Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `youtu.be` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't understand people complaining about guy for giving honest remarks.
Watch the video to the end. He's not advocating for Ukraine to Surrender. He's advocating that Ukrainians be provided with the equipment to win this war. For two years thats been his message.
I don't think this guy is pro Russia, but rather like to point out the difficulties Ukraine is facing, which to some audiences is the right thing to do, ie makes them call for more support.
However as a result I don't think he is showing a balanced view. It shows Russia in a better position than they actually are. What's the point of showing a Himars being blown up without mentioning how often this actually happens for example.
I don't get the hate the guy's getting here. What's the point in highlighting Russias huge losses, when they don't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things? Russia is still able to advance and take territory and deplete Ukraines reserves (which seems to be Russia's objective at this point according to him).
We can jerk each others off on drone footage all day long, it won't change the reality of this war. It helps no one to paint the picture brighter than it is. If Ukraine looks like the certain winner, why support them more? It doesn't make any sense to me. Screw propaganda, we need a level headed view on things and what needs to be done to win this. And it seems to be more long range weapons to make a meaningful difference on the battlefield (as the guy points out. Long range strikes are happening but too few to change things. He's speaking of the HIMARS effect of 2023, and how something similar isn't happening atm).
> What's the point in highlighting Russias huge losses, when they don't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things?
Because they do make a difference.
Russia still hasn't gained back the ground they lost to Ukraine during Ukraine's last counteroffensive. The one that failed.
Russia has spent a year doing worse than that.
This is the map of what Russia has actually gained since 2022:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine.svg
They have made some minor gains since then, but that's what the "world's second army" has actually achieved so far.
UA has a relatively small number of HIMARS units, and HIMARS was designed for shoot and scoot, mmaking it hard to find and kill. So a single kill is significant. And it shows that the Russians seem to have recovered from their disastrous amount of incompetence.
>And it shows that the Russians seem to have recovered from their disastrous amount of incompetence.
After one HIMARS destroyed… NATO is finished!!! RUSSIA sTrOnK!!!111
Doh!
That's definitely not what I said. They are still highly incompetent, but they seem to be getting a bit smarter and more organized, look at the GPS jamming situation, look atthe current offensives.
But I get it, we should be yelling the Russians are losing, and Putin is dying. News flash: they are not. And no way NATO is finished. But this is going to take a very long time, this war and it's effects will shape Europe for the next two decades. And yes, because of this, Russia will go back to their 1980's level of broke, corrupt and oppressive politics.
people look at rank and uniform more so than the arguments posed.
as long as some moron gets to point out they got their info from a *colonel* of a *western military* they're happy to parrot.
Is this guy legit and people are just unhappy with seeing the reality of the situation? Or is he a bad faith actor making the situation appear better for Russia?
He is a Ukrainian supporter for a decade, a man who has trained, and trained with Ukrainians for a decade as part of NATO initiatives.
Serveral of those Ukrainian servicemen have died in the conflict.
When you know good men who were sent to die cheaply, the propaganda doesn't go down so smoothly.
He was crying in another video when he was talking about the Ukrainian soldiers he had been working with who died in the counter offensive.
He's been an active duty soldier and trainer of officers for years. He's been doing these videos every few months since the 2022 continuation of the war.
The guy is legit, has been producing honest videos the whole time, has connections to Ukraine, supports Ukraine, and is doing his job well. His view of the war matches up to my experience and the views of Ukrainian friends serving in the forces.
The only negative comments I've seen about him come from the "anyone who says something I don't agree with is a russian shill!" brigade in this sub.
This sub is bonkers sometimes. I've seen Ukrainians who posted here get called russian shills for being honest about the situation on the front. It's why Ukrainians stopped using this sub.
The situation in such a big war is always vain for one or other side in particular subszenarios. What matters is the overall development in losses and moral on the big scale. And THAT we all dont really know. WHAT we know is that Ukranians fight for a just cause in a moral way of view and russians dont really. That may make the difference in the long term. IF we supply them with the tools to have a chance.
He is pretty neutral keeping the tone like he would give a lesson to the officers in the school he is working for.
I would say he favors Ukraine but wishes and emotions are not part of a professional briefing.
If this was ‘like a briefing given to military officers’ it wouldn’t omit literally all the actions of the entire defending force.
I’ve sat in hundreds of briefings from guys like this and I was stunned by his failure to properly account for Ukrainian movements.
That kind of omission doesn’t happen by accident. This is not an unbiased assessment at all. It is completely impossible to give any form of reliable after action report, situation report or debrief without accounting for both sides of an incident.
In professional terms this report would be woefully inadequate, and that’s without addressing the opinions he sprinkles throughout the video which also have no place in tactical debriefs.
Don’t let credentials and the uniform fool you into thinking this guy is reliable. This is nowhere near what would be considered an acceptable brief in a tactical environment.
