“The economy does better when everyone is not dead”[citation needed]
@SuperCatacata
2 жыл бұрын
Can't go in the red if dead. :)
@MrDanisve
2 жыл бұрын
Omg i almost died laughing at that point.
@tangentreverent4821
2 жыл бұрын
Citation not needed
@martinoamello3017
2 жыл бұрын
Sometimes I wonder if human life on this planet just might be the existential threat to this planet. We certainly don't have a lot of house cats or even mean dogs threatening us all..
@tangentreverent4821
2 жыл бұрын
@@martinoamello3017 define existential. If we humans do kill each other. Life on earth will continue.
@KingsandGenerals
2 жыл бұрын
For me, the stark number was the amount Russia and the US spend on the maintenance of their nuclear arsenals. Apparently, the US spends something like 50 billion, while Russia spends 5 billion. Granted, Russia can probably do most things cheaper than the US. I don't want to sound conspiratorial, since we don't have much info on that, but I am curious how well-maintained the Russian arsenal is.
@beetlejuus
2 жыл бұрын
It's dogshit.
@morisan42
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah there's always the PPP argument in resource rich countries like Russia, but I'm not sure that it accounts for a 10x difference in upkeep.. I would be surprised if Russia didn't have enough nukes to wipe out at least Europe but there's a good chance they've inflated their number of (operational) nukes quite considerably
@DahVoozel
2 жыл бұрын
An unknown I would rather not test, but an unknown Putin is probably looking into furiously.
@ooloncolluphid360
2 жыл бұрын
I wonder if they are so keen to raise the moscow because they have less than they admit and might have lost a decent chunk of them overboard
@Win32error854
2 жыл бұрын
Good chance that's true, but the common consensus in Europe at least is that they'll have enough functioning nukes to effectively pose the same threat as if they had 100% of their claimed amount operational. And nobody really wants to find out either.
@zsfekete5211
2 жыл бұрын
"Australia probably would've benefiterd from a nuclear weapons program to counter some of the greater and more threatening examples of our wildlife, the reality is that we never erally went down that road". 10/10
@glenshumate9260
2 жыл бұрын
This is why they lost the Emu war.
@JustAnotherAccount8
2 жыл бұрын
@@glenshumate9260 Emu's are the bird equivalent of cockroaches. No weapon works against them
@builder_dahomey
2 жыл бұрын
The uk tested some of their nukes in outback australia.
@zsfekete5211
2 жыл бұрын
@@JustAnotherAccount8 "If we had a military division with the bullet-carrying capacity of these birds it would face any army in the world... They can face machine guns with the invulnerability of tanks. They are like Zulus whom even dum-dum bullets could not stop." Actual quote from an Australian millitary officer (Major C. W. P. Meredith)
@basedeltazero714
2 жыл бұрын
The Final Emu War.
@FreddyRangel85
2 жыл бұрын
Only Perun could have made us excited for a PowerPoint presentation 👍
@Cotictimmy
2 жыл бұрын
In an internet ocean of drivel, finding calm rational analysis is exciting. ✅🤣
@mandranmagelan9430
2 жыл бұрын
lol
@Haan22
2 жыл бұрын
Being boyishly excited over slides, I have a weird inner child it seems.
@chrishieke1261
2 жыл бұрын
He definately deserves my subscription. Measured, clear, level-headed and good research. And not preachy. ;)
@aristideswade2046
2 жыл бұрын
@@chrishieke1261 and I hope a few $, be it American, Canadian, Singaporean, or other denominations. First video and I added to his Patreon.
@jermania766
2 жыл бұрын
Russian officials giving a whole new meaning to "tactical n-word"
@Barwasser
2 жыл бұрын
*DON'T PRESS THE BUTTON!* "are you talking about the possible start of ww3?" "kinda..."
@ericmckinley7985
2 жыл бұрын
They're gamers.
@DogeickBateman
2 жыл бұрын
@@ericmckinley7985 Putin be reading too much TNO.
@manofcultura
2 жыл бұрын
MRS. OBAMA! Get down!
@DogeickBateman
2 жыл бұрын
@@manofcultura Putin:
@fraserbuchanan1083
2 жыл бұрын
Would love to see a PowerPoint presentation from Perun on "Why Australia should have adopted a nuclear program for use against its own wildlife"
@jamescastle7704
2 жыл бұрын
seconded
@talltroll7092
2 жыл бұрын
... but what if the drop bears captured one, and reverse engineered the technology? There would be nowhere safe in the world, let alone Australia
@bananian
2 жыл бұрын
Emu war 2?
@1Maklak
2 жыл бұрын
The Emu war is even funnier if you know how the Aussies won. Their army was attacking air, like the Russians did in Ukraine, and the Emu's were waging a guerilla war and retreating from any overwhelming force. So the Australians used fences and barbed wire to divide the land and clear the pockets, like the British did in the Boer War in South Africa.
@schumzy
2 жыл бұрын
Hopefully he does it as an April Fools next year.
@kotorfanatic3897
2 жыл бұрын
The lightbulb finally went on for me during this video. Russian nuclear statements and actions have been very carefully calibrated and are highly logical. Scaring the crap out of Ukrainians and the citizens of NATO countries = WIN. Scaring the decision-makers who control US/UK/FR nuclear arsenals = LOSE. While those decision-makers are also some of the most important decision-makers when it comes to making decisions about aid to Ukraine and sanctions, they are all also highly vulnerable to pressure from their own citizens and from the leaders of non-nuclear allies. Thus, the winning Russian strategy is to rattle that nuclear sabre hard, while at the same time making sure that the truly well-informed (the leaders of the Western nuclear powers) *know* they are bluffing.
@loganwalton8952
Жыл бұрын
this is such a great way of putting it, thanks man
@soorian6493
2 жыл бұрын
Another note to be made on the 'specialness' of nuclear weapons is that, unlike almost all conventional options, retaliation will likely immediately attack command and control. Given that leadership is standing in command and control, that's a much larger risk for a politician or a general to stomach than sending some teenagers off to die and seeing their poll numbers go down 8%.
@Jordan-Ramses
2 жыл бұрын
The dangers of radiation are greatly exaggerated in the media and fiction. I wrote a long explanation. But let me just say this instead. Most of the people who were inside the Chernobyl nuclear power plant when it melted down were not killed by it. Is radiation dangerous? Yes. Would a lot of people die in a nuclear war? Yes. Could it wipe out humanity? No.
@fredi1356
2 жыл бұрын
💯
@ethank5059
2 жыл бұрын
And even if you “win” a nuclear war the question then becomes “what comes next?” Being the king of a ruined country and a radioactive wasteland is not ideal even if your primary enemy is dead.
@thekinginyellow1744
2 жыл бұрын
If you're going to launch a nuclear strike, I don't think you're going to hang out in any of your published C&C locations to wait for the reaction of your fanbase.
@kennethferland5579
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent point, Nuclear war is the only type of war in which the leadership will be the first to die.
@kaseyfreudenstein4970
2 жыл бұрын
Perun's history: 1945: Hiroshima and Nagisaki nuked 1946: Russia builds nuclear arsenal 1947: in a final stand against the Emus and giant spiders, Australia sends a final goodbye to the nations of the world and declares itself radioactive hellish wasteland...then nukes itself.
@Guplk
2 жыл бұрын
Fallout Australia
@nishanisho
2 жыл бұрын
Whoa whoa whoa, do you want Australia to lose ANOTHER war to the Emus???
@theleva7
2 жыл бұрын
@@Guplk Replace deathclaws with wombats the size of a bear, supermutamts with carnivore emus and kangaroos, sprinkle some kookaburras where bloatflies would be, add koalas falling on your head from the trees above (dropbears ftw), crocodiles can remain unchanged. Who would the BoS equivalent be though? Order of Steve Irwin?
@richmcgee434
2 жыл бұрын
Leaving the rest of the world to deal with the coming plague of radioactive drop bears. :)
@SuperCatacata
2 жыл бұрын
@@theleva7 TY for the nightmares tonight bruv.
@boobah5643
2 жыл бұрын
With respect to the Suez crisis: it's worth pointing out that the US was more-or-less on the same side as the USSR there, which means it was _both_ nuclear super powers that cowed the French and British. And many credit that incident for pushing the French to develop their own nukes three years later.
@nutyyyy
2 жыл бұрын
Yep it was a big push for Britain and France to develop their own arsenal's.
@BoleDaPole
2 жыл бұрын
Well British got help from America, and France just stole the tech.
@oceanhome2023
2 жыл бұрын
The Brits were not helped by the US for their Bomb because of all of the Spies they provided that leaked the Atomic secrets to the Russians. They could not trust working with the British scientists .
@garyeuscher4499
2 жыл бұрын
wrong,Britain and France were completely broke. The US was lending them money. Ike shut the money off. Your colonial BS was over cause we said so.
@spidertazzfb47
2 жыл бұрын
Monkey see Monkey do, people are power hungry ,all over the world, especially when power is in a dictator ,rule over the people . Putin is a good example of that activity.
@lakobause
2 жыл бұрын
This reminds me of a quote from Agent Kay from Men in Black: "There's always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IT!"
@artnull13
2 жыл бұрын
Ah that explains the slap - Agent J got recalled
@tikaanipippin
2 жыл бұрын
In my personally curated copy of "The HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy" This quote ("There's always an Arquillian Battle Cruiser, or a Corillian Death Ray, or an intergalactic plague that is about to wipe out all life on this miserable little planet, and the only way these people can get on with their happy lives is that they DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IT!") inexplicably occurs as a footnote on page 42. (It is immediately followed by yet another recipe for a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster v.II, which seems absolutely identical to the original recipe.)
@kennethferland5579
2 жыл бұрын
I think the Russian's are starting to tone down their nuclear saber rattling as they are realizing that it is 1) Did not or atleast is no longer disuading the Wests arms shipments and 2) It is actually making their conventional forces look weaker as they are admitting that their conventional forces are not up to the job.
