main question is who paying the WAR?
I hope that I am.
If I discover that my taxes are simply
going to a immigrant welcome center I will be upset.
Certainly not Red shield and he's ghouls as after all they are the sole benefiters of these types of wars😂
Well, you, my dear chap! US and EU tax payers. And all that money goes to US-EU military industrial complex.
Jajajajaja. Buena película 😂. Solo falta Maveric y Rambo. Jajajajaja es la única forma. Manden los F14 contra los Su 57 😂😂😂😂😂
What the fuck is a maverick and a Rambo? Your dream lover boys?
What the fuck? You must be a child of minor age, go back to bed with ya warm hot chocolate.
We don't need another Afghanistan style retreat.
If you can't deal with sand people how are u gonna deal with a now semi professional millitary ?
LOL Russian in comments still going "Ruskie army strong" and think they can take on NATO while they can't even deal with Ukraine.
its funny to see how Ukrainian meat is literally fighting with US+Nato toys and 100 B budget and still barely holds the line and loses actually to current "sanctioned" Russia
А какой смысл снимать ролики, про то, что вы сильны? Придите и возьмите.
Read about the Wolfowitz doctrine. It can quite possible change you're perspective on the current events happening in my country of birth (Ukraine)
It is quite easy to see who is actually benefitting from all of these proxi conflicts once you start searching around for some censored names, families and organizations. Sadly though TH-cam doesn't allow these certain names and links to be posted on here as they are a direct *threat* to freedom of speech and democracy these days (SARCASM)😄
@@pavels8890I can tell how bad youre coping and crying into your keyboard as you type this by the disorganized structure of your sentences😂 On the contrary, your boys are struggling to take 20% of your own decrepit third world ex colony armed with our 1980s warehouse surplus😂
They are going to OD on copium still thinking they can take on NATO when Ukraine alone is taking 2+ years now. 😂
Сотни 2 Кинжалов и 3-4 Цирконов и от потенцияла НАТА - пшик ,сверху полируем ониксами и искандерами.Пару Ярсов для полировки бугорков в Аглии и Франкии.А Амеры даже и не пикнут - речь пойдеть о глобальном уничтожении, а вони люди вумные -- жить хотят да и своя рубашка ближе к тушке ..... Так-то....
Which possibility is more demoralizing? A.) The comments are the product of the average level of intelligence. B.) The comments are the product of the level of intelligence of our professional propagandists.
XD T_T
People forget that Sadam had like 6 thousands tanks when we invade. The war was almost done in a 8 hour day. Once the f15 f16 f35 f22 where in the sky. Sadam could have one hundred thousand tanks it would make no difference. Russia is a artillery army. The US is about guided missiles. Russia will never be able to use artillery because it would be targeted as soon a shell is sent and the sam 300 or 400 would be destroyed.
Russia has a far superior air defense network than Iraq and the US doesn't have the surge capacity to keep up with Russia . A fully mobilized Russian military is 20 million soldiers .
Ye not like Russia has any nukes or anything
And you forget that Sadams little air defence grid is nothing compared with Russias. Back in Soviet days they countered American reliance on sky dominance by heavily invest in air defence systems (not to mention their own fleet of strike craft). These anti-air assets can easily also kill any incoming missile - with some error maring, of course. Ukraine proves that - only some 30% of fired missiles (that we know of) ever made it through - real numbers will have to wait a little while. Today Russian S300 and S400 systems are far more capable than Patriot systems in terms of range. Precission is a bit harder to realistically judge, but Russians have been equally successful in intercepting western missiles, as Patriot systems have been. No fleet of F15, F16, F35 or F22 can just fly in and dominate these skys, without taking heavy losses. The Ukrainian war also shows, that the amount of stored guided missiles by the US today, is way too small to actually destroy all Russian assets on the ground. Even if they'll get never successfully intercepted and always hit spot on.
@@RIEKSONE clearly you skip history class. So il remind you if America ever goes into war mode we will pump a ungodly amount of anything we need. So 20 million is nothing really.
@@Koz4concern Nukes like America doesn't have any or it can't produce anymore.
Comrade Binkov -- I appreciate all your videos but this one you got dangerously wrong.
How? Simple : As you must know (but just hint about in the video), ANY direct NATO intervention in the Ukraine conflict has a frighteningly high chance of quick escalation to nuclear war. You downplay this in a very misleading way.