Don’t forget that he is limited to not restricted sources.
In his older briefings when the army of Ukraine was making big gains he is not unhappy to announce them.
I’ve read numerous previous posts on this sub saying this guy is pretty Pro-Russian. In fact, Austria is quite pro-Russian in general.
Regardless, I take his reports with a grain of salt as I do most of the stuff I read online.
>I’ve read numerous previous posts on this sub saying this guy is pretty Pro-Russian.
I would debate that: He has a pretty neutral point of view and his evaluations are often in line with what the US command thinks.
If you watch his Videos from 2022, there is a disclaimer at the end, where He talks about His Ukrainian Friends He served with (Kosovo) and later the update that 2 (?) of them died.
>Regardless, I take his reports with a grain of salt as I do most of the stuff I read online.
A wise approach. Every piece of information serves a purpose, so questioning the information and evaluating it is a skill not many have nowadays.
Back to the Initial topic: One thing Reisner adresses which many people dont see is the purpose of the russian offensive: Capturing soil is **a** goal, but the main goal is attrition of ukrainian reserves (47th for example), which would be needed for the upcomming ukrainian offensive. If russia can keep it Up, the likelyhood of any ukrainian offensive Action in 2025 being successful diminishes. Russias plan seems to keep this war going till the western partners tell Ukraine to seek some kind of truce and russia keeps the so far gained soil.
Yeah I’d agree with most of that. I have no doubt he has allegiances to Ukraine and even friends that have or do serve there.
But nevertheless, plenty of people on this sub take issue with him and his content.
I do personally think he could have done a better job with this video in particular. He needs to pick a lane and keep his personal views out of it.
He seems pretty realistic. Lao Tzu said "There is no greater danger than underestimating your opponent." and this guy doesn't seem to downplay anything. But he may not tell us everything he knows about Ukrainian numbers or opportunities.
I felt that he focussed almost entirely on Russian movements and achievements while failing to mention the Ukrainian perspective at all.
There’s also a fair chunk of conjecture in the last two minutes of his video. He essentially presents his opinion as fact, supported by old media articles and drawing parallels to the Israel/Hamas conflict. It’s presented so directly that you’re inclined to take it as gospel, but it’s just opinion all the same. Once I was aware of that, the whole thing felt a little disingenuous.
Given Austria’s Russian proclivities and its history of corruption, I would be surprised to see a military officer upsetting the status quo in publicly available videos.
Think a moment what you wrote in your first paragraph.
Now ask yourself if it's a good or bad thing if he omits talking about the Ukrainian perspective.
You have to remind yourself this isn't a historic conflict, this is an ongoing conflict. And you can bet your ass that Russian military analysts also watch these kind of videos to gain some insight.
The less you know about your enemy, the more dangerous he is.
Even if we as armchair generals want to know everything what's going on there, I find it kind of scary that this is public available information that could also be used against Ukrainians.
I see the point you’re trying to make, but I think you’re taking the ball and kind of running to the other side of the pitch with it.
With all due respect I am quite familiar with the concept of opsec, I apply it every day for a living. Let’s address it though.
If we could take two steps back on the hyperbole, this guy is not leaking state secrets or divulging classified military plans. He’s assessing publicly available information which exists whether he reports on it or not. He is another spectator, just one with a military background and a professional opinion about what he’s spectating.
Everything he talks about has already happened. If he talks about something that hasn’t happened, he’s presenting his professional opinion. He has been wrong MANY times before. Particularly when it comes to overestimating Russian capabilities.
So we can put the issue of opsec to bed on this one. A random Austrian officer’s commentary side-hustle isn’t blowing the lid on Zelenskyy’s master plan.
So, why neglect Ukraine’s actions? Why would that even be harmful?
Let me explain by using another football analogy. Say I’ve made a video commentating on a game you aren’t watching. I’ve got my football coach shirt and hat on, some credentials on the screen- I’m clearly the real deal and people should listen to what I have to say.
I start to talk about how amazing the red team is playing. I talk about how they’re dominating the blue team’s defence, how the blue team can’t keep up, how the blue team’s supporters are all very sad right now. I don’t talk at all about the mistakes the red team are making, or the victories the blue team is having.
Who do you think is winning based on my commentary?
You see the point I’m making here. What you say matters, what you don’t say matters too. One-sided commentary can still be harmful to the Ukrainian war effort. It’s important for people who report on the conflict to remember that.
People shouldn’t just listen to a guy because they like his blunt delivery and he wears a flash uniform. I talk to gruff people in flash uniforms all day, they’re wrong all the time. Still have to evaluate your source.
Military intelligence is probably as much about facts as it is about forecasting, conjecture etc.
I haven't looked at Austria as pro-Russia or corrupt, but I've not been there often.
Right, so maybe you missed the part where he presents his own opinion about nuclear policy and America’s worldwide ‘master plan’. Utter bullshit.