@jrd33
2 жыл бұрын
Hmm, Russian TV hosts have been talking about wiping out the UK with nuclear weapons, and how Russia is being "forced" into this by NATO.
@dirtyaznstyle4156
2 жыл бұрын
The haven’t rattled that saber in a long time. They haven’t used nuclear weapons to dissuade arms shipments. Take into account under what conditions they even mention their use. The US intelligence, the CIA, they can’t have misjudged Russian strength. If their conventional forces were over hyped they were the ones doing it.
@jamesrowlands8971
2 жыл бұрын
You are deluded by Western Prop.
@TheInfamousMrFox
2 жыл бұрын
@@dirtyaznstyle4156 You're joking right? They rattle that sabre virtually every day! Every single time a new western weapon starts slaughtering orks, they start whining that "the world is headed for nuclear war!"
@matthewyabsley
2 жыл бұрын
They've not been sabre rattling, they've been signing to the choir. Very different. Russia is a mafia state authoritarian regime. It needs a bogeyman (in this case USA and Nato). Any mention of nuclear has always been in context with propaganda at home.
@AnimarchyHistory
2 жыл бұрын
Beat me to the Punch Perun, was thinking of covering the Nuclear War angle. Outstanding as always mate.
@PerunAU
2 жыл бұрын
Cheers! Clearly we need to get EE and Hypo into a discord at some point and get these releases planned better. What are people going to think if the Aussies don't have their topics perfectly synched up? And It'd be great to hear your perspective if you were going to do the topic anyway - I was thinking about revisiting lend-lease 2022 once it's signed into law (albeit from more of a mechanical/legal perspective) and you did a great job of covering that already.
@AnimarchyHistory
2 жыл бұрын
It'd be great actually to have a chat! Our national pride is at stake XD What I am itching to talk about is the air war, but both sides are naturally rather cagey about information so I have been scraping around and theorising. So many projects to work on so little time.
@guamsoncruz5107
2 жыл бұрын
Would still love that video animarchy
@Haan22
2 жыл бұрын
Collab when?
@silentdrew7636
2 жыл бұрын
@@AnimarchyHistory cover it too anyway.
@Dantick09
2 жыл бұрын
“Nuclear powered cruise missile” has to be the most Russian weapon ever
@metalfatigue708
2 жыл бұрын
Nah the USA started developing one back in the 1960’s powered by an open cycle nuclear ramjet. The concept was that this thing would fly low at supersonic speeds and dump nuclear warheads off a pre designated points, before crashing and irradiating a wide area with it fuel source. Fortunately sanity prevailed and the program was cancelled but they did have a working model of the engine by the end.
@target844
2 жыл бұрын
@@metalfatigue708 I do not think the major reason for the cancelation was sanity but budgets and that there was no need for it. ICBM could be launched immediately and become available and nukes got smaller in size there was no need for a fast man or unmanned aircraft for strategic nuclear bomb delivery. The B-58 Hustler has a short service life, XB-70 Valkyrie is canceled. It was reasonable to develop an aircraft delivery system when rockets were not capable or were slow to fuel and launch. But when air defenses get better and better and ICBM that can be launched immediately exist programs like that got canceled for a reason. There is some sense in developing it now when a ballistic missile defense system that works starts to exist. I would guess it is more of developing the capability to build it in the future if missile defense gets better. I suspect it is also a message to the US if you build missile defense we build this weapon that it can't stop so do not try to build a missile defense system that could handle all Russian ICMBs.
@peterkracht6621
2 жыл бұрын
Naw, that honor belongs to the coal-fired, steam-turbine powered cruise missile.
@Giganfan2k1
2 жыл бұрын
Fission candle cruise missile.... O.o
@dosmastrify
2 жыл бұрын
Scott Manley has a video on the rocket equivalent. kzitem.info/news/bejne/xKyQ0JyNfl9krYI
@rahulshah1408
2 жыл бұрын
The internet is amazing. From cats and dogs living together to the second phd level analysis on war from a primarily gaming channel. Thank you for the excellent content.
@GhostlyJorg
2 жыл бұрын
cats and dogs living together is unrealistic
@ecaesar614
2 жыл бұрын
If they are raised from puppy and kitten together, they can and will live together.
@rahulshah1408
2 жыл бұрын
@@GhostlyJorg especially in Ghostbusters.
@anarchyorslavery1616
2 жыл бұрын
if you think this is phd level political content you need to have your head checked, seriously
@paullakowski2509
2 жыл бұрын
@@anarchyorslavery1616 careful mate , them's fighting words for an aussi .
@apoth90
2 жыл бұрын
"They'd have to be stupid to launch nukes" They'd also must have been stupid to invade Ukraine. In the mud season. After letting them militarize for 8 years.
@treeman5274
2 жыл бұрын
They were giving peace a chance. It didn't work
@jskratnyarlathotep8411
2 жыл бұрын
@@treeman5274 they weren't as they've started and fueled that conflict in the first place
@danielkiran8174
2 жыл бұрын
@@treeman5274 "Giving peace a chance" by funding and controlling separatists? GTFO, armchair politican. It was obvious for everybody that Crimea was only the beginning.
@treeman5274
2 жыл бұрын
@@jskratnyarlathotep8411 I think it's not so simple. The US had been trying to destroy Russia for decades, fomented a coup in Ukraine in 2014, there has been a civil war ever since and after 8 years of waiting for the Minsk agreements to be fulfilled by Ukraine, who in the meanwhile was being armed to the teeth by the west, Russia lost patience, and took matters in their own hands. Geopolitics. Move and countermove. They've got this one.
@treeman5274
2 жыл бұрын
@@Pohonesty there have been many reports from western news outlets on Ukrainian Nazis for years now, BBC newsnight comes to mind, look that up, Ukraine On Fire is another, it is real
@undercrackers56
2 жыл бұрын
I have vivid memory of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. At school we practiced the drill of getting under our desk for protection. Even at the age of 6 I realised that this was a laughably futile gesture. At that age I dreamed of robots, space travel and how advanced mankind would be by 21st Century. Sadly despite huge advances in technology we are as primitive as ever.
@landochabod7
2 жыл бұрын
It's not all bad. The internet brought people across the world together (I'm an Italian, here to listen to a lecture by an Australian...), we took lead out of gasoline and just this week scientists "photographed" the black hole at the center of the Milky Way. Cheers :)
@fiendish9474
2 жыл бұрын
Living in the pacific, I've been desensitized by the constant North Korean nuclear threats to everyone around them that I don't think Russia with way more to lose would risk using their arsenal. I hope I don't get proven wrong, dear God
@roblangada4516
2 жыл бұрын
That assumption requires Putin to be a logical agent. He might very well be, but will he always be? What if he goes senile? What if the stress from this invasion not going as planned knocks a spring loose in his head?
@MisterBrausepulver
2 жыл бұрын
The thing that scares me the most is that russia has "small yield" tactical nuclear bombs. And a desperate Putin might be tempted to use them while believing not to provoce a full scale nuclear war. As a Europea I am also especially terrified by the implications of that. Case 1) NATO also responds with nuclear weapons: We will have a global nuclear war. Case 2) There won't be a nuclear response in which case russia is likely to launch further nuclear attacks. The aggressor seems to have lower costs than the defender. That is what really scares me.
@findor5639
2 жыл бұрын
As a Finn I appreciate to subtlety of hypothetical scenario with Finnish prime minister and flag at the background, since it's very similar to historical Finnish way of speaking about possible threat from the East.
@ak9266
2 жыл бұрын
Findor, as a Finn, can you tell for what Finland want to join NATO? Do the Finns support this decision?
@findor5639
2 жыл бұрын
@@ak9266 I mean that's fairly complicated question, both as a short answer: Yes, there seems to be wide support, both political and in public. As for reasons, Finland has undeniably become part of the "West" after end of Soviet Union and therefore in regards to Russia we are seen as getting all of the downsides that comes with that without any of the security benefits provided by the NATO membership. And of course the situation in Ukraine was the straw that broke the camel's back (I would argue that it hit Finns especially hard given our historical context) that basically tipped to scale between any possible uncertainty that the membership would bring and its benefits.
@ak9266
2 жыл бұрын
@@findor5639 thank you very much for your answer
@alexander1112000
Жыл бұрын
32:12 For the gamers out there, this is actually the situation that leads to the Fallout universe. The US and Red China got into a conventional war, the US ended up invading mainland China and was in spitting distance of Beijing (and was clearly on the verge of victory) when China launched every nuke in it’s arsenal at all their pre-selected targets, which prompted automated response from the US, which prompted automated responses from the Soviet Union, which prompted automated responses from the remnants of the European Commonwealth, etc, until the only not nuked nation left was Australia. Because the Aussies have it bad enough with the native fauna so they don’t need irradiated mutants.
@noneofyourbusiness4133
2 жыл бұрын
“The economy does better because not everyone is dead.”
@martins.4240
2 жыл бұрын
Words to live by.
@RCorvinus
2 жыл бұрын
Kappa
@GhostlyJorg
2 жыл бұрын
well...
@_Lumiere_
2 жыл бұрын
It would be horrible for the economy!
@KptLehmann100
2 жыл бұрын
Good work, Perun. Thank you.... from an American 1980's & 90's Cold War soldier. (Fun fact: I still have my old NBC Radiac nuclear yield calculator wheel. Back my Army days, it would allow us to calculate yield and radiation dose based on the height and width of the mushroom cloud, and other factors such as air or ground burst etc. We could then calculate our expected duration of combat effectiveness based on that dosage. Good times. Good times. :o)
@neolexiousneolexian6079
2 жыл бұрын
Let us die young or let us live forever. Turning golden faces toward the sun. Praising our leaders, we're getting in tune. The music's played by the mad man. Hoping for the best but expecting the worst. Are you gonna drop the bomb or not ?