For example in one part of the video (around 12:53) you cheerfully claim that NATO could use aircraft based outside of Ukraine (e.g. in countries like Poland, Romania and the Baltic States) to bomb Russian forces, either inside or outside of Ukraine... and the Russians would just sit on their hands and let it happen, without taking any retaliatory steps.
You must know that a scenario like this (e.g. helpless Russian passivity in the face of over the top aggression by NATO forces) is nonsense -- the Russians have said so many times, and military realities would make it absolutely inevitable -- Russia would have to attack the NATO airbases from which these strikes were launched. They would likely use SRBMs and cruise missiles, and NATO would not know if these were nuclear or conventional.
The Russian counter-attack would of course immediately trigger NATO Article 5 and we then have WORLD WAR 3.
I know that you are trying to make your videos "interesting" with a range of scenarios being illustrated, and that's fine most of the time, but pretending that NATO direct intervention could be engineered without escalation to nuclear war, amounts to you misleading the audience. You should revise the video to make the risks involved, completely clear.
Mr. binkov always misleading his copium dosed sniffing lines.. next time I;m expecting overdose and a great compilation of fake facts as an Secretary general of NAFO as leading forces behind his dilapidated bots forces.
As you said yourself, Russia knows that using nuclear-capable weapons against those NATO airbases would be suicide. So why would they do it? It's much more likely that the Russian elite decide that committing national suicide for a meaningless war isn't worth it.
Is there a risk it happens? Of course. But it would be in Russia's best interest not to do it, and every other red line they have spoken about in this conflict has turned out to be nothing. This one is likely the same.
@@hrisoflinoski4803Russia using nukes is always very unlikely unless someone invades their country even then they will try to fend them off with conventional methods
🎯
Even a 1% risk of all out nuclear war is too much - that is civilisation ender if not a species ender@@canitnerd
Что за чушь я посмотрел?
влажные мечты....ну или прогрев общественного мнения
@@wizeghunter6490 Не, это на самом деле честный анализ. Блинков точно не состоит в штате пропагандистов. Все названые в видео цифры легко бьются с открытыми источниками. Предлагаемый размер группировки вмешательства тупо повторяет размер российской группировки.
@@heyhoe168 Открытое вмешательство НАТО приведет к третьей мировой войне.
Копиум
@fadaos Вы правы, это бред, но он основан на гипотетическом видео.
So if we include nato pilots with Ukrainian pilots, we're basically gonna do what russia did in the korean war. They sent their pilots over to help fight the US. What comes around goes around, I guess lmao.
"Lightning Alley" really does have a good ring to it, doesn't it?
It would look like Hiroshima x 10000 .
No it wouldn't. It has no existential threat for Russia.
It absolutely would, as once a full on war starts, it quickly spirals out of control. Lets not take that risk.@@parabalani
@@parabalani Of course it would. It would no longer be the “proxy wars” since 1945, this would be the “full fat”. Russia would use Nukes right away. And the west, with its men dressed as woman, drug addicts and third world infested cities would collectively defecate.
What's the minimum amount of political upheaval needed to liberate my tax dollars?
based
NATO air power is insane.
insane alright, insanely stupid.
COnsidering the lack of Ammo it isn't that insane.
Aside from Turkey and America. There is nothing insane about Nato's airpower.
Yes England and France have high end planes. But they don't have the logistics to keep them flying, no enough pilots and barely any ammunition.
🤡@@williamdavis9562
@@williamdavis9562 almost as serious as Russian air defense.
@@MrLougarou1000 Still doesn't change the fact that outside of Turkey and the USA the rest of the Nato nations are so inept they won't even be able to test those bad Russian air defenses will they?
I don't even know why we say Nato vs XYZ. We should just say America vs XYZ.
The problem with NATO is they don’t even have enough soldiers for all their weapons
That's not right. They can simply name Russians with the wrong pronouns and win easily.
aren't european weapon stockpiles are depleted and none of nato solders has been lost?
@@palar4195no. There is just no surplus of old stock around anymore
@@palar4195there are not depleted, they just have many customers for their weapons
@@fischersfritz468 are you just saying nato is neglecting its promises to help oinkraine by sending only surpluse of old stock?
13:30 - “That would be seen as an escalation by Russia.”
At the risk of “underestimating” Russia…..I not think that would amount to just so much childish foot-stamping.