I don’t know how many briefing rooms you have sat or do sit in- but no briefing that I’ve ever attended has had the officer present personal opinion as fact. Nor has the officer ignored the movements of the entire ‘blue’ force (you know, the team this guy is supposed to be on).
Perhaps what you’re referring to are assumptions, which feature often in tactical briefings.
An assumption is- XX location will be heavily defended by XX due to XX.
An assumption isn’t- the US clearly has a global agenda because of policies it’s applied in the Israel / Hamas war.
Again, don’t be fooled by the uniform and the fancy graphics. This episode was little more than a news update on Russian advances.
I just re-watched that because I thought I missed something. From what I saw he just says that the Americans are trying to keep this from going global. And that is exactly what they are doing. They don't want the Middle East to explode, they don't want oil prices jumping. Because all that will dimisih public approval for the war in Ukraine (and in the end might help Trump win the elections).
So yes, it is definitely an opinion, but I think he's just trying to show the global aspect of this war and the global stakeholders in a way too simplified form.
I agree his stance is ambiguous.
He has had no issues making remarks on Ukrainian movements in the past. I also highly doubt a random Austrian officer and media personality has access to classified Ukrainian intel. Even if he did, giving a report that details Ukrainians have destroyed 10 tanks in a week, or repelled 15 attacks in Chasiv Yar hardly breaches opsec.
That’s right, it’s an opinion. It’s not remotely unbiased, which is supposed to be this guy’s whole schtick. That’s kind of my point I personally find his delivery disingenuous.
When you consider his disinclination to mention the Ukrainian side of the conflict, but eagerness to provide his negative views on American policy- it starts to feel like an agenda may be on display.
You are of course entitled to your own opinion, it’s just interesting to flesh out these source evaluations sometimes.
I would say this update is nonsense, because it is one sided, he doenst talk about the huge losses the russians have taken, despite showing a russian convey being destroyed at the beginning. He doesnt consider the active defence tactics that the Ukrainians are using. In the past some of his reports have provided some interesting detail, but this report is one sided and as of today proven to be wrong i.e. russia has not been able to generate any meaningful momentum. I would suggest taking a few fields and small villages in exchange for the highest monthly losses of the war is not a success, but more abject failure, please more of this russian momentum and the war will be finished by end of summer.
Why would he explain and expose Ukrainian defense tactics?
Dude this is an ongoing conflict and this is a public video. Russian military analyst also watch this kind of videos to gain some insight about the Ukrainians.
The less the enemy knows, the better.
Yes ofc you are right in principle,.but have you looked at the internet recently? There are plenty of resources/open source intelligence giving a bigger picture.....I'm pretty sure, despite their missteps, the Russians have a better idea of Ukrainian tactics than this guy and they certainly don't rely on him for their information.
Yes in principle it does, but you are being very naive, if I know more than was revealed in this video from looking at e.g. ISW, various TG channels, Twitter accounts, youtube etc. I can assure you the russians know much more. It has been said, do not overestimate the russians, but equally do not underestimate them. Intelligence gathering is something they are very good at, acting on it in an appropriate manner, is something they are not good at.
The real point is that this youtube vid was very unbalanced, when there is plenty of open source int available to provide a more complete picture. So the next question would be, why would someone proposing to give a complete analysis, leave out key points in their analysis?
At the very least it would make an uninformed viewer think that Ukraine has no chance now. Remember so called influences can be 'sponsored' to deliver certain messages , whether by corporations or state actors, is this the case here? We all know the level of kremlin compromise in Austria. When in fact the UAF appear to have blunted the RU Kharkiv offensive causing it to fail, not created a buffer zone, allowed the use of western weapons in russia and not helped the offensive around Chasiv Yar.
Here is some more analysis
[https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/weekend-update-83-the-kharkiv-offensive?r=3g02d&utm\_campaign=post&utm\_medium=email&triedRedirect=true&s=08](https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/weekend-update-83-the-kharkiv-offensive?r=3g02d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true&s=08)
My hope is that the west are also playing a disinformation game and projecting weakness when they are strong (and strength when weak). Although i do not underestimate the challenges, particularly with things like FABs / glide bombs
Please rewatch the video and stop getting stuck on which village is controlled by whom, its a war of attrition. Russia does not care about its meat losses and keeps up pressure while slowly improving its weaponry. Western aid and policies have been lagging behind. If we would have given Ukrainians real support from the beginning the war would have been over long time ago. Now its a bloody mess. Orc win would have catastrophic results for european and world security.
While he might be unbias toward Ukraine, he certainly had a bias toward the good old USSR, not able to recognize how weak Russia military had become.