@AmySavage6
2 жыл бұрын
As a massive Fallout fan I hope your sound analysis is correct. The one thing those games drilled into my young mind 20 years back is that nukes aren't cool, they're terrifying and should remain in their silos. I do have to note on the Russian habit of threatening vague nuclear-sounding consequences if we (Finland) or other neutrals don't do what they tell us. There's a bit of a cry-wolf effect with them. Russia has threatened doomsday so often and over so many issues that threats like the ones we're seeing now don't carry the intended punch.
@TurboHappyCar
2 жыл бұрын
Also a big Fallout fan. I think the main issue would be the lack of mods and access to the console. What's even the point of an apocalyptic wasteland if there aren't any anime girls and sim settlements? 😂
@IsaacHenryinAK
2 жыл бұрын
But invading non-nuclear-capable countries and shelling cities does carry a punch.
@kyarimaresuki
2 жыл бұрын
This is the sort of content that I like best--people just talking over slideshows for more than 10 minutes vs fancy cameras, "KZitem personalities", overly edited edutainment. You actually make valuable content. Thank you, and congratulations on your well-deserved trophy thing!
@live_free_or_perish
2 жыл бұрын
This piece completes the analysis. This comprehensive series of videos is the best deep dive into almost every aspect of the war is the best I've seen anywhere.
@IRISHMAN555
2 жыл бұрын
It definitely is
@NightOwlinNewOrleans
2 жыл бұрын
I agree. I share with anyone who will listen.
@FelixMeister
2 жыл бұрын
You may like the series "Understanding the War in Ukraine". kzitem.info/door/PL9zL6xEwtVujfHHif6MyfIFxP_G44sfAG It's by Pr Alexander Stubb and ex-Finnish prime minister.
@Yellowsnow69420
2 жыл бұрын
I’m so fed up with Russia’s nuclear saber rattling that I’m at the point where I’m thinking “just shut the fuck up” every time they say “we might use em.”
@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537
2 жыл бұрын
Lavrov opens his horse mouth and the only thing that needs to be said is /watch?v=YAgRBq2jnz4 It's the head pain meme, and I am multiple fifths of vodka in not having any of that bullshit.
@suburbia2050
2 жыл бұрын
Funny how we have still decided to trade with them over the years despite the Kremlin allowing the idea of nuclear threat to leak out through their media, Putins Russia should have been out on pariah status decades ago
@Mike-fk7ur
2 жыл бұрын
True, better push the red button and let it all be over with, no more war in Ukraine, no more covid-19, no more economic downfall, only peace...
@jhonatancock2302
2 жыл бұрын
Do it, DO IT NOW!!
@Yellowsnow69420
2 жыл бұрын
@@suburbia2050 oh, but don’t you remember? Bush looked into his eyes (soul?) and saw a good man…🤦♂️
@michaireneuszjakubowski5289
2 жыл бұрын
"I've simplified some things out of necessity, because we don't want to be here all day." Well I for one wouldn't really mind! Great material as always, I hope the release is a sign of your recovery.
@pax6833
2 жыл бұрын
tfw someone says 'I've simplified things' and the video is still almost an hour long lol
@Eric149162536
2 жыл бұрын
Almost all of the analysis is excellent *except for the part of other historical comparisons at* 12:00, where Perun's lack of historical knowledge/research of those conflicts shows. Many of the examples cited reflect a poor understanding of those conflicts and situation. Some strange examples are picked and where they are used are partially or largely incorrect. *China and Vietnam* - Using this as an example of nuclear coercion failing is wrong because nuclear coercion was not used in the first place. The war was always meant to be a highly limited war, with no intention of conquering any part of Vietnam. This was in fact outright promised by China to the USSR (and the US) and in exchange the USSR would not enter into the war as Vietnam's ally. As a result of this limitation even the Air Force and Navy were ordered to mostly not participate, let alone nuclear weapons. The relatively low importance of the conflict to China and the explicit no-first-use policy of China meant that nuclear coercion was never on the table. *Nuclear Monopoly* - It is a common misconception that the time of greatest US nuclear advantage was right after 1945 when only the US had atomic bombs, and therefore possessed some magical ability to immediately order everyone in the world around or face atomic destruction. In fact, nuclear bombing was still secondary to conventional bombing in 1945. Nuclear bombs were both much smaller in quantity and in yield (fusion bombs not yet invented), thus they did not become the core of strategic bombing until the mid-50s. Compared to the 8000-megaton SIOP-62 plan, the US arsenal in 1946 amounted to less than a single megaton - and they were deployed on far inferior platforms (planes) with lower range, survivability and accuracy. The 1946 arsenal would have struggled to destroy even 1% of the USSR. "Wiping out a gigantic country from the map" was not a thing for nuclear arsenals in 1945-1949. Nuclear weapons in themselves could only form a limited part of the full spectrum of military deterrence. In fact, the very phrase "massive retaliation" was only uttered by Eisenhower in 1954. This reflects the reality that "nation-destroying" nuclear bombing power only started emerging as a possibility around this time. *India and Pakistan* - This argument is even weirder. The idea that India could somehow use its nuclear weapons to destroy Pakistan just because it got the nukes first is extremely wrong. Just because India got nukes before Pakistan doesn't mean it had a monopoly. Pakistan was allied with the United States, the country with the most nuclear weapons in the world. Even if India was ruled by a warmonger, its ability to conduct any nuclear invasion of Pakistan would have been hampered by this alliance. India did *not* have any nuclear advantage over the US and therefore it is silly to to speak of Indian restraint in not nuking Pakistan as if India had any advantage in that conflict to begin with. All in all a good analysis for Russia and Ukraine but when Perun doesn't have the knowledge or research on the other parts of Asian history it shows.
@michaireneuszjakubowski5289
2 жыл бұрын
@@Eric149162536 Seems like sound criticism (though I'm rather ignorant on Asian history myself, I'll admit that freely). Still, I think you'd do better to levy it at Perun directly, rather than bury it here in the comments by answering me.
@michaireneuszjakubowski5289
2 жыл бұрын
@@pax6833 It *is* simplified - well, imagine delving into all the theoretical background, the minutia of different doctrines, historical precedents, logistical basis of all that, knock-on effects... He's not lying, we WOULD be here all day.
@shinyary2
2 жыл бұрын
@@michaireneuszjakubowski5289 I agree; I would love to see Perun's response to this constructive criticism, and he's more likely to see it if it's posted as a direct comment instead of buried in a reply.
@traumateaminternational4732
2 жыл бұрын
"A reverse clickbait video." This sir, is why I love this channel so much.
@shiniesftw1652
2 жыл бұрын
Yes daddy. Gimme that PowerPoint
@jasoar1563
2 жыл бұрын
up your tight boot?
@EatMyShortsAU
2 жыл бұрын
#MakePowerpointGreatAgain
@holybased5039
2 жыл бұрын
LMAO
@julesgro8526
2 жыл бұрын
The logic of nuclear weapons never seizes to amaze me. It´s soooo close to being paradox that it´s downright weird.
@matthewyabsley
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear standoffs are like both sides standing in a pool of gasoline, with 1 side bragging they have 5 matches whilst the other side has 4....
@rapturedmourning
2 жыл бұрын
After "losing", Russia can say "Our joint Russian and NATO operation in Ukraine has successfully removed the Nazis, and we have taken their grain and John Deere tractors".
@Aptonoth
2 жыл бұрын
Underrated comment lol.
@wotnot4646
2 жыл бұрын
My opinion is that some commander or general stole the grain and equipment for themselves the same way the more common Russian soldier stole washing machines. The general's theft is just on the industry scale.
@jskratnyarlathotep8411
2 жыл бұрын
@@wotnot4646 but generals can not use federal police to escort trucks with grains, do they?
@tealc6218
2 жыл бұрын
American farmers have trouble getting new John Deere tractors fixed because they wait forever on a JD tech, since JD has many repairs locked out at the software level...good luck getting someone to fix them when they breakdown or need maintenance.
@j.pgoodwin9020
2 жыл бұрын
@@tealc6218 JD has remotely disabled them
@TWFydGlu
2 жыл бұрын
Something missing is a discussion about the "red button". People have somehow got it in their imagination that Putin just pushes a red button a missiles starts flying, when the systems are more complicated and involve people who are not terminally ill.
@garethh.watson4089
2 жыл бұрын
Discussed and covered if you listened to the content. Imaginary red buttons are irrelevant.
@mickday5234
2 жыл бұрын
So who told you that Putin is terminally ill MSM. You will sleep better without them!?
@KinoTechUSA69
2 жыл бұрын
"Every time a Russian official says the N-word" lmao
@barleysixseventwo6665
2 жыл бұрын
My new favorite out of context line ever: “Every time a Russian Authority opens their mouth and says the N-word, it seems the apocalypse is one step closer.”
@kmech3rd
2 жыл бұрын
But is it the Hard R version?
@weirdofromhalo
2 жыл бұрын
@@kmech3rd Nucleah
@als1023
2 жыл бұрын
Whaaa,, nobody throws in the Bush ' newcular ' ,,, sheesh,,
@als1023
2 жыл бұрын
@@capturedflame Yes I'm very aware that Bush was much smarter than CNN et al made him out to be. Biden could never manage his files. And of course no one dared use the chimp meme on Obama,, I was just making a crack joke off the cuff. Thanks for posting,, Slava Ukraine !!
@maxcorder2211
2 жыл бұрын
As a B-52 pilot in 1970, my target was Moscow with two nuclear bombs. Due to the time required to fly from the US, our ballistic missiles would have already struck. The only benefit to launching B-52’s is that we could be called back up to a certain point.