WW3 FOR UKRAINE???? LMAO MY ASS. STOP PLAYING WITH FIRE.
The truth!. Europeans must understand that their line of defense starts in Ukraine, if Ukraine loses maybe a weak non-NATO country will suffer the consequences.
lol shhhhh
@@barbosaguzman6101go back to ural russian trol
Its getting hard to find legitimate comments on some of these videos, seeing alot of state sponsored political trolls. Great video as always, intresting seeing different scenarios to Armageddon
Suggesting Russia immediately starts throwing nukes around if X or Y threshold is crossed will always be flawed. No matter what, if Russia throws a nuke, someone throws one back, so they almost certainly won't.
Yeah but the comments section has been totally flooded by bots, take a look at the insane amount of accounts with 4 numbers at the end of the name just all parroting exactly the same messages. It's crazy.
@@PluvioZA didn't even notice that all pro-russia comments have 4 numbers at the end, that's kinda funny
@@KaboomHS You do know that the 4 number at the end of a name is just a feature of TH-cam right: TH-cam has been adding numbers to usernames that are already taken. This is to ensure that every user has a unique username.
It might means dooming Russia but you can expect anything from desperate dictator. You can't count out bad possiblities, things can escalate so fast that we might have way more human lives gone than Ukranian-Russo war ever would cause. US been very carefull with not escalating the war so i hope they will contunie to be carefull.
>someone throws one back
No, someone starts talking, there are none of the nuclear states that see this issue as existential except russia.
Your videos don't get many Russian views because unlike Europe where many people
speak English you don't find such a high percentage in Russia. Especially over the last two
years where middle school and high schools have cut English language courses from their offerings.
Есть Яндекс браузер, который хорошо переводит видео на русский язык. Никто не смотрит это в России, поскольку здесь низкопробная пропаганда.
I usually tell my children the following:
In 19th century Russian nobility studied French and there was war with Napoleon.
In 20th century Russians studied German and there was war with fascist Germany
In 21th century Russian children study English and who will we soon fight....😮😮😮
@arhidemus your television is crazy propaganda
@@exstazius man, TV is the same propaganda as in the western and eastern Europe but to find the truth you need many points of view
No need for Nato to help Ukraine, Ukraine is close to victory. Russia has lost hundreds of thousands of men dead and even more injured and Ukraine has barely lost a couple tens of thousands. Right,thats the truth and not the other way around, sure.
lol sure bud. EU estimates put Ukraine well over 100 thousand dead.
@@pyromcr He's being sarcastic dude. Everyone knows the AFU KIA is well over 550,000
With the comments of Emanuel Macron, it would be interesting to see what full support of only France would do if it would go all in on the side of Ukraine. Could France when committed a 100% of its battle capability and industrial capacity be enough to tip the balance of scales in favour of Ukraine?
75% of the French ppl does not want France to send military to the Nazis (LeFigaro)
France can't even hold on to west africa
@@e33d90 paris streets are also in danger I heard
@@palar4195 correction: France cant even hold on to the streets of Paris
Usually I can kind of hold the suspension of disbelief for most Binkov video, but I truly failed to grasp how and why Russia will continue to fight a conventional war when there are no chance of victory. As is, if they are fighting Ukraine backed by NATO, sure Russia can simply drag on and hopefully drain Ukrainian manpower, but fighting a conventional war against NATO itself?
Are we going to stretch the original argument on mutually assured destruction as far as saying Nuclear weapon will never be used since all nation are logical actor and will never first use? Or do we have some hidden information that indicate Russia's nuclear asset are mostly non functional and they are incapable of further escalation?
Not to mention escalation doesn't always happen from 1-100 overnight, what exactly should NATO do if Russia nuke Kiev? How about ''just'' Kherson? Where do the chain of escalation ends? Or perhaps we have to live in lalaland and imagine Russia will lie down and immediately accept defeat, Putin deposed, a western friendly government appears, Russia accept it final destiny as a disarmed and discounted fuel pump for europe?
Ok, if you still have difficulty imagine Russia not being defeated easily, perhaps try to imagine a US liberation of Iran or DPRK instead? What do you think will happen? And is the situation between Russia and these pariah countries any different?
If there's no chance of victory, then why Russia is winning?
Who said there wining or losing arm chair general are ya little sausage boy
@@user-wd1pd7dd3p Winning? You're funny dude. Did you see the loses for Bakhmut and Avdiivka for the russians?