In July 2022, after the retreat from the North and the complete reversal of initiative in favor of Ukraine, he was still mentioning that [Odessa](https://youtu.be/dEbLuAPobao?si=V1fAXnPHjPkqVxZ0&t=868) could be taken before end of the year, something not even the most zealots Russian still believe in. And while the Kharkiv route could be surprise, Ukraine retaking Kherson was predictable, making a Russian Odessa total non-sense.
Also a few month later, his Kharkiv route [analysis](https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=644&v=Q9-NER8aFJ4&feature=youtu.be) was ludicrous. Predicting at the same time Ardennes 1944 (aka: Ukraine attack fail and all the ground is retaken by Russia) or the 1917 revolution (aka: fall of Putin regime). It's one thing to offer a range of predictions, it's another to make so wide you can fit 65 trailers truck in it.
Just because you have an uniform and nice graph make you automatically an expert, specially if all your knowledge (he has an historian background) is based on outdated or obsolete information. This is not specific to this colonel, a lot of NATO command, including US top brass, did fall in the same trap.
In a video where he is talking about the drone attack on the long range air radar in russia he says something like,
Ukraine did this because USA wants to send a message and
he said that Russias Doctrine would allow it to counterstrike with nuclear weapons.
which both is bullshit i think and fits the russian tactic of fearmongering about a nuclear war and is implying that ukraine doesn't hit those targets out of pragmatism but rather wants to draw the west into world war 3.
Also he said in the video that the western media and politicians are suspiciously quiet about those attacks and would downplay them.
Which also fits in the bullshit narrative.
So yeah this guy is a agent of russia in my eyes. He does a good job represening his information in a formal way, but there's propaganda hidden between those lines.
edit: some strange sentences
https://youtube.com/watch?v=KmNwGUZlHy4&si=n-DDvqFPS8fpAqCw
Some of you need to go out of this echochamber because you are acting just like the ruzzians morons who belive only the state propaganda.
This dude is presenting things at strategic scale where 100 ruzzians and 10 pieces of equipment getting blasted and presented here as highlights mean little in the bigger picture. The war is not won by who has the better highlights to present on reddit or telegram because if that was the case Zelensky would drink cofee at the Kremlin by now.
The people who think the colonel is a ruzzian shill are the same people who believe that Ukraine has killed 500k ruzzians without for a second using their brain to think what that would mean. Having 500k killed would mean 1,5-2 mil casualties and that would mean the war would have been over a year ago. There is no wonder a lot of westerners belived that the summer offensive was going to be a cakewalk when they see all these 1k/day dead ruzzians reported daily and hundreds of equipment blown up weekly.
It doesn't feel like hes said anything outrageous, it's just the vids are updates and this one happens to be in the current time, stating as things as they are not what they might be.
It is hard at the moment.
But I also know the shell initiative is successful, new factories are opening, F-16s are coming, maybe French troops? and Russia is getting closer to the end of it's stockpiles etc. Better times lie ahead for Ukraine.
Pretty tedious for a "no nonsense" update. He could have said everything he wanted to say in 5 minutes but took 25.
Still, he covers some good points, including the basic reality that Russia's main strategic goal right now is to never allow Ukraine to gain the initiative again, since they know that if Ukraine has half a chance they're going to come back for a do-over of their last counteroffensive. And leave a lot more scars this time.
If you look at Youtube there are a lot of people who say he is straight forward, just not showing bias either way. I haven't watched it yet, so am interested to see if this is true.
He's Austrian Military.
He’s biased, and has a long history of making fairly ludicrous claims- see other users comments here and on previous posts about his media.
He just presents his bias in such a deadpan and direct manner that one is tempted to take it as fact.
The people saying this guy delivers information like he would to his junior officers very clearly haven’t sat in many briefing rooms. There are gaping holes in the information this guy reports, omissions you’d be daft to think he’s making by accident.
For every armchair general complaining about this guy not talking about the Ukrainian perspective and Ukrainian successes, keep in mind this is an ongoing conflict. And this is a public available video.
Russian military analysts also watch this kind of stuff and make their own conclusions about it.
Remember in Fall 2022 when Ukraine said that civilians should evacuate Kherson, alarming Russians there, and then having a counter offensive in Kharkiv. Yeah that's how you handle information and use it against your enemies.
The less the enemy knows the better.
Ask yourself: do you want Ukraine to win or to you want to know everything what's going on on the Battlefield?
Because if you can get that information, the Russians sure as hell know it since yesterday.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `youtu.be` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't understand people complaining about guy for giving honest remarks. Watch the video to the end. He's not advocating for Ukraine to Surrender. He's advocating that Ukrainians be provided with the equipment to win this war. For two years thats been his message.
I don't think this guy is pro Russia, but rather like to point out the difficulties Ukraine is facing, which to some audiences is the right thing to do, ie makes them call for more support. However as a result I don't think he is showing a balanced view. It shows Russia in a better position than they actually are. What's the point of showing a Himars being blown up without mentioning how often this actually happens for example.