@PeteCswampy
2 жыл бұрын
Max, very interesting to hear from an actual B52 pilot. Those are big airplanes. The film ' Dr Stangelove" was apparently very acurate in its depiction of the aircraft. What do you think? (if you have seen the film)
@maxcorder2211
2 жыл бұрын
@@PeteCswampy Strangely enough, I haven’t seen it. Heard about it of course.
@pax6833
2 жыл бұрын
That would not be the only benefit. You could also have been given another target. Or make a more accurate strike than what ICBMs were capable of (for instance, if wanting to put a bomb right on top of a bunker complex rated against indirect nuclear strikes)
@Mikhail-Tkachenko
2 жыл бұрын
What was the planned flight path? (CPL + instrument pilot)
@frankmiller95
2 жыл бұрын
"Well, boys, l reckon this is it. Nucler combat, toe to toe with the Rooskies."
@FlorinArjocu
2 жыл бұрын
Loved the "random" selection of the 2 countries that might be in a nuclear situation: a small country wanting to join a "blue" coalition, a big nuclear neighbour yelling not to do that as they might use their nuclear weapons :))
@scratchy996
2 жыл бұрын
It's just "hypothetical".
@iam8401
2 жыл бұрын
Remember Cuban crisis?
@Superknullisch
2 жыл бұрын
"thei" and "migjt"??😏😅 But good comment otherwise!😉
@FlorinArjocu
2 жыл бұрын
@@Superknullisch Thanks, I corrected.
@Laotzu.Goldbug
2 жыл бұрын
@@iam8401 the Cuban Missile Crisis was different in nearly every conceivable way
@Terrados1337
2 жыл бұрын
Having witnessed the incompetence of the russian army, I am mostly scared about them accidentally going nuclear.
@CoffinElement
2 жыл бұрын
you know.. maybe they'd accidently detonate on themselves x D
@ishan7735
2 жыл бұрын
i dont think they are incompetence
@gwilliams4269
2 жыл бұрын
No nuclear power is incompetent But. 🥺S--t happens ...☯️☮️
@jkr9594
2 жыл бұрын
Lavrow in august: "today Moskow was attacked by the nazl drog addicted swines of the russ... Russian federation. we hereby declare war on them."
@JohnnyKaw11B
2 жыл бұрын
@@ishan7735 I'm a former infantryman, and watching the Russian soldiers work on many different videos leads me to believe that most of their infantryman haven't received enough/good training. Most of them are incompetent.
@officernealy
2 жыл бұрын
A lot of Russian bots like to bring up the fact that Russia has hypersonic missiles as if they somehow believe that definitively proves that they would "win" a nuclear war against the United States and NATO nations but they seem to be willfully ignorant of multiple obstacles to prop up the notion _"Russkiy stronk"_ : - The amount of hypersonic missiles in Russia's arsenal is very low. They've only formally declared 15 and with the existing sanctions in place from when they annexed Crimea that halted mass development on their other wunderwaffe such as the T-14 Armata and the Sukhoi Su-57, its safe to assume that the real number is barely higher than that. Not all of their 6,000+ soviet era stock, the ones that are maintained btw, are hypersonic nor can they be easily retrofitted to be them either. - Hypothetically, let's just say that the real number is 50 hypersonic nuclear missiles. Russia doesn't just have 50 targets they'd have to hit to "win" the nuclear war and they're not all located within the US. They'd have to hit multiple targets in the UK, France, Germany, Poland, Turkey, Japan, and other NATO aligned nations. Emptying your entire stock of super-futuristic missiles with no way to replace them short term is an incredibly idiotic approach so that would mean they'd have to use their standard, much slower ICBM's in tandem which defeats the purpose of hypersonics as those are easily detectable on early warning systems and countermeasures can be mounted. - The US has publicly confirmed there are two hypersonic missile projects in the works, but thats only what they're telling us. Unlike Russia that has to constantly parade its most up-to-date-arsenal to convince itself that its still a global superpower, the United States has been historically hush-hush on its up-to-date tech. Examples include the SR-71 Blackbird entering service in the early 1960's but the world at large not knowing about the craft until the mid 1980's, the US Military had access to ARPAnet decades before the world got their first taste of the internet, or that the only reason the world found out that the US has stealth helicopter technology was because an outfitted UH-60 Blackhawk went down during the otherwise successful raid on Osama bin Laden's compound. There are rumors abound of the US actively testing laser & railgun tech which would be faster than hypersonics and while it can't be confirmed if those are real or ready, it should be noted that unlike Russia there has been nothing financially stopping the US from continuously advancing its weapons and defense systems. - Thinking the Hypersonic missiles would decisively win Russia a nuclear war is to assume that the conflict is over once the first strikes happen, that what remains of the US and her allies would just accept annihilation, and that NATO's nuclear arsenal is entirely landlocked missile silos that can be easily wiped out. It doesn't factor in the they have numerous nuclear submarines as well as strategic bombers that stay in the air 24/7. Unless those Kinzhal & Zircon missiles simultaneously throw up magic deflector shields around Moscow, St. Petersburg, Volgograd, and other cities while they rocket towards their targets, there is little to nothing to stop a retaliatory strike from a very hidden and very angry strike force that is hellbent to drag Russia to hell with them.
@User-jr7vf
2 жыл бұрын
While I get your point, I don't see the logic in NATO "massively retaliating" with nukes a first strike by Russia... because that would only cause Russia to "massively re-retaliate"... and in the end guess what.. the world is over.
@LunaticTheCat
2 жыл бұрын
Also the US has nuclear submarines all over the world, so if nuclear war were to breakout nukes launched from these submarines could easily strike in Russia just as fast as a hypersonic missiles launched from Russia would strike in the US.
@userofthetube2701
2 жыл бұрын
Since there already is no way to stop ICBM's in any significant numbers, the hypersonic missile thing really doesn't do anything to change the nuclear balance of power.
@kekistanimememan170
2 жыл бұрын
The V2 missile was hypersonic in its terminal faze. It’s simply Russian rebranding of existing ICMBs it’s like the t90 re brand. It’s a t72 just new.
@officernealy
2 жыл бұрын
@@User-jr7vf Are you aware of the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction or *MAD?* Most people are so instead of explaining what it means, I'd rather focus on how we got there. If Humans aren't self-interested creatures, we certainly reactionary. If there was credibly evidence that the Russian Federation launched a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the United States, literally actually no one in the US high command would think _"Well, its a pity that Russia took such an evil act against us, but we can take comfort in our final moments knowing they'll get to live the lives we won't while becoming the new world rulers."_ No, instead they would do everything in their power to make them suffer and in that moment the only way to do that is repeat their slight onto them
@gabenguyen1216
2 жыл бұрын
I remember being stationed in Europe and the forecast during an invasion was a survivability of 15 hours to 3 days before annihilation depending on the scenario. I am both relieved and surprised at how dire we thought it would be. Maybe we're wrong about the nuclear threat as well but I imagine the consequences would still be catastrophic.
@joeschmo5166
2 жыл бұрын
Sad to say, but at this point I think our best hope is that their nukes work as well as their tanks. Go Ukies!
@Goosestaf
2 жыл бұрын
Maybe it’s worth a brief revisit based on developments in the last month… 💀
@daskurka
2 жыл бұрын
"hypothetical small nation subject to coercion by a big nation trying to stop the small nation from joining an alliance" Shows picture of Finnish PM in front of Finnish flag... 👀👀👀👀
@warbrain1053
2 жыл бұрын
I mean perfect example
@TiagoJoaoSilva
2 жыл бұрын
Well, she's a looker.
@jansenart0
2 жыл бұрын
6:45 That "command" Putin gave was hilarious; it instantly reminded me of "Double Secret Probation" because his nuclear forces have a very specific progression of posture and what he said was not on that list.
@fluo9576
2 жыл бұрын
Really? Like he said something completely non sense? Lol, I mean just look at the face of the other guys when he speaks, they are like “yo for real?”
@warbrain1053
2 жыл бұрын
@@fluo9576 he said a state of preparation that doesn't exist. Like if i said put nuclear forces into defcon 2.5
@fluo9576
2 жыл бұрын
@@warbrain1053 damn that’s kinda hilarious. I’m still scared anyway but damn
@warbrain1053
2 жыл бұрын
@@fluo9576 so the soldiers were like : doesn't exist, well time to do nothing again
@jansenart0
2 жыл бұрын
@@fluo9576 Yes, he did. They were like "that's... not a thing?"
@peope1976
2 жыл бұрын
I look back at the cold war with nostalgia remembering that this could be the day we where invaded or there was the end of the human civilization. Born and raised in Sweden -76 at some time invasion or destruction was inevitable possibilities. You had to deal with it. And you did. We had our airforce base flying Viggen attack jets daily. Windows where rattling. We had dug us in something abnormal. There where leaders of countries asking us what kind of war we where preparing for. We had alternate production for necessary things like swedish snus (wet tobacco under your lip) and all kinds of other production the civilians and military needed. We had caves full of oil. Like big seas of oil expecting us to be cut off. Stores to keep the population from dying and also production to keep the troops. We had conscription with retraining weeks. Poor and rich mixed and there where friendships for life. We knew we had an enemy that was overwhelming. We where told never to end the fight. It gave character to boys who came out kind of like men. Each serving in a post that the govt thought would be the best utility. We had NCOs om group, platoon and even a conscript officer level on company level. I remember the training. We took risks that our current professional military do not take. Like how when I grew up we didn't wear bicycle helmets unless there was something problematic with us acceptation of risks changed over time making it more or less mandatory to wear helmets if you ride a bike. At least for kids. The military was taught to take initiative and some played around with their explosives. We had bomb-shelters everywhere. In cellars. In garages. We had plans for blowing up anything useful by the coast that the enemy would want and flee westward into the country. We also had hospitals hidden in schools. Normal kids went to school not knowing above the lamps and ceiling was oxygen, operating lights and all kinds of medical stuff. We had a leading central blown into the mountain 100 meters from where I lived. On top of that mountain was a machine-gun nest filled with stone. Inside was communications and command and control facilities with bunks and its self-contained water and all. There even was a faraday cage that was used for electronics. I believe it was for the local civil govt. The military probably had other control centrals hidden deep into mountains. It was a completely different life. Remembering the fall of the wall. The lifting of the looming threat of nuclear destruction and invasion. The happiness for the freedom of the soviet people. I remember so much good will towards the Russians hoping their lives would be much much better now., If we are not prepared to stand up to a nuclear ultimatum we are forever slaves. it is not within our control to choose to press that button or not even if everything was fine. Make it impotent by saying no. And I am sorry about how Sweden acted during WW2. In part we where neutral but in part we accommodated the axis. The Finnish friends obviously didn't think highly of us when we didn't take up arms in their defense. We had volunteers. Sent materiel. Food. As a controverse we also took in Finnish kids for safety. (Something that had tragic consequences with identity and family ties). I am so for joining NATO. And not for our own benefit and protection. Mostly for the solidarity with our like-minded friends and countries. Especially the baltic states. I am sure we would have people posted along Finland on its border. We are quite used to cold (up in the north at least) so it is an environment we are suited for. We have lived through years and years of threats of armageddon. Don't be weak. I lived with it as a kid. You can do too.
