Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

2mufc0 said:
This is propaganda, makes no logical sense.
Click to expand...

It makes sense when you factor in how deep into the bowels of Russian society (ie freeing prisoners to fight) Putin has had to go to replenish battlefield losses. They are obviously going to conceal the true number, although we can safely presume it is far more than what the Russian government has admitted thus far - for obvious reasons to preserve domestic support for the war.
 
2mufc0 said:
This is propaganda, makes no logical sense.
Click to expand...
Including injured it's not that crazy
They were just throwing bodies at a relatively modern army with decent artillery for a long time. Coming up to 2 years of war and an absolutely humungous frontline.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Including injured it's not that crazy
They were just throwing bodies at a relatively modern army with decent artillery for a long time. Coming up to 2 years of war and an absolutely humungous frontline.
Click to expand...

They don't call it the meat grinder for nothing.
 
Raoul said:
It makes sense when you factor in how deep into the bowels of Russian society (ie freeing prisoners to fight) Putin has had to go to replenish battlefield losses. They are obviously going to conceal the true number, although we can safely presume it is far more than what the Russian government has admitted thus far - for obvious reasons to preserve domestic support for the war.
Click to expand...
tomaldinho1 said:
Including injured it's not that crazy
They were just throwing bodies at a relatively modern army with decent artillery for a long time. Coming up to 2 years of war and an absolutely humungous frontline.
Click to expand...
The Russian operation would have collapsed if it lost almost 90% of it's army and Ukraine would have sent them packing. Any army would.
 
2mufc0 said:
The Russian operation would have collapsed if it lost almost 90% of it's army and Ukraine would have sent them packing. Any army would.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the whole point they’ve had many mobilisations since then + convicts + Wagner? It’s only saying the initial standing army at the start of the war.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Isn’t the whole point they’ve had many mobilisations since then + convicts + Wagner? It’s only saying the initial standing army at the start of the war.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt scores of Russians have been killed but this 87% is fantasy, using one of Raoul's favourite punchlines 'for domestic consumption'.
 
2mufc0 said:
I have no doubt scores of Russians have been killed but this 87% is fantasy, using one of Raoul's favourite punchlines 'for domestic consumption'.
Click to expand...
To repeat isn’t it the number for all injuries as well. Hence why so high.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
To repeat isn’t it the number for all injuries as well. Hence why so high.
Click to expand...
An injured soldier who can't fight is pretty much good as dead for an army. I mean think about it, losing 87% professional soldiers and replacing them with criminals and civilians at such a fast rate without collapsing , it's highly unlikely.
 
2mufc0 said:
An injured soldier who can't fight is pretty much good as dead for an army. I mean think about it, losing 87% professional soldiers and replacing them with criminals and civilians at such a fast rate without collapsing , it's highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

They’ve had multiple mass mobilizations; something that wouldn’t be necessary unless a vast majority of their troops were killed or injured and not replacing them could result in losing the war, so we shouldn’t be surprised if the numbers are closer to accurate than not and Putin has been selling us wolf tickets all along.
 
Raoul said:
It makes sense when you factor in how deep into the bowels of Russian society (ie freeing prisoners to fight) Putin has had to go to replenish battlefield losses. They are obviously going to conceal the true number, although we can safely presume it is far more than what the Russian government has admitted thus far - for obvious reasons to preserve domestic support for the war.
Click to expand...
It makes zero sense. If it was the case, then Russia would've already crashed out of the war. You can't lose 87% of your fighting forces and 2/3 of your tanks while keeping on fighting in a meaningful manner on a front that large. That's an amount of casualties that can't be compensated for, no matter how much cannon fodder you throw in. Russia would've militarily collapsed.

Absurd claims for propaganda purposes (and help pushing for that financial envelope) rather than an objective reflection of the reality on the ground.
 
That_Bloke said:
It makes zero sense. If it was the case, then Russia would've already crashed out of the war. You can't lose 87% of your fighting forces and 2/3 of your tanks while keeping on fighting in a meaningful manner on a front that large. That's an amount of casualties that can't be compensated for, no matter how much cannon fodder you throw in. Russia would've militarily collapsed.

Absurd claims for propaganda purposes (and help pushing for that financial envelope) rather than an objective reflection of the reality on the ground.
Click to expand...

Thats why they’ve had multiple mass mobilizations. If they hasn’t lost a vast majority of their people, there wouldn’t have been a need to constantly replenish them.
 
calodo2003 said:
This fecking guy...

Click to expand...


Wouldn’t be surprised to learn there’s some degree of Russian involvement in his candidacy. Putin tried with Tara Reid last time, and is massively incentivized to try again.
 
Raoul said:
Thats why they’ve had multiple mass mobilizations. If they hasn’t lost a vast majority of their people, there wouldn’t have been a need to constantly replenish them.
Click to expand...
They've had heavy losses, that's absolutely a given, and why they partially mobilized and used prisoners but if it was in the numbers given by a totally not biased american source while Zelenskiy is in Washington right now, then the Ukrainians would be in Crimea by now. 90% is akin to the almost total destruction of your fighting forces. Cannon fodder will never replace trained professional soldiers and if you lose 90% of the latter you simply lose the ability to mount coordinated military operations in any meaningful sense, you collapse and ultimately sue for peace. You're done. That's my opinion anyway.