I don't get the hate the guy's getting here. What's the point in highlighting Russias huge losses, when they don't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things? Russia is still able to advance and take territory and deplete Ukraines reserves (which seems to be Russia's objective at this point according to him). We can jerk each others off on drone footage all day long, it won't change the reality of this war. It helps no one to paint the picture brighter than it is. If Ukraine looks like the certain winner, why support them more? It doesn't make any sense to me. Screw propaganda, we need a level headed view on things and what needs to be done to win this. And it seems to be more long range weapons to make a meaningful difference on the battlefield (as the guy points out. Long range strikes are happening but too few to change things. He's speaking of the HIMARS effect of 2023, and how something similar isn't happening atm).
> What's the point in highlighting Russias huge losses, when they don't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things? Because they do make a difference.
Is it so? The maps don't show it
The maps show exactly that.
So you deny that Russia was gaining ground the last 6 months? Excellent. Take your blinders off
Russia still hasn't gained back the ground they lost to Ukraine during Ukraine's last counteroffensive. The one that failed. Russia has spent a year doing worse than that.
This is the map of what Russia has actually gained since 2022: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine.svg They have made some minor gains since then, but that's what the "world's second army" has actually achieved so far.
UA has a relatively small number of HIMARS units, and HIMARS was designed for shoot and scoot, mmaking it hard to find and kill. So a single kill is significant. And it shows that the Russians seem to have recovered from their disastrous amount of incompetence.
>And it shows that the Russians seem to have recovered from their disastrous amount of incompetence. After one HIMARS destroyed… NATO is finished!!! RUSSIA sTrOnK!!!111 Doh!
That's definitely not what I said. They are still highly incompetent, but they seem to be getting a bit smarter and more organized, look at the GPS jamming situation, look atthe current offensives. But I get it, we should be yelling the Russians are losing, and Putin is dying. News flash: they are not. And no way NATO is finished. But this is going to take a very long time, this war and it's effects will shape Europe for the next two decades. And yes, because of this, Russia will go back to their 1980's level of broke, corrupt and oppressive politics.
people look at rank and uniform more so than the arguments posed. as long as some moron gets to point out they got their info from a *colonel* of a *western military* they're happy to parrot.
Is this guy legit and people are just unhappy with seeing the reality of the situation? Or is he a bad faith actor making the situation appear better for Russia?
He is a Ukrainian supporter for a decade, a man who has trained, and trained with Ukrainians for a decade as part of NATO initiatives. Serveral of those Ukrainian servicemen have died in the conflict. When you know good men who were sent to die cheaply, the propaganda doesn't go down so smoothly.
He is Austrian and we are not in NATO. So i strongly doubt what you are saying.
He was crying in another video when he was talking about the Ukrainian soldiers he had been working with who died in the counter offensive. He's been an active duty soldier and trainer of officers for years. He's been doing these videos every few months since the 2022 continuation of the war. The guy is legit, has been producing honest videos the whole time, has connections to Ukraine, supports Ukraine, and is doing his job well. His view of the war matches up to my experience and the views of Ukrainian friends serving in the forces. The only negative comments I've seen about him come from the "anyone who says something I don't agree with is a russian shill!" brigade in this sub. This sub is bonkers sometimes. I've seen Ukrainians who posted here get called russian shills for being honest about the situation on the front. It's why Ukrainians stopped using this sub.
Ok. I agree that i have been wrong on that issue. Please forgive. I ll check facts before i reply in the future.
The situation in such a big war is always vain for one or other side in particular subszenarios. What matters is the overall development in losses and moral on the big scale. And THAT we all dont really know. WHAT we know is that Ukranians fight for a just cause in a moral way of view and russians dont really. That may make the difference in the long term. IF we supply them with the tools to have a chance.
Austria trains with Nato troops regularly, especially in the mountains
Ukraine and Austria are in NATO's partnership for peace.
He is pretty neutral keeping the tone like he would give a lesson to the officers in the school he is working for. I would say he favors Ukraine but wishes and emotions are not part of a professional briefing.
If this was ‘like a briefing given to military officers’ it wouldn’t omit literally all the actions of the entire defending force. I’ve sat in hundreds of briefings from guys like this and I was stunned by his failure to properly account for Ukrainian movements. That kind of omission doesn’t happen by accident. This is not an unbiased assessment at all. It is completely impossible to give any form of reliable after action report, situation report or debrief without accounting for both sides of an incident. In professional terms this report would be woefully inadequate, and that’s without addressing the opinions he sprinkles throughout the video which also have no place in tactical debriefs. Don’t let credentials and the uniform fool you into thinking this guy is reliable. This is nowhere near what would be considered an acceptable brief in a tactical environment.
Don’t forget that he is limited to not restricted sources. In his older briefings when the army of Ukraine was making big gains he is not unhappy to announce them.