@ane-louisestampe7939
2 жыл бұрын
as for WWII, the Danes are grateful for Sweden sawing thousands of Danish lives, so don't be too hard on yourself. If Putin touches Finland, we'll all (Scandinavians, that is) have to go there - so let's hope he doesn't. Peace and love Edit: I'm born in '64, grown up the coast of the Great Belt. It felt like we were basically waiting for "them"
@TeaParty1776
2 жыл бұрын
> And I am sorry about how Sweden acted during WW2. See "Counterfeit Traitor" w/William Holden
@joemerino3243
2 жыл бұрын
This was an amazing post.
@jamesmoroney1378
2 жыл бұрын
What a wonderful synopsis of Swedish and American life during the cold war. At 17 I went into the United States Navy and into the Submarine Service - both diesel and nuclear boats. I was born in 1949 . I went into the submarine service in 1966 and was in it until 1972.. Always following around the Soviets. I like to think that we were able to make a positive impact impact on a safe free world . Your synopsis is very very good and should be read by all that are Interested in following and understanding the the cold war and today's threats to our freedom. Throughout the history of humanity, we always have needed good hard men with dangerous weapons! Best regards, Jim Moroney
@KaiserMattTygore927
2 жыл бұрын
You won't live with anything if we get this wrong. Fake strength that ends the human race is weakness by any other name.
@xb2856
2 жыл бұрын
Is it time to revisit this one?
@remielpollard787
2 жыл бұрын
Why? You think just because Putin says, "this isn't a bluff", it means it isn't a bluff? When it isn't a bluff, you don't need to tell anyone that it isn't a bluff. You just do it.
@xb2856
2 жыл бұрын
@@remielpollard787 the main argument in this vid was that none of russias red lines were really near being crossed. Now we are looking at a sitution where they absolutely are. I give no credence to "its not a bluff" but I do about ukraine rolling into russian annexed territory as their mobilization fails.
@remielpollard787
2 жыл бұрын
@@xb2856 it's a manufactured situation. Moving the 'red line' in the same way that China expands by building artificial islands. The whole thing is a farce and none of the 'annexed' territory is legitimate by any standards, especially international law, which means the UN Security Council can ignore any Russian veto on the matter.
@gunnar6674
2 жыл бұрын
@@xb2856 Ukraine has already attacked Russian targets in Crimea and inside Russia itself. If you're wondering what Russia would do if Ukraine attacks annexed territory, we already have the answer: Nothing at all.
@Teixas666
2 жыл бұрын
Why? nothing has changed. At this point nuclear Warfare it just not in the table regardless of what either party says because they know that measure is suicide.
@DorathyTheDinosaur
2 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure why I come home from work and check KZitem for my weekly 1 hour slideshow presentation. I think you are well and truly scratching my military economics analysis itch.
@badlt5897
2 жыл бұрын
Because this one hour makes you smarter than the other 6 days and 23 hours of coverage we've heard.
@raideurng2508
2 жыл бұрын
"But the whole point of the doomsday machine is lost... if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, eh?!"
@JonZiegler6
2 жыл бұрын
To announce it on victory day of course!
@samueladams1775
2 жыл бұрын
That was epic. Dr. Strangelove is an incredible movie. Many excellent actors.
@megalonoobiacinc4863
2 жыл бұрын
@@samueladams1775 absolutely, my favorite black and white movie
@TheRealJasonson
2 жыл бұрын
These videos are absolutely top tier - I really appreciate having solid, credible, well thought out videos that try to avoid arguing based on opinion, and rather try to stick to arguments based solely in fact.
@enhancedutility266
2 жыл бұрын
It is I'm glad the algorithm was able to show me his content
@MarxAlex
2 жыл бұрын
I think he misses the human element precisely because it becomes a scientific accounting exercise. With the current situation rationality and scientific strategies may work up to a point but the wild card is how the other side perceives these actions. In ww2 Japan attacked pearl harbour over oil sanctions, this dwarfs that. USA has openly said they want to degrade the Russian military and have all but indicated they want regime change. I think culturally westerners misunderstand the minds of the Russian leadership.
@crhu319
2 жыл бұрын
No they're kiddie gamer stuff. But fun. You want actual stuff watch Scott Ritter or Defense Politics Asia.
@wildfeather
Жыл бұрын
Wonderful research and presentation. One of the best I've seen on the subject. It's a breath of fresh air to me, a Vietnam vet who's quite concerned during these troubled times. Thank you for your dedication to providing sound reliable material.
@Gurfi28
2 жыл бұрын
The nuclear threat doesn‘t scare me at all. Should a nuclear war happen, nothing will matter and I‘ll most likely die. I personally can‘t change anything when it comes to these things, so why should I worry?
@Me2goTi
2 жыл бұрын
I find it funny that people always assume that they're gonna just die during the first strike. Do you live near a really imporant military base or in the city center of a megacity? If not, it's unlike you're gonna die on day X. Most likely you will die from the following consequences several months, maybe even years later.
@apotato6278
2 жыл бұрын
I have an old bomb shelter on my property. A few years ago I renovated it and turned it into a wine cellar/recreation room. If a Russian nuke goes off I'm going to have a few dozen bottles of homemade wine, hammer some nails through my pool cue, switch my jeans for leather shorts and proclaim myself the raider king. If a Russian nuke doesn't go off I'll have one bottle of homemade wine before falling asleep on the couch. Either way I'm in for a good time.
@SpiffRogue
2 жыл бұрын
You truly have an inherent lack of imagination that is frightening.
@andrewfleenor7459
2 жыл бұрын
The majority of people will in fact survive (especially outside major population centers). We'll just all be miserable, hungry, riddled with cancer, etc.
@Gurfi28
2 жыл бұрын
@@andrewfleenor7459 Well, that‘s a world I don‘t want to live in.
@_Churchy
2 жыл бұрын
Really glad you're on the mend. My Dad is recovering from covid and he gets wiped out quick so take yr time. And I really appreciate this video, not that I'm a panic merchant, but it helped me find some clarity. Thanks Perun 👍🏾👏🏾
@nibblrrr7124
2 жыл бұрын
02:28 *What am I going to cover?* - 03:33 *TLDR* - 05:28 *What is Russia doing?* - 11:50 *Does nuclear coercion work?* - 18:59 *Russian nuclear doctrine* · 25:32 · 28:17 - 33:48 *Will they use nukes?* - 39:24 *When might nukes be used? - **42:03** *How do you prevent use?* - 44:30 *Key takeaways* - 47:33 _Channel update_ - 00:00 Introduction 01:02 Nukes and the media 02:09 But hold up a moment 02:28 What am I going to cover? 03:33 TLDR 04:40 Caveats 05:28 *WHAT IS RUSSIA DOING?* 05:34 Capability demonstration 06:21 Rhetoric 07:10 Capability development 10:21 So who is the audience? 11:50 *DOES NUCLEAR COERCION WORK?* 12:02 Historically? No 14:30 Nuclear taboo 16:34 A simple example 18:59 *RUSSIAN NUCLEAR DOCTRINE* 19:08 Doctrine and declaratory strategy 20:03 Why should we care? 21:34 Lavrov quote 21:58 Putin the nuclear warmonger? 25:32 Historical perspective 28:17 The 2020 statement 29:39 The four reasons 32:11 "Escalate to de-escalate" 33:48 *SO WILL THEY USE NUKES?* 34:10 No doctrinal use case 35:03 Russian media control to the rescue 36:15 No military utility 37:14 Likely response 39:24 *WHEN MIGHT NUKES BE USED?* 39:39 Nuclear use case? 42:03 *HOW DO YOU PREVENT USE?* 42:11 Signal and deter 44:30 *KEY TAKEAWAYS* 47:33 _CHANNEL UPDATE_
@rick7424
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you! Your help is greatly appreciated!
@Joan-xy5wm
2 жыл бұрын
Well done, sir. I salute your effort.
@mitchellbaker4806
2 жыл бұрын
Should be top comment.
@shuaguin5446
2 жыл бұрын
Up ! Up you go.
@Canessa1298
2 жыл бұрын
@@mitchellbaker4806 is in the description...
@RiffZifnab
2 жыл бұрын
Re-watching this today for no reason. /:
@michaeldeaton
2 жыл бұрын
From all outward appearances, the rust, the rot, of the graft and corruption in the Russian system has been fairly complete and thorough. It costs quite a lot to keep up that nuclear arsenal. Who knows how many detonators were said to have been replaced properly that weren't and the money disappeared up some middle level military stooge's coat sleeves? Its not something you want to gamble with but at the same time, we shouldn't let incompetent bullies push us around when they're showing themselves to be mostly a paper tiger.