King Phyrros the first from Epirus wants to have a word with you about your definition of "winning".
@@mephisto8101and yet ukraine is calling a another mobilization of around 500k men and the average age of a Ukrainian soldier is 43 to 45
@@jackjames7283 ukraine is mobilizing more troops after russia mobilized more troops? no way
3 million 152mm sheels are provided by North Korea , how can anyone fight with that amount of shells , they can fire 30k shells for 100 days continously
The fact two thirds are duds is a good help though
that's the scale of the war, problem is people are living in their toyish echo chamber thinking this war is about a bunch of tanks destroyed and a couple of drone videos shot every now and then
You need to have precision ammunition and destroy guns
Made from north Korean slave Labor
How many barrels did they provide?
I know this is an impossible scenario because it would require leaders in the West with integrity. But could you make a video showing what a negotiated peace would look like? Maybe a nice map of what a hypothetical post-war Ukraine would look like? How much territory would be ceaded to Russia, things like that.
And how much territory did Russia cede to anyone ever?
@@rbrb804 Russia already ceded so much territory as a combination of Lenin(1917) and Gorbachev(1991)
Keep dreaming dude, it’s free!
If America and Western Europe does not help properly, why would anybody ever want to rely on them ever again?
They can pay the low price voluntarily of helping now, or pay a much greater price in many more lives and treasure of their own countries involuntarily later.
false promise it not new
Because Ukraine is not in NATO
Where will NATO get fuel for its machines if goes to war with Russia?
You’re joking right? US has double the oil production of Russia not even including other NATO countries 😂
@@thedeytow8776that’s why USA buys oil from the Middle East fool? Because they have so much 🤦🏻♂️🤣 what’s your IQ 70 max?
@@OlegUshyarov The US buys oil from the Middle East because it is cheap and they don't want to deplete their own reserves. Furthermore only 10% of oil the US imports is imported from the Middle East. That comment about IQ looks like projection to me
@@hresvelgr7193 let me educate you ok! USA uses more oil than they produce, thus they have to import/buy more to make up for the deficit. 🤦🏻♂️🤣
@@OlegUshyarov The US pumps enough oil to support itself, but lacks enough refineries to refine the type of oil that it produces, If they build more refineries or converted existing ones, it could be self sufficient, But no one wants to live near new refineries, so here we are. But if push comes to shove, it will happen.
NATO can send troops to hold the frontier with Russia and Belarus (freeing Ukraine manpower) whilst gaining air superiority. I strongly believe that would be quite enough. It could easily hype out the rest of the black see fleet and enable a landing in Crimea and south Kerson, breaking the deadlock in zaporizia. Russia would not have any claim to use Nukes because NATO would not be invading Russia but freeing international recognized Ukraine
whats the MINIMUM involvement required for NATO to help ukraine liberate its territory?
MINIMUM? and your answer is 500-1000 airplanes + awacs and reapers, tens of thousands of missiles and bombs, 1000+ artillery systems and ammo...
obviously the is NOT the minimum required? unless you mean, the minimum required to complete the mission in 1-2 months.
Россия не будет ждать когда произойдёт, разбомбит США и Европу и всё!
Suppose North Korea had half a million or a million soldiers doing joint military exercises right just east of Crimea??
Maybe they could train on Russian demining equipment drones, armour, artillery,etc
Of course they could bring their own ammunition as North Korea has more 155mm artillery than the UK, Italy, Spain, France and Germany combined
North Korea uses the Soviet 152mm, not the NATO 155mm. All factories in North Korea have started up at full capacity.
This comment section is the real world war
Naaa, just troling ;)
The world war IS trolling.
Bro, actually said that NATO troops are better trained than Ukrainian troops, who have been fighting for 2 years already
Nice analytic
Combat experience is a plus no doubt from Ukraines end but don’t forget that many Ukrainian troops received military training from Nato countries.
They are all casualties though. How many people do u think trained who aren't here anymore
MOst of expirienced troops are already dead or wounded and will never be back on front lines. Ukraine keep recruiting over 15 000 troops a month, and they need at least twice that just to be able to resist russian advance, according to french report.... Reading this between the lines, that means Ukraine is loosing about 30 000 troops a month.
@@osvaldobetancourt3991You call that military training? For that time they cant learn even how to shoot accuratly.