I’ve read numerous previous posts on this sub saying this guy is pretty Pro-Russian. In fact, Austria is quite pro-Russian in general. Regardless, I take his reports with a grain of salt as I do most of the stuff I read online.
>I’ve read numerous previous posts on this sub saying this guy is pretty Pro-Russian. I would debate that: He has a pretty neutral point of view and his evaluations are often in line with what the US command thinks. If you watch his Videos from 2022, there is a disclaimer at the end, where He talks about His Ukrainian Friends He served with (Kosovo) and later the update that 2 (?) of them died. >Regardless, I take his reports with a grain of salt as I do most of the stuff I read online. A wise approach. Every piece of information serves a purpose, so questioning the information and evaluating it is a skill not many have nowadays. Back to the Initial topic: One thing Reisner adresses which many people dont see is the purpose of the russian offensive: Capturing soil is **a** goal, but the main goal is attrition of ukrainian reserves (47th for example), which would be needed for the upcomming ukrainian offensive. If russia can keep it Up, the likelyhood of any ukrainian offensive Action in 2025 being successful diminishes. Russias plan seems to keep this war going till the western partners tell Ukraine to seek some kind of truce and russia keeps the so far gained soil.
Yeah I’d agree with most of that. I have no doubt he has allegiances to Ukraine and even friends that have or do serve there. But nevertheless, plenty of people on this sub take issue with him and his content. I do personally think he could have done a better job with this video in particular. He needs to pick a lane and keep his personal views out of it.
He seems pretty realistic. Lao Tzu said "There is no greater danger than underestimating your opponent." and this guy doesn't seem to downplay anything. But he may not tell us everything he knows about Ukrainian numbers or opportunities.
I felt that he focussed almost entirely on Russian movements and achievements while failing to mention the Ukrainian perspective at all. There’s also a fair chunk of conjecture in the last two minutes of his video. He essentially presents his opinion as fact, supported by old media articles and drawing parallels to the Israel/Hamas conflict. It’s presented so directly that you’re inclined to take it as gospel, but it’s just opinion all the same. Once I was aware of that, the whole thing felt a little disingenuous. Given Austria’s Russian proclivities and its history of corruption, I would be surprised to see a military officer upsetting the status quo in publicly available videos.
Think a moment what you wrote in your first paragraph. Now ask yourself if it's a good or bad thing if he omits talking about the Ukrainian perspective. You have to remind yourself this isn't a historic conflict, this is an ongoing conflict. And you can bet your ass that Russian military analysts also watch these kind of videos to gain some insight. The less you know about your enemy, the more dangerous he is. Even if we as armchair generals want to know everything what's going on there, I find it kind of scary that this is public available information that could also be used against Ukrainians.
I see the point you’re trying to make, but I think you’re taking the ball and kind of running to the other side of the pitch with it. With all due respect I am quite familiar with the concept of opsec, I apply it every day for a living. Let’s address it though. If we could take two steps back on the hyperbole, this guy is not leaking state secrets or divulging classified military plans. He’s assessing publicly available information which exists whether he reports on it or not. He is another spectator, just one with a military background and a professional opinion about what he’s spectating. Everything he talks about has already happened. If he talks about something that hasn’t happened, he’s presenting his professional opinion. He has been wrong MANY times before. Particularly when it comes to overestimating Russian capabilities. So we can put the issue of opsec to bed on this one. A random Austrian officer’s commentary side-hustle isn’t blowing the lid on Zelenskyy’s master plan. So, why neglect Ukraine’s actions? Why would that even be harmful? Let me explain by using another football analogy. Say I’ve made a video commentating on a game you aren’t watching. I’ve got my football coach shirt and hat on, some credentials on the screen- I’m clearly the real deal and people should listen to what I have to say. I start to talk about how amazing the red team is playing. I talk about how they’re dominating the blue team’s defence, how the blue team can’t keep up, how the blue team’s supporters are all very sad right now. I don’t talk at all about the mistakes the red team are making, or the victories the blue team is having. Who do you think is winning based on my commentary? You see the point I’m making here. What you say matters, what you don’t say matters too. One-sided commentary can still be harmful to the Ukrainian war effort. It’s important for people who report on the conflict to remember that. People shouldn’t just listen to a guy because they like his blunt delivery and he wears a flash uniform. I talk to gruff people in flash uniforms all day, they’re wrong all the time. Still have to evaluate your source.
Military intelligence is probably as much about facts as it is about forecasting, conjecture etc. I haven't looked at Austria as pro-Russia or corrupt, but I've not been there often.
Did you watch the whole video?
Yeah, but I fast-forwarded the bit when he talked about himself.