@aenorist2431
2 жыл бұрын
Or they just pawn off warheads on the black market now and then. Honestly, a corrupt nuclear force is still world-endingly deadly, but also terrifying in its own right.
@lukasgruber1280
2 жыл бұрын
The US spends around half the total Russian military budget on just maintaining their existing nuclear arsenal. So you can imagine how well the even bigger Russian arsenal is maintained.
@davidbonn8740
2 жыл бұрын
I think you can go quite a bit further than that. Given the rot and corruption within the military that has affected all branches we can see, it is extraordinarily unlikely that most of their nuclear weapons will work as advertised or planned. In addition, there is no way at this point in time that the Russians can know how bad the problem is, and it will likely take them many months to figure that out. And in any event it will likely take them many years to address those problems.
@rodiculous9464
2 жыл бұрын
@@davidbonn8740 thanks for the insight general patreus. Would love to see your PHD paper elucidating these claims.
@jerrywatson1958
2 жыл бұрын
@@davidbonn8740 As has been shown when UKR captures T-80 and T-90 tanks from RU. The shells they have loaded 60% don't have primers. Training rounds with plastic primers. Munitions that can't explode can't win battles. So while RU has a lot of missiles, a majority fail (thank God!) But the ones that do "work" cause great pain and destruction. It's a full time job clearing unexploded munitions in UKR.
@nikolaivdb
2 жыл бұрын
Here we go! Thanks Perun, hope you're feeling better
@mariokartgamecube
2 жыл бұрын
"In the event of a military conflict, this Policy provides for the prevention of an escalation of military actions and their termination on conditions that are acceptable for the Russian Federation and/or its allies" The most literal way of reading that just means that Russia won't unconditionally surrender, which is one of the base deterrence cases for pretty much any nuclear state. "Acceptable" does not mean "favorable", it just means that they will literally accept terms.
@anderssorenson9998
2 жыл бұрын
I have a very shitty immune system but when I got it a couple of months ago it was not so bad, those vaccines work folks.
@henningklaveness7082
2 жыл бұрын
25:25 This confidence is being eradicated. The scary part is that Moscow is framing this war as an existential threat.
@Pechenegus
2 жыл бұрын
It is. Russia is way weaker then people think. If Russia will fail in Ukrain, it will stop existing as a state, as it is barely held together by a duct tape.
@E4439Qv5
2 жыл бұрын
It never had to be one, but it just may go that way.
@WagesOfDestruction
2 жыл бұрын
I recommend the book " When Governments Collide", it's a case book example of how government messages to their enemies go wrong.
@FoxtrotYouniform
2 жыл бұрын
edit - you talking about the one by Wallace Thies? Will pick it up. The analyses discussing the national signaling always makes me think back to the first Gulf War, where a combination of poor and mixed message signaling combined with a sudden domestic priority shift to suddenly lead to a war that everyone seemed to think was being cleverly avoided.
@engineerskalinera
2 жыл бұрын
Here's a classic example. "We will bury you" -Khrushcev, 1956, intended to mean something like "we will outlive you" or "your funeral" but interpreted by the West as a nuclear threat.
@howarddavis2281
2 жыл бұрын
Essence of Decision by Allison is very instructive too. How the Cuban Missile Crisis was a series of very near misses rather than confirmation of rational actor deterrence theory.
@WagesOfDestruction
2 жыл бұрын
@@howarddavis2281 Must investigate this, apparently, communications between lower grade Soviet military officials and the big blokes broke down. The decision to launch nuclear weapons was under low-grade officials and some came quite close to launching
@WagesOfDestruction
2 жыл бұрын
@@FoxtrotYouniform It is said that wars are the result of miscalculations. I was reading an interview of a Hezbollah leader who stated that if they had known that capturing two Israeli soldiers would have led to the 2006 Lebanon War, they never would have done it. The same could be said of many wars. Would Iranians have committed their acts of terrorism in Iraq if they had known how Saddam would react, would Serbia have supported the Black Hand if they had known what would happen, etc.? The premise of this video is that people are rational, they are not particularly in times of stress.
@nishanisho
2 жыл бұрын
I've watched this twice because I love it so much, I'm so tired of people fear mongering in youtube comments, "RuSSiA hAS 6000 NukES!!1!". Like, I get it. I don't want to see if all of those work anyways, but people are so quick to fear monger to the point that they believe the most exaggerated 'fact' about what nuclear weapons can do. I remember watching the news reporting about Russia 'threatening to nuke Britain and create a 500m tsunami that'll wipe out Ireland and GB'. I read the comments and so many are fear mongering. Lol, come on guys. No nuke can do that shit. Russia would need a very VERY big yield and I very much doubt they've built something bigger than Tsar Bomba.
@MattSpoon07
2 жыл бұрын
Or, how about...wait for it....more than one nuke?
@bobbywise2313
2 жыл бұрын
Of those 6000 only about 1500 are deployed stratigic warheads. I honestly didn't know what percentage is on ICBM'S vs bombers and subs. The USA actually has more warheads on the Ohio class subs than on ICBM'S. But Russian bombers and subs would likely be taken out well before able to launch. I would assume that still leaves about 1000 warhead's on ICBM'S. Currently we could not stop many if any of from hitting their targets. The targets are most likely our minutemen missiles in Montana, ND and the corner area of Wyoming, Nebraska and Colorado. We have a sub base on both coast and a couple of AFB's with nuclear bombers. These sites would be hit with at least 500 warheads. That may be a conservative number though. Beyound that all NATO military bases could be hit by a warhead or 2. Of course this is assuming all of those warheads have been maintained and are capable of detonation. If regular maintenance is not done they will not work.
@iainreid6292
2 жыл бұрын
“The economy is better because not everyone is dead” 😂 love it
@markjmacrae
2 жыл бұрын
“A second sunrise over Ukraine” is an absolutely beautiful phrase. Great video!
@obsidianjane4413
2 жыл бұрын
Except its horrible implication.
@BiggestCorvid
2 жыл бұрын
Old old old cold war phrase.
@Up2Speed
2 жыл бұрын
The future is bright, so bright in fact, that you don’t even need to open your eyes!
@CJ-nd9gg
2 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of the Roger Waters song ‘Two Suns in the Sunset’
@sarkybugger5009
2 жыл бұрын
@@CJ-nd9gg Beat me to it!
@equesta
2 жыл бұрын
I've never looked forward to a 50 minute PowerPoint Presentation as much as this!
@AncientRylanor69
Жыл бұрын
They say that vampirism is an insult to the chaos gods. Khorn hates them because they drink blood that is for him. Nurgle hates them because they are immortal and immune to sickness. Tzench hates them because they are etarnal and never changing. And Slanesh hates them because they are conservative in their pleasure 😂😂😂
@andyspam7663
2 жыл бұрын
Now that Russia has undergone at least a partial mobilization and formally annexed parts of Ukraine, do any of these escalation arguments change?
@Concord003
2 жыл бұрын
Probably yes. Hopefully not by much.
@jaronfranklin1
2 жыл бұрын
Even a worse case scenario for Russia in Ukraine would only get you as far as starting down the road of an internal Russian regime change. Using nukes forces any economic lifelines Russia has to immediately disengage and would only lead to a forced decapitation by Nato forces or hasten internal discontent there's nothing to gain everything to lose
@FoxtrotYouniform
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with your ideas about what Russian use of a nuke would bring, but contest whether that may have any influence in the decision making to use a nuke. All indications are that internal command structure communications within Russia have mostly broken down as nobody is willing to brief Putin fully. If Putin is convinced that a nuke would be useful, and I can see scenarios where he would, then I think that the command to use one is possible.
@jaronfranklin1
2 жыл бұрын
@@FoxtrotYouniform In that scenario it would be possible if Putin had recently shown an appetite for nuclear use. But all signs point to that his use cases don’t apply to Ukraine. Full declaration of war is much more likely and a fully mobilized Russian Army is strong enough to kick the Nuclear can down the road at least
@rodiculous9464
2 жыл бұрын
What do you think "regime change" looks like? You think navy seals are gonna storm the Kremlin and kill putin and everything will be hunky dory? The entire russian govt is behind him and like it or not, putin is a centrist. There's FSB hardliners that have been screeching for nukes constantly. This isn't going away easily or any time soon.
@FoxtrotYouniform
2 жыл бұрын
@@jaronfranklin1 I would once again agree that any nuclear use case scenarios have yet to be reached, but the two most likely progressions of this war from here tend to lead towards use cases. My basis for this thinking - Russia's invasion is not merely a land grab or an opportunistic war, it is an expression of forces which Russian leadership consider to threaten the Russian state on a critical level. Russian domestic demographics, the foreign reliance upon the advanced elements of the Russian economy, and the inability of Russia's domestic social and civil infrastructure to produces the skilled workforce needed all combine to show Russian leaders that without action they will be a client state to either the US/Europe or to China. This is entirely unacceptable to Russia. This invasion, if successful, would at least be one step in the direction of addressing these forces by increasing the population pool for workers, increasing the material resources available with which to develop the Russian economy, and the move towards a more geographically secure geostrategic position, all combine with the respect and esteem given to military victors to show Russian leadership a phantom of an image of a way out. Problem is, as NATO floods in weapons and money that way out becomes even more tenuous. It is unlikely Russia can ever fully occupy Ukraine without Chinese support, at least as long as NATO is interfering, and so a sort of proxy war between NATO and China becomes more likely as time goes on. This isn't out of love for Russia by China,, but internal recognition by Chinese elites that if Russia falls to the west then China may not be strong enough on their own to unseat the US. That potential reality of a 21st century proxybwar, if accurate,, makes even more likely NATO direct involvement, whatever reasoning may be given. If NATO gets involved, I think Russia will find few options aside from using 1 or 2 small yield nukes and crossing their fingers, as any other realistic scenario where NATO fights Russia ends with a new Russian regime.