Western Anime loving gamers won't last a second on the front. That's why they need Ukrainian men to fight this war.
The people you speak of have fought pretty much every single war prior to the Ukrainian war. If NATO sent troops into Ukraine and Russia did not use nukes, NATO could wipe Russia off the face of the planet using just conventional forces.
@@DemonSliime Lmao anime profile pic.
They are confused with their own gender and too busy painting their nails
@@DemonSliime You must be a product of the US education system, big mouth no brain, the US lost in Afghanistan, Vietnam, did not win in Korea, Failed in Iraq, Iran has more power there than the US. They lost in Syria and Libya. Sound like failure to me
@@Cradleling LOL no they also know how to use the correct pronouns and color coordinate their pink hair and combat boots.
An initial option is the have NATO nations offer guaranteed contracts to munitions manufacturers. A big thing keeping the manufacturers of tanks, bombs, and missiles from expanding production is the concern that the war will end before they can recoup the investment needed to expand production. If the NATO countries guarantee that they will purchase the munitions, even if the war ends, then industry will be more willing to expand production.
@@jameschalkwig787 that was a lot of words to say nothing.
How is this armchair nerd still churning out these after he predicted Russia won't invade Ukraine 😂😂
🤡
Because he is smart, and a smart person wouldn't have invaded Ukraine.
@@CorsetGraceDo you think this is a smart man who dreams of becoming a сolony of the USA?
@@celovec69 No. I think it's someone who spends a lot of time analyzing available data.
@@CorsetGrace😂🤡
The amount of Russian bots in these comments is insane tbh
The amount of Ukrainian bots in these comments is insane tbh
You have no idea how many of them there are in the Russian segment. In words, 87% support, in fact, all the appearance of support for the chief is bots and zombies.
The mobilization included mainly the rural part of the population, who were washed by propaganda long before everything and who are ready to kill everyone and everyone in their path for the sake of money and the chief.
NATO, like the "Allies" at the time, is waiting for the appetites of modern fascism.
Yeah it's insane aint it? Such backwater country, yet uses more advanced bots online with more arguments than any liberal NPC from the west. Go cope harder.
Thank you for being one of the few channels that doesn't talk about the political aspect of the war, and just focusing on the military stuff.
Imaginary military stuff
Didn't see your survey. Thanks for the video.
What happened to taking Kiev in 3 days😂
Russia never said that which proves you drink the msm Kool aid. Do some research and you might learn something.
What happened to the counter offensive?
@@VIPER276 it failed to meet it's objectives but Russians suffered three times more casualties than Ukrainians while on defense and Ukraine didn't suffer nearly as much casualties as Russia
@@peterlangan1181 Russia did, however, decide not to stage supplies for more than three days when they rolled into Ukraine. Which is quite telling.
@@darthsidius9631 Ukraine didn't even achieve its minimum goal, they also lost a ton of equipment. They can't conduct any offensives because they wasted so much equipment and had so many casualties. You can say Russia suffered a million casualties, but at the end of the day, they're winning the war of attrition. Ukraine has lost all combat capabilities and can only conduct local counter-attacks. I suggest you stop listening to western propaganda
God the vatnik bots on these videos are crazy 😂
Didnt ukro shills say Ukraine was gonna win? What happened to that?
@@jacktaylor0465LOL, what about "take Kiev in 3 days"?
@@evFPV
2022
>Ukraine is gonna win
>Russia is gonna Collapse
>2024
>Ukraine doesnt win
>Russia still in Ukraine
>uh uh muh 3 days!!11!!
What about Russia running out of supplies back in April 2022? Or the Summer Counter Offensive of 2023? Or Leopards and Himars turning the tide of the war? Pepperridge farm remembers,lmao
@@evFPV What happened the Summer Counter Offensive of 2023? What happened to Russia running out of supplies in 2022? What happened to Russia collapsing?
@@jacktaylor0465why are you mad? Why are you desperately trying to support this imperialistic dictatorship thats threatning European Democracy. Either you are 13, or you have a very sad life
Just came back to watch again and check I liked it the first time.
If NATO escalates, there is a fair chance China esculates. China will do this because they know if Russia is strategically defeated the USA will focus on them next. The idea of limitations of escalation is foolish in the extreme. Binkov's analysis is missing factors such as NATO troops are not well trained for this conflict, poor ammunition availability and logistical limitations.