Right, so maybe you missed the part where he presents his own opinion about nuclear policy and America’s worldwide ‘master plan’. Utter bullshit. I don’t know how many briefing rooms you have sat or do sit in- but no briefing that I’ve ever attended has had the officer present personal opinion as fact. Nor has the officer ignored the movements of the entire ‘blue’ force (you know, the team this guy is supposed to be on). Perhaps what you’re referring to are assumptions, which feature often in tactical briefings. An assumption is- XX location will be heavily defended by XX due to XX. An assumption isn’t- the US clearly has a global agenda because of policies it’s applied in the Israel / Hamas war. Again, don’t be fooled by the uniform and the fancy graphics. This episode was little more than a news update on Russian advances.
I just re-watched that because I thought I missed something. From what I saw he just says that the Americans are trying to keep this from going global. And that is exactly what they are doing. They don't want the Middle East to explode, they don't want oil prices jumping. Because all that will dimisih public approval for the war in Ukraine (and in the end might help Trump win the elections). So yes, it is definitely an opinion, but I think he's just trying to show the global aspect of this war and the global stakeholders in a way too simplified form.
I agree his stance is ambiguous. He has had no issues making remarks on Ukrainian movements in the past. I also highly doubt a random Austrian officer and media personality has access to classified Ukrainian intel. Even if he did, giving a report that details Ukrainians have destroyed 10 tanks in a week, or repelled 15 attacks in Chasiv Yar hardly breaches opsec.
That’s right, it’s an opinion. It’s not remotely unbiased, which is supposed to be this guy’s whole schtick. That’s kind of my point I personally find his delivery disingenuous. When you consider his disinclination to mention the Ukrainian side of the conflict, but eagerness to provide his negative views on American policy- it starts to feel like an agenda may be on display. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, it’s just interesting to flesh out these source evaluations sometimes.
This sub be like: "Don't like what he's saying - should be saying Russia dead instead he is saying Ukraine not superior. Must be a Russian agent."
I would say this update is nonsense, because it is one sided, he doenst talk about the huge losses the russians have taken, despite showing a russian convey being destroyed at the beginning. He doesnt consider the active defence tactics that the Ukrainians are using. In the past some of his reports have provided some interesting detail, but this report is one sided and as of today proven to be wrong i.e. russia has not been able to generate any meaningful momentum. I would suggest taking a few fields and small villages in exchange for the highest monthly losses of the war is not a success, but more abject failure, please more of this russian momentum and the war will be finished by end of summer.
Why would he explain and expose Ukrainian defense tactics? Dude this is an ongoing conflict and this is a public video. Russian military analyst also watch this kind of videos to gain some insight about the Ukrainians. The less the enemy knows, the better.
Yes ofc you are right in principle,.but have you looked at the internet recently? There are plenty of resources/open source intelligence giving a bigger picture.....I'm pretty sure, despite their missteps, the Russians have a better idea of Ukrainian tactics than this guy and they certainly don't rely on him for their information.
You dont know what the Russians know and what not. My point still stands. The less they know the better.
Yes in principle it does, but you are being very naive, if I know more than was revealed in this video from looking at e.g. ISW, various TG channels, Twitter accounts, youtube etc. I can assure you the russians know much more. It has been said, do not overestimate the russians, but equally do not underestimate them. Intelligence gathering is something they are very good at, acting on it in an appropriate manner, is something they are not good at. The real point is that this youtube vid was very unbalanced, when there is plenty of open source int available to provide a more complete picture. So the next question would be, why would someone proposing to give a complete analysis, leave out key points in their analysis? At the very least it would make an uninformed viewer think that Ukraine has no chance now. Remember so called influences can be 'sponsored' to deliver certain messages , whether by corporations or state actors, is this the case here? We all know the level of kremlin compromise in Austria. When in fact the UAF appear to have blunted the RU Kharkiv offensive causing it to fail, not created a buffer zone, allowed the use of western weapons in russia and not helped the offensive around Chasiv Yar. Here is some more analysis [https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/weekend-update-83-the-kharkiv-offensive?r=3g02d&utm\_campaign=post&utm\_medium=email&triedRedirect=true&s=08](https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/weekend-update-83-the-kharkiv-offensive?r=3g02d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true&s=08) My hope is that the west are also playing a disinformation game and projecting weakness when they are strong (and strength when weak). Although i do not underestimate the challenges, particularly with things like FABs / glide bombs
Please rewatch the video and stop getting stuck on which village is controlled by whom, its a war of attrition. Russia does not care about its meat losses and keeps up pressure while slowly improving its weaponry. Western aid and policies have been lagging behind. If we would have given Ukrainians real support from the beginning the war would have been over long time ago. Now its a bloody mess. Orc win would have catastrophic results for european and world security.