@FoxtrotYouniform
2 жыл бұрын
@@rodiculous9464 there are two likely scenarios I see for regime change. First is an internal uprising, most likely a coup, and the result would almost certainly be another hostile regime. The second would be the result of direct NATO involvement in the Ukrainian conflict and resulting from hostile external dismantling of the state followed by support for new state mechanisms being erected in their place. I would highly contest any description of Putin which referred to him as anything akin to "a centrist" as while its a term with very little meaning it implies that he is not an avenue for increased polarity or extremism, merely an outlet for it, and I dont see any reason that assertion is credible given how he has handled the mechanisms of his state.
@patrickstar5136
2 жыл бұрын
"We don't have insane people..." - Lavrov "Hitler was a jew and Israel is supporting Neonazis" - Lavrov a couple days later
@thejason755
2 жыл бұрын
Underrated comment
@Djiehh
2 жыл бұрын
If Putin nukes us, my procrastination will have been much more savvy in hindsight. Plus it would eliminate my heretofore held anxiety over my lack of preparation for old age. In case I would survive long enough for it to matter, it would be replaced with more immediate, more pressing anxiety of trying to survive nuclear fallout, but I feel like that would put me on a less slanted playing field, given that only a negligible number of people holds a significant head start on this issue, whereas my current lack of preparation would be seen as a major lack of concern by the average reasonable compatriot. So it's either being miserable due to first world problems or being miserable (or, preferably, dead) due to nuclear war. While one issue can be helped by counseling (financial as well as psychological) and the other is quite irreversible, at least I've found a "glass half full" perspective on this out-of-reach predicament.
@SM-nz9ff
2 жыл бұрын
The US respected The Soviet Union too much back then. Should have put those dogs down way back then
@lythiomaniac6391
2 жыл бұрын
I've been waiting all week on the next one in this series. Thank you for your work and diligence with these. I greatly appreciate them, as do many others
@Bigcrusha16
2 жыл бұрын
Great points Perun. I'd go a step further in arguing that Russia would not have given the order to withdraw from Kyiv or permitted itself to absorb such catastrophic losses of military personel/infrastructure had it decided that abandoning the deterrence game was a worthwhile pursuit. This further strengthens your mentioned point that use of Nuclear arms would need to yield a net benefit to Russia, they are already in a worse position, nukes will not undo the economic and military damage it has sustained in this campaign.
@GhostlyJorg
2 жыл бұрын
The actual beneficial use-case of a nuclear bomb in the Ukraine conflict right now for the Russians, would be to create an EMP over Kyiv destroying practically all electronic devices and electrical transformers to disrupt the military command structure. This would actually mesh well with conventional Russian forces pulling back. Tell me I'm wrong
@doyouwanttogivemelekiss3097
2 жыл бұрын
@@GhostlyJorg a couple of caveats and questions: 1) by definition, that crosses the nuclear threshold. I.e. russia would open itself to western nuclear doctrines (uk/fr/us) , where I am not sure whether they are as well aligned as one may assume. I.e. the western response may be hard to calculate. 2) for it to be effective against even slightly hardened targets, it would need to be so massive as to either affect soft infrastructure in russia or in the west. in which case it would be considered as a direct attack on the west and it would be answered as such. 3) conversely, hardened military targets may still be resilient in Kyiv - so it isn't even clear to me whether it would achieve its intended goals. So in all, I think it would be a high risk, limited reward move. Then again, that would fit perfectly with the russian war logic of the past two months...
@TeaParty1776
2 жыл бұрын
@@GhostlyJorg You drop the context of nuclear war in principle. A Russian tactical nuke would encourage a US 1st nuke strike in a crisis. The resulting global destruction would end the Russian desire to spread Christianity. And Christianity, contra Islam, does not have the after-glorious-death-in-war party at the Playboy mansion. Christians who get to Heaven must sit quietly on hard wooden pews for eternity, listening to stern-faced nuns. Its not a fun religion.
@doyouwanttogivemelekiss3097
2 жыл бұрын
how about antisatellite weapons e.g. against starlink and gps? would that be feasible? I mean it would be unprecedented too
@MrMichaelBCurtis
2 жыл бұрын
OR the Russians have withdrawn so they CAN use nukes on Kyiv. Russia seems more to care about destroying Ukraine than taking it over in tact
@LeeBrown92038
2 жыл бұрын
Greetings from Moscow. Thank you for such a detailed analysis. Definitely a calming voice of reason in times of unprecedented hysteria.
@williamyoung9401
Жыл бұрын
"We don't know who fired first...us or them...but we know it was us that scorched the sky..."
@lynxfirenze4994
2 жыл бұрын
Honestly at this point I'm actually relatively relaxed about the prospect of a nuclear war coming from Ukraine. Everyone knows that using even a minor nuclear weapon will result in becoming a pariah state at best and annihilation at worst. The best response to it is perhaps to just make it known that you're ready with your own nuclear forces and will respond to any use of nuclear weapons with extreme force.
@Kayzef2003
2 жыл бұрын
Is USA a pariah state for using nuclear weapons TWICE?
@pm.meowth4850
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kayzef2003 the whole of ww2 was a war crime…so stop… minus killing hitler
@thunderspark1536
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kayzef2003 No, because the US did it to end the second world war. Even with that people are still arguing if it was the right choice
@rocerist
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kayzef2003 were the japanese not pariahs? Enough was enough, those old fossils didnt want the smoke 😂😂😂 L
@cass7448
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kayzef2003 No because a) Given the scale of WW2 and the regular bombing raids, it was not an escalation b) Japan was clearly the aggressor and had plenty of chances to stop the war and c) The world at large hadn't yet established a legal or moral framework for the use of nuclear weapons (for comparison, see the use of chemical weapons in WW1).
@lwilton
2 жыл бұрын
I think there are about three things worth considering here: 1. If Russia uses nukes in Ukraine, it is likely to be tactical nukes. These will have a burst height somewhere between about -100 feet and 5000 feet. A tactical nuke probably can't penetrate much below 100 feet into the ground and still be intact enough to blow up, and a burst much above 5K feet will have too wide a coverage area for tactical use, probably killing most of the Russian invaders within 5 miles or so of the blast. This would not be a positive outcome for Russia. Low altitude nuke blasts pull up a whole lot of dirt, which tends to become radioactive. This makes LOTS of fallout. You get much less fallout from a high-altitude strategic nuke burst. 2. Eastern Ukraine, like the Donbas region, is within about 20 miles of the Russian border, and the wind I believe is blowing generally east. That means that the blast will have an effect within Ukraine, but most all that fallout is likely to end up inside Russia itself. The effects after a year or two will probably be far worse inside Russia than in Ukraine. 3. Western Ukraine is very near to NATO countries. Having a lot of fallout blowing into NATO countries most likely would be considered a deliberate atomic attack on NATO members. NATO and the US, separately or together, would probably not be amused by this. Likely something long-term bad would happen to Russia.
@カペラマヌエル
2 жыл бұрын
👍 Not to mention that the arms race would be for real in Europe (with some countries trying to go nuclear as well?).
@RealCS2000
2 жыл бұрын
Don't forget how pissed China would be given their own geographical distance to both Russia and Ukraine as well.
@pierrecurie
2 жыл бұрын
@@RealCS2000 China would not be happy, but they're hella far from Ukraine.
@jamesrowlands8971
2 жыл бұрын
"If". They won't. Don't be absurd.
@althesilly
2 жыл бұрын
Thank the maker for a non nuclear Australia. Could you imagine what would have happened if the emus had taken the nukes in there victory. Love ya oxzie
@matthewwaddington2777
2 жыл бұрын
Russia to Finland & Norway: "Don't join NATO!" "OR WE WILL ATTACK!" F+N: "Well," "were going to join NATO then..."Fatty!"
@klutzspecter3470
2 жыл бұрын
Russia issues 9 billionth nuclear warning
@FredPauling
2 жыл бұрын
Very reassuring video. Balanced content like this is extremely important to combat the fear mongering and propaganda on both sides of this conflict.
@legion999
2 жыл бұрын
"Formally annexed" Huh? Pretty sure barely any country has recognised Crimea as part of Russia, it's still russian-occupied part of Ukraine. They should take it back.
@GenocideWesterners
2 жыл бұрын
It's insane that a Russian city for centuries like Odessa is in Ukraine today.. Soviets screwed up while drawing those borders.
@SahasaV
2 жыл бұрын
@@GenocideWesterners Tankie moment
@GenocideWesterners
2 жыл бұрын
@@SahasaV Have written anything false ?
@SahasaV
2 жыл бұрын
@@GenocideWesterners "Crimea and most of eastern Ukraine" are not legitimate russian land. The entirety of Ukraine is the sovereign territory of Ukraine.
@GenocideWesterners
2 жыл бұрын
@@SahasaV Yes on paper but realistically they should have never been part of independent Ukraine. As I said earlier, soviets screwed up the borders.
@denniskrust2137
11 ай бұрын
My only dispute with Perun, who is a brilliant young man, is based on Putin's self-interest. Putin is an old man used to nigh-absolute power. If faced between the choices of definite dethronement, followed by imprisonment or execution, or the deployment of a nuclear device which just MIGHT keep him in power, despite any future harm this might cause the Russian state, I'm not sure Putin would not choose himself over Russia. This is wherer the world would have to hope others in the chain of command would stop the madness.
@casbot71
2 жыл бұрын
4:55 You didn't mention Australia's nuclear armed wildlife. Nuclear Marsupials from the Maralinga nuclear test site (from British nuclear test in the 1960's) have been developed. The radioactive desert regions have also produced some cases of atomic Emus, but they have yet to be weaponized. And Goannas and Cassowaries have been shown copies of Godzilla films, but they haven't so far had any tangible results.