This. The war will escalate all over the world if big Western powers shift their war machinery solely to Ukraine. Bye bye France from Africa, bye bye US from the Middle East, and most definitely, bye bye US from South and East China sea. If NATO enters Ukraine, China will never ever get a better chance to deal with Taiwan, once for all.
It's not that easy for China to escalate even if NATO will involve itself in Ukraine more intensely. Naval and air NATO's assets will still be free to interdict stuff on the sea.
@@saldownik there are many ways China can escalate. Yes there are huge drawbacks and devastating economic consequences for both NATO and China. The magnitude of the consequences of escalation are huge and not properly addressed in Binkov's analysis.
@@peetasmith4403 what would be your first thought when it comes to what China's escalation could answer greater NATO's involvement in Ukraine?
@@saldownik firstly direct and vertical escalation, there are rumours of direct military aid, such as 122mm shells, vehicles direct logistics support but mostly economic and supply, drone batteries and motors, chips and electronics and manipulation of other supplies, both in favour of Russia and against NATO. Other escalation such as trade relationships and fiscal policies such as adoptions of trade in non dollar denominations. Then lateral escalation of proxy conflicts such as what Russia has done in Africa and a possibility of Israel's current conflict. Lots of options that will enflame American interests and drive a response. Escalation theory is a huge area of political science and foreign relations and one well understood. Often such escalation is to provoke a response and use the enemies own response to hurt them. We can easily conclude this has already happened to a large extent and could be escalated to a significant degree, calculated to destroy NATO economies and cause internal political instability.
200+ billions we didnt brake through first defensive line. If anybody will produce thermonuclear war will be us, RU have different doctrine for using nucks.
Honestly wish Russia didn't have nuclear weapons as a Gulf War 2.0 scenario could have ended this war well over a year ago. Wouldn't even need to invade Russia itself. Seeing how prop driven drones can penetrate so far into Russian airspace the USAF would have a field day.
Yes America prefer war against weaker opponent.
NATO also likes weak targets.
That's why they shy from declaring war.
Declaring war on any Nuclear superpower is doomed.
Just ask DPRK. Only the nukes keep America away.
Ahahah, realy? The Gulf War 2.0 will end very fast after couple curriers hit the bottom of ocean. US cant stop ONE hypersonic missile, let alone couple dozens targeting their curriers.
Also there is reason why drones can penetrate far..... Same goes for Russian drones, how many of them hit targets on the other side of Ukraine? I bet you cant guess the reason.
@@avengerpz same hypersonic missiles which have not crippled Ukraine after two years? Try again.
@@Alte.Kameraden Same hypersonic missiles that they dont need to use. Russia is producing over 60 cruise missiles a month, but they dont use most of them ether ... you should ask yourself why.
Russia fire 500$ drone, Ukraine patriot fires 2 missile at it 2 milion each.... and misses with both.
@@avengerpz Sounds like a convenient excuse. Likely pulled from someone's ass completely through speculation and no actual facts.
The Russian regime already claims that it's "fighting nato". How could they suddenly claim that a nato country is "escalating"? :D :D
We don't. you can send your LGBTQ armies and we will call you with wrong pronouns and win.
Basically Russia have just contradicted it's own propaganda against the reality! 😏
If I teach you how to make a pizza am I cooking the pizza?
Ever heard of proxy wars? The US is also fighting Iran through it's militias. Same for US and Ukraine
@@dragonemperorsy2515 I do agree that proxy wars exist. They pretty much always existed. The thing I don't understand is why when the US does it is bad but when Iran or Russia do it it's ok.
America sent 2 patriot system's, and more then a dozen modified hawk system's
That's not correct.
NATO has 8 patriot systems in Ukraine.
6 covertly brought in
@@jensramputh Did Lavrov tell you that?
0:40 i dont want to die in a nuclear holocaust. Does anyone else feel like this?
It appears the people in the west are suicidal fools
I should start building my Basement bunker for Nuclear Winter.
@@hansgruber2509 the real fool is the one launching nukes first. I think defending Ukraine's right to freedom and independence from RUZZIA is not enough to start a nuclear war.. this is some poor eastern european country after all.. who cares right?
@@StrataVision It's so rich when you speak about protecting countries sovereignty and freedom, we helped overthrow the elected Ukrainian government in 2014 because they were too friendly with Russia. Peace was possible there but the US wanted war.