War propaganda is always about minimizing your own losses and exaggerating the enemy's. I'm all for helping Ukraine and stand on their side but I'm not willing to give into this blind cheerleading and believing numbers coming right from Disneyland.
 
That_Bloke said:
Cannon fodder will never replace trained professional soldiers and if you lose 90% of the latter
Click to expand...

As others have tried to point out, the number does not claim to be from their main trained forces. Obviously a large part of their casualties are from the soldiers drafted later.
 
That_Bloke said:
They've had heavy losses, that's absolutely a given, and why they partially mobilized and used prisoners but if it was in the numbers given by a totally not biased american source while Zelenskiy is in Washington right now, then the Ukrainians would be in Crimea by now. 90% is akin to the almost total destruction of your fighting forces. Cannon fodder will never replace trained professional soldiers and if you lose 90% of the latter you simply lose the ability to mount coordinated military operations in any meaningful sense, you collapse and ultimately sue for peace. You're done. That's my opinion anyway.

War propaganda is always about minimizing your own losses and exaggerating the enemy's. I'm all for helping Ukraine and stand on their side but I'm not willing to give into this blind cheerleading and believing numbers coming right from Disneyland.
Click to expand...

Unless they refer that the professional soldiers + cannon fodder that had been lost the last years equals 90% the initial force. Lets say, you have 200,000 initially, and you lose 50.000 professionals and after, you lose 130,000 of the mobiks. Equals to 180.000 in total, that is the 90% of the 200,000 IN NUMBERS. Just a mathematical trick to confuse people for propagandistic purposes without technically lying
 
That_Bloke said:
It makes zero sense. If it was the case, then Russia would've already crashed out of the war. You can't lose 87% of your fighting forces and 2/3 of your tanks while keeping on fighting in a meaningful manner on a front that large. That's an amount of casualties that can't be compensated for, no matter how much cannon fodder you throw in. Russia would've militarily collapsed.

Absurd claims for propaganda purposes (and help pushing for that financial envelope) rather than an objective reflection of the reality on the ground.
Click to expand...
It's 87% of their PRE WAR army size, not the total numbre of soldiers sent to the war. The total numbre of Russian soldiers sent to Ukraine are probably well over 700,000 by now.
I don't see why they couldn't compensate for losses like that when they have millions of reserves to mobilize.
 
Wirecard was supposed to be Germany's crown jewel in fintech. Didn't work out well either.

 
A good thread on the implications of Ukraine not winning

 
Raoul said:
A good thread on the implications of Ukraine not winning

Click to expand...

I think the most interesting point made there is that the US would have to increase its military presence in Eastern Europe and that would divert resources from other areas.
 
From the Estonian MoD. Essentially it seems the point is (as others have made) 2024 must be a year of strengthening Ukraine to be ready for 2025.

2024 will provide a building year for beefing up Ukraine’s manpower and lifting the production volumes of critical equipment and ammunition to required levels. By 2025, the collective efforts in support of Ukraine will have provided a sufficient increase of critical skills, capabilities and stockpiles for Ukraine, unlocking the power for inflicting the required level of attrition on Russia.
Click to expand...

 
ExoduS said:
I am not sure if it is wise for Ukrainians to brag that they are supporting Israel. Supporting an obvious aggressor while at the same time fighting of an alleged aggressor does not look good.
Click to expand...

They are both democracies who were attacked neighboring by autocracies, so its obvious there will be mutual support. This is also before we get to the fact that Ukraine's President is Jewish, Ukraine and Israel are US allies, and Hamas being directly courted by the Kremlin.
 
Raoul said:
They are both democracies who were attacked neighboring by autocracies, so its obvious there will be mutual support. This is also before we get to the fact that Ukraine's President is Jewish, Ukraine and Israel are US allies, and Hamas being directly courted by the Kremlin.
Click to expand...

Ukrainians and Israelis have shown their commitment to democracy by how they are treating the minorities in their respective countries. Unlike unlucky Palestinians, Russian minority in Ukraine had someone to fall back on for support.
 
ExoduS said:
Ukrainians and Israelis have shown their commitment to democracy by how they are treating the minorities in their respective countries. Unlike unlucky Palestinians, Russian minority in Ukraine had someone to fall back on for support.
Click to expand...

The so called Russian minority are actually Ukrainians since a large swath of southern and eastern Ukrainians speak Russian, but don't want anything to do with being a part of Putin's Russia. If you're concerned about minorities, perhaps you should begin your analysis by looking at how Crimean Tartars are faring in totalitarian, Putin occupied Crimea.
 
ExoduS said:
I am not sure if it is wise for Ukrainians to brag that they are supporting Israel. Supporting an obvious aggressor while at the same time fighting of an alleged aggressor does not look good.
Click to expand...
What makes Israel an obvious aggressor but Russia an alleged one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.