@jimlofts5433
2 жыл бұрын
ssshhh thank god you didn't mention the ultra top secret drop bears
@jpoeng
2 жыл бұрын
@@jimlofts5433 😆 Beat me to it… I was about to mention the latest generation of drop bear technology with variable yield warheads…
@casbot71
2 жыл бұрын
As well as drop bears, koalas have been equipped with biological weapons - chlamydia was just the first phase as a test of concept.
@davidty2006
2 жыл бұрын
Us brits did quite a few nuclear tests... Only good thing from them is that we know our tanks are strong enough to eat a nuke
@Unsensitive
2 жыл бұрын
Be glad you didn't have COVID 2 years ago. It really sucked! My wife had severe fatigue for months afterwards, and couldn't taste anything for over a month.
@CKOD
2 жыл бұрын
Babe wake up, new Perun video dropped.
@cheater556
2 жыл бұрын
Hi Perun I wanted to say thanks for this video. While your word and research would not be able to stop the horrible event from happening it does give reasons to be quietly optimistic. I used some of your points to help talk down some of my friends and family who worry a lot about this topic.
@Mixcoatl
2 жыл бұрын
The British and French didn't leave Suez because of the Soviet nuclear threat, but because the US decided to stab the UK and France in the back and threatened to cut off their oil supply if they didn't withdraw. The Soviets only made the threat when they realized the United States was genuinely against the Suez intervention, and was done simply to make themselves look good in the Middle East. It was never a serious threat, although the US should have treated it as such but didn't, hence why France decided to develop its own nuclear capability.
@Jhon47807
2 жыл бұрын
The US didnt backstab the UK and France. The US called them out on their bullshit.
@ryanhinrichs7353
2 жыл бұрын
Cringe Colonial Minor power Europeans vs chad anti imperialist superpowers
@silverhost9782
2 жыл бұрын
@@ryanhinrichs7353 'anti-imperialist' lmao, good one
@connormclernon26
2 жыл бұрын
@@ryanhinrichs7353 put anti-imperialist in quotations and then you’d get it right
@jeromeace1282
2 жыл бұрын
@@silverhost9782 eh, depends on which version of the word you're using (ie the one that basically means colonialism or that Marxist version where something something money extraction comes up). Tho if if you want to get technical you could call it anti colonialism, because outside of cases where they tried to go communist, the USA was generally p pro countries throwing off their imperial chains Baring stuff like us fruit companies roping the CIA into surpressing local populace anyways.
@chriscavanagh1347
2 жыл бұрын
Fine analysis. My only difference: Autocrats operate outside the logic constraints of groups. Logically, Putin should never have attacked Ukraine. But one of Putin's greatest influencers is Aleksandr Dugin with his theory of Russia's grand historical dominance, in the past and the future. And Dugin believes that a world without a dominant Russia shouldn't even exist. Putin, an addled autocrat, lives in this perspective which explains his conclusion that a land grab would succeed. I believe game theory fails if all parties have substantially different worldviews.
@sgill4833
2 жыл бұрын
Lol you guys need to watch Ukraine on fire. Then mayhe you'll know why this war was started.
@MattSpoon07
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, tell us you have no idea what's going on without directly telling us.
@zenpig6605
2 жыл бұрын
your original premise defining someone who is paying attention to developments including the possibility of nuclear war as "being scared or frightened" and we "really don't have anything to be worried about" is kind of a strawman fallacy. I can be watchful and pay attention to what is, and might develop without being "scared or frightened" While I think that the chances of a nuclear war is small at this time, does not mean that I don't keep watchful. I think the term is "Low probability- High consequence events", I don't think that my house will burn down anytime soon, but I still keep smoke detectors in every room.
@paulmurray8922
2 жыл бұрын
I wasn't worried about nuclear annihilation in the 70s and I'm not worried about it today. I have great faith in MAD.
@hazzardalsohazzard2624
2 жыл бұрын
I'm slightly concerned, mainly from the response to a threat resulting in a first strike.
@RideAcrossTheRiver
2 жыл бұрын
Are you sure Putin cares abut MAD?
@SuperCatacata
2 жыл бұрын
@@RideAcrossTheRiver Anyone who lived through the actual cold war doesn't give a shit about Putin. MAD has prevailed with more hostile situations between nuclear powers.
@rtqii
2 жыл бұрын
@@RideAcrossTheRiver Putin does not care... His generals may not like the idea of self-incineration and the incineration of their wives and children however.
@kamikaziking
2 жыл бұрын
MAD went bye bye when Russians went hypersonic and the west hasnt, if anything its going to be pretty one sided.
@broderbunto2305
2 жыл бұрын
Congrats on your success with the new content. I really like the long format slide shows, there is already to much clickbaity rage content on the internet. I'm looking forward to lots of interesting episodes. Thank you for your good work.
@Boatswain_Tam
2 жыл бұрын
Welcome back. I take this vid as a sign of a full recovery?
@EatMyShortsAU
2 жыл бұрын
He made "a recover". He suffered from Hypovidemia. Hypo meaning low, vid meaning video, emia means presence in blood. Low video presence in blood.
@andrewgora3672
2 жыл бұрын
Australia is a non nuclear state- not true ! American warships regularly dock at Australian ports carrying nuclear weapons. Most importantly Australia comes under the " American nuclear umbrella ".
@NikolayNikoloff
2 жыл бұрын
I'm currently surviving covid (hopefully, it's been a week since I feel like shit), thanks for the upload, it's what I've been saying to all the fearmongers out there, excellent work as usual!
@MrWeezy312
2 жыл бұрын
Best of luck! Kick covids ass and steal its lunch money while your at it.
@theecat3689
2 жыл бұрын
hey, coming from someone who has gone through it and helped people through it, 2nd week can be worse. thats when i developed the cough that lasted weeks. keep vigilant, make sure you check your oxygen level if possible, and keep eating healthy! if not possible, make sure you got multivitamins and make sure to finish your recommended antibiotics if necessary to prevent secondary infections. take care, stay safe, and i hope you feel better soon!
@NikolayNikoloff
2 жыл бұрын
@@theecat3689 thanks, if it gets worse Ill take antibiotics, but for know it's just mild cough and fatigue and yeah, i'm checking my biometrics + a lot of good food and vitamins, thank you, glad you beat it!
@macmcleod1188
2 жыл бұрын
If you have medical care then see a doctor about possible heart inflammation afterwards. It happens in about 30% of young people and at a higher rate in older people. Don't immediately return to heavy exercise. And this is true whether you have a severe case or a first mild case. I don't know if it's true for the second and third and so on times you catch covid.
@ArtZasadny
2 жыл бұрын
I wish you a rapid full recovery!
@ДенисКалиниченко-з1к
2 жыл бұрын
I would like to point out something interesting. When I was a teenager, I was sitting in Vkontakte and was subscribed to some large pro-weapons group (mainly guns). And I remember seeing Sarmat delivery system advertised in some photographed brochure with all 'cool' info about it. Several weeks ago I saw that news about its FIRST test launch. So, what is interesting here, you might ask? They were advertising Sarmat as READY TO DEPLOY in 2010 in that brochure. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it too long to develop some ICBM for 10+ years while having 50+ years of preexisted experience and technologhy in doing so?
@FelisImpurrator
2 жыл бұрын
Ready to delay lmao
@robertsneddon731
2 жыл бұрын
The Sarmat is a modern replacement for an existing silo-based "heavy" missile (the R36M/SS-18 NATO name "Satan") and its development has been stretched as expensive weapons development programs tend to. It's also likely that there will be a lot fewer Sarmats deployed than the hundreds-strong Soviet-era R36M/SS-18 fleet, possibly as few as thirty.
@mso2013
2 жыл бұрын
Depends on what part of it is new.
@ДенисКалиниченко-з1к
2 жыл бұрын
@@robertsneddon731 My point was: if we were talking about devices with aerospace grade reliability - is there any sense to build 30 (I am taking here your number) of such devices if they had their test launch only recently? As for me, to build such quantity is a challenge in itself cost-wise without even mentioning the absence of valuable data needed (such as test launches) for making such decision
@kamikaziking
2 жыл бұрын
thats why SARMAT-2 is deployable now......at least try to be a better troll.....
@stormwolf3255
2 жыл бұрын
"...and while Australia probably would have benefitted from a nuclear weapons programme in order to counter some of the greater and more threatening examples of our wildlife..." I see... you don't just want poisonous spiders, you want giant *radioactive* poisonous spiders :D
@brianeleighton
2 жыл бұрын
How else can we get a real life Spider Man?
@FelisImpurrator
2 жыл бұрын
Venomous. Poisonous is if you bite it and you die.
@patrickb1303
Жыл бұрын
The Russians always threaten the bomb. But I doubt they want to start playing mad max the video game as real life. Any more than we do.
@MrSneakyGunz
2 жыл бұрын
11:42 As an American, I can tell you nothing shown to date produces fear. Shows desperation, as well as perhaps some fear on the side of the Russians(Putin). He continues to do as he pleases with the everlasting threat of Nuclear weapons. I firmly believe he'll continue this behavior as long as he's permitted to do so.
@1000kennedydk
2 жыл бұрын
I happened upon your site. Thank you for your presentations. They are well-organized and easy to understand, so that we can think about what you present. Good job!
@jmaccsarmiesofArda
2 жыл бұрын
"End up destorying the planet" I think were doing a good job of that without nukes to be honest. Great vid man.
@hansgruber2509
2 жыл бұрын
This channel is a joke from video games to wartime analysis. Call of Duty much?
@TheSolitaryEye
2 жыл бұрын
That damn Emu war would've gone very differently if Australia were a nuclear power. The bird brains would've capitulated immediately.
@Newbmann
2 жыл бұрын
Wow a powerpoint with good pacing and doesnt drag on. I cant belive it. Amazing work
Пікірлер: 4,3 М.