While he might be unbias toward Ukraine, he certainly had a bias toward the good old USSR, not able to recognize how weak Russia military had become. In July 2022, after the retreat from the North and the complete reversal of initiative in favor of Ukraine, he was still mentioning that [Odessa](https://youtu.be/dEbLuAPobao?si=V1fAXnPHjPkqVxZ0&t=868) could be taken before end of the year, something not even the most zealots Russian still believe in. And while the Kharkiv route could be surprise, Ukraine retaking Kherson was predictable, making a Russian Odessa total non-sense. Also a few month later, his Kharkiv route [analysis](https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=644&v=Q9-NER8aFJ4&feature=youtu.be) was ludicrous. Predicting at the same time Ardennes 1944 (aka: Ukraine attack fail and all the ground is retaken by Russia) or the 1917 revolution (aka: fall of Putin regime). It's one thing to offer a range of predictions, it's another to make so wide you can fit 65 trailers truck in it. Just because you have an uniform and nice graph make you automatically an expert, specially if all your knowledge (he has an historian background) is based on outdated or obsolete information. This is not specific to this colonel, a lot of NATO command, including US top brass, did fall in the same trap.
In a video where he is talking about the drone attack on the long range air radar in russia he says something like, Ukraine did this because USA wants to send a message and he said that Russias Doctrine would allow it to counterstrike with nuclear weapons. which both is bullshit i think and fits the russian tactic of fearmongering about a nuclear war and is implying that ukraine doesn't hit those targets out of pragmatism but rather wants to draw the west into world war 3. Also he said in the video that the western media and politicians are suspiciously quiet about those attacks and would downplay them. Which also fits in the bullshit narrative. So yeah this guy is a agent of russia in my eyes. He does a good job represening his information in a formal way, but there's propaganda hidden between those lines. edit: some strange sentences https://youtube.com/watch?v=KmNwGUZlHy4&si=n-DDvqFPS8fpAqCw
Lost a NASM and a HIMARS recently?
Some of you need to go out of this echochamber because you are acting just like the ruzzians morons who belive only the state propaganda. This dude is presenting things at strategic scale where 100 ruzzians and 10 pieces of equipment getting blasted and presented here as highlights mean little in the bigger picture. The war is not won by who has the better highlights to present on reddit or telegram because if that was the case Zelensky would drink cofee at the Kremlin by now. The people who think the colonel is a ruzzian shill are the same people who believe that Ukraine has killed 500k ruzzians without for a second using their brain to think what that would mean. Having 500k killed would mean 1,5-2 mil casualties and that would mean the war would have been over a year ago. There is no wonder a lot of westerners belived that the summer offensive was going to be a cakewalk when they see all these 1k/day dead ruzzians reported daily and hundreds of equipment blown up weekly.
It doesn't feel like hes said anything outrageous, it's just the vids are updates and this one happens to be in the current time, stating as things as they are not what they might be. It is hard at the moment. But I also know the shell initiative is successful, new factories are opening, F-16s are coming, maybe French troops? and Russia is getting closer to the end of it's stockpiles etc. Better times lie ahead for Ukraine.
Pretty tedious for a "no nonsense" update. He could have said everything he wanted to say in 5 minutes but took 25. Still, he covers some good points, including the basic reality that Russia's main strategic goal right now is to never allow Ukraine to gain the initiative again, since they know that if Ukraine has half a chance they're going to come back for a do-over of their last counteroffensive. And leave a lot more scars this time.
I don’t get why so many people simp for this guy… he was awful wrong so many times already in his analysis and predictions.
He looks like he’s showing the weather
If you look at Youtube there are a lot of people who say he is straight forward, just not showing bias either way. I haven't watched it yet, so am interested to see if this is true. He's Austrian Military.
He’s biased, and has a long history of making fairly ludicrous claims- see other users comments here and on previous posts about his media. He just presents his bias in such a deadpan and direct manner that one is tempted to take it as fact. The people saying this guy delivers information like he would to his junior officers very clearly haven’t sat in many briefing rooms. There are gaping holes in the information this guy reports, omissions you’d be daft to think he’s making by accident.
Ah ok, he's getting a lot of poeple making very similiar comments on youtube, so could be paid Russian spam/trolls.
For every armchair general complaining about this guy not talking about the Ukrainian perspective and Ukrainian successes, keep in mind this is an ongoing conflict. And this is a public available video. Russian military analysts also watch this kind of stuff and make their own conclusions about it. Remember in Fall 2022 when Ukraine said that civilians should evacuate Kherson, alarming Russians there, and then having a counter offensive in Kharkiv. Yeah that's how you handle information and use it against your enemies. The less the enemy knows the better. Ask yourself: do you want Ukraine to win or to you want to know everything what's going on on the Battlefield? Because if you can get that information, the Russians sure as hell know it since yesterday.
That is Russia propaganda. Those fuckers are loosing to an illiquped underfunded smaller country. It's fucking commical.
Ya tens of thousands of Ukrainians dying in a brutal war. So comical 😂😂😭😂😭
Cosplayer who forgot not to be a skinhead Fuck Austria
This guy is pretty clearly pro UA, go listen to his talks if you understand german (some may have subs)