We invaded Iraq under fake WMD claims leading to the death of 100's of thousands of civilians. Tried to overthrow Syria and destroyed Libya. Its a long list. Yeah we are the good guys LOL.
Read some history the US is the only county to use nukes
"Russia hasn't used nukes yet even though NATO has crossed several of Putin's red lines, therefore it will not in the future either so Moscow's saber-rattling can safely be ignored." This is precisely Binkov's logic, and that of most Ukraine hawks in the West. "If he hasn't by now, he'll never do it in the future so no worries about escalation." Stop and think for a moment, do you realize how idiotic that is? By this logic, if you get in an argument with some musclebound bully in a bar, and he says "Don't touch me, I'm warning you," but you poke him in the chest anyway, and then he says "I really mean it, get your fist our of my face" but you shove him anyway, and by the fourth time he says "Last warning dude, you'll be sorry" what should you do--spit in his face? And when he knocks all your teeth out and fractures your jaw, what will you say: "But nothing happened the first few times I ignored him, boo hoo, it's no fair that he socked me!" You can tell those who didn't live through the crises of the Cold War, who haven't studied Herman Khan and Thomas Schelling, who bring the insight of a simpleton to the complex and deadly dangerous business of nuclear strategy. If you can only absorb one lesson, how about this one: Russia is showing every day that it can accept extremely high losses to prevent defeat on the battlefield, a resilience that completely baffles the spoiled West (whose commentators have predicted Russian mutiny and collapse for two years now) and a tolerance for casualties that is stunning. Do you really want to get into a nuclear exchange with these brutes? More precisely, in the unlikely event that massive NATO intervention in Ukraine begins rolling Russia back, what will you do when Putin launches several .5 kiloton "battlefield" warheads to shatter the advance? Will you nuke their military bases at Murmansk and Kronstadt? Apart from the fact that prevailing winds mean you will kill tens of thousands in Warsaw, Villnius, Stockholm and Helsinki, what do you do when Putin hits back at a dozen European cities and then says "Launch even one more and I destroy Miami, Charleston and Atlanta"? That's called escalation dominance baby, and over $ 400 B in missile defense spending over recent decades has not bought us any meaningful security from a Russian retaliatory strike. On the contrary, Russia has made much of that spending useless by developing multiple non-ballistic RV options that our National Missile Defense cannot even see much less hit. So go ahead and escalate, go ahead and answer a small Russian nuke with a big America one, back and forth until the West is a smoldering mess while China laughs itself silly.
You forget 1 thing in this cool story: Russia will be a smoldering parking lot too. For where it isn't already (the east). But good point, it would propel China to #1 dawg instantly.
Question is: isn't it likely that the West must go all-in from there and might as well include China..?
The end of western civilisation and America as a nation state, You really think america is ready for this? Over ukraine which was only recently occupied by the Soviet Union. @@Doug.Dimmadome
@@Doug.DimmadomeThe west must go all in and include China? Dude the west left Afghanistan after twenty years of war against goatherders. As a defeatist, chaotic and totally incompetent military presence. What do you think will happen to a western army in Ukraine? Army that hasn't fought a capable adversary for the last fifthy years! You high on acid?
Russian completely failed in their special operatipn that only last 3 days... 2 years later hmmm.... not much going on, still got a long way to go until ukraine is done.
You clearly can't even look whats in front of you.
Why would putin essentially destroy the world if nato enters ukraine? Because he knows russia would lose. Nato won't invade russia. It must be pretty shit having a closed mind 😕 like that. Putin started this war, that's russia starting shit and I guarantee nato wil finish it if gets involved.@polipantev84
So it’s better to just leave Ukraine, and later, in 10 years, we will face a Russian invasion of the Baltic states or Poland? Or have you already forgotten what the policy of appeasement and neutrality led to during the last world war? The war has already begun. Now NATO has 2 choices - either lose the current conflict in Ukraine, and achieve the collapse of the world order and the ineffectiveness of the United States as its defender. Or win the war in Ukraine and prevent other potential wars that will undoubtedly begin if Ukraine loses.
That would be a Nuke war.
You can grow orange, lemon, banana etc in Ukraine, if the weather conditions become warmer than ever before. Generally, there won’t be winter.
Szia Józsi! Nagyon tetszik a profilképed, nosztalgikus lett a hangulatom tőle!
A legjobbakat!