Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbuna
|
Puh... Watched ten minutes into it.
He is right in indicating that the recent military success of Ukraine do not nec nessarily indicate "victory", and I said that early in the war, too: what use is it if Ukraine throws Russians out, all of them - at the cost of a totally destroyed infrastructure, economy, supply grid, short: at the cost of beign destroyed in the process of the war? Russia now has turned towards systematically annihilating warmth- and energy- and water-supplying infrastructure. Something to be expected in every war, its a strategic objective that is hoped to improve own options on the tactical combat and strategic political level. And on this side, the ukraine currently indeed is loosing the war. Only thing that could save them form this special aspect is that the Russians run low on ammo.
But then Ritter voices some I would say controverisal views. That the reionfocrment of the Russians run according to plan. That they have the initiative. That they are concerned about saving civilian's lives. He perfectly parrots the Russian narrative, and leaves me wondering whether he knows or knows not that he does it.
Fact is that the Ukraine has high losses, too, but the US says for example (maybe two weeks ago) that it also has lost so far no HIMARS systems, different than what Russia claims.
Mind you, Ritter has a controversial, scandal-enriched and controversy-heavy biography. I share the egnerla atoittude he presnets at the ver ybeginning, that a Ukrianian victory in his words is a fanatsy oinly, in my tzinkling: very difficult to acchieve and if realised: coming at a maybe even suicidally high economic cost. But that is where my willingness to more agree than disagree with his views, ends.
But then, I spared the remaining 30 minutes of the video.