Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Ukraine making progress in counteroffensive, U.S. officials say

U.S. officials have told CBS News it appears the Ukrainian military has made progress in advancing on the Russian-held city of Tokmak– a vital barrier city that stands between the Ukrainian forces and the southeastern city of Melitopol.

A U.S. official told CBS News on Thursday that Ukrainian forces have made it through a Russian minefield north of Tokmak and are now engaging with the first line of Russian defenses holding the city.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukrain...-us-f16/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=230501841
 
Russia’s objective was to disrupt a weapons pipeline through Poland that accounts for more than 80 percent of the military hardware delivered to Ukraine, a massive flow that has altered the course of the war and that Russia has seemed helpless to interdict, according to Polish and Western security officials.

 
^From the NYT article.

Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
But Russians outnumber Ukrainians on the battlefield almost three to one, and Russia has a larger population from which to replenish its ranks.

Ukraine has around 500,000 troops, including active-duty, reserve and paramilitary troops, according to analysts. By contrast, Russia has almost triple that number, with 1,330,000 active-duty, reserve and paramilitary troops — most of the latter from the Wagner Group.
 
If true, that is awful for Ukraine, Russia has 3 times the population after all, if they can't even achieve twice the kill ratio, they are in trouble in the long run.
 
If true, that is awful for Ukraine, Russia has 3 times the population after all, if they can't even achieve twice the kill ratio, they are in trouble in the long run.
And Ukraine seems to have become casualty averse too according to that NYT article:

American officials say they fear that Ukraine has become casualty averse, one reason it has been cautious about pressing ahead with the counteroffensive. Almost any big push against dug-in Russian defenders protected by minefields would result in huge numbers of losses.

In just a year and a half, Ukraine’s military deaths have already surpassed the number of American troops who died during the nearly two decades U.S. units were in Vietnam (roughly 58,000) and about equal the number of Afghan security forces killed over the entire war in Afghanistan, from 2001 to 2021 (around 69,000).
 
15,000 Soviet soldiers killed over the course of eight years in Afghanistan.
 
That 120,000 killed in action number seems roughly equal to US KIA numbers in the Pacific theater. It's just madness.

Yep. It is just unconscionable to think one country can lose this many soldiers on the attack in 18 months of war, especially when history buffs like us know that the Pacific theater saw some of the bloodiest and harshest battles known to man. One tenth (1/10) of those total American KIA were lost in Okinawa alone.
 
Yep. It is just unconscionable to think one country can lose this many soldiers on the attack in 18 months of war, especially when history buffs like us know that the Pacific theater saw some of the bloodiest and harshest battles known to man. One tenth (1/10) of those total American KIA were lost in Okinawa alone.

Russia is fighting a war of attrition here, its obviously very costly for them, but in a war of attrition, it helps to have a population much larger than your opponent.

Having said that, they may never run out of men, but equipment? Thats more difficult, at some point, they have to run out of the soviet-era equipment, only question is when.
 
Russia is fighting a war of attrition here, its obviously very costly for them, but in a war of attrition, it helps to have a population much larger than your opponent.

Having said that, they may never run out of men, but equipment? Thats more difficult, at some point, they have to run out of the soviet-era equipment, only question is when.

The US were also fighting a war of attrition during WW2, but it became glaringly too much as the conflict entered in the few chapters prior to its end. The casualties at Iwo Jima and Okinawa followed by the projections of Operation Downfall were the reasons why the usual strategy could no longer carry on in a possible invasion of Japan.

The main difference between the US then and Russia now is that the latter have stopped making progress and are even backing off in certain areas. That is even worse from any military standpoint.
 
I refuse to believe they're anywhere near that high.
Because? Not that I necessarily believe them. However, this is coming from Western officials whose estimates tend to be usually more conservative than Ukraine's own reported numbers.
 
Because? Not that I necessarily believe them. However, this is coming from Western officials whose estimates tend to be usually more conservative than Ukraine's own reported numbers.

Because the last credible western estimates we had were a tenth of that (maybe an exaggeration, I don't remember the exact numbers). It seems weird that there are so many killed compared to wounded, isn't the difference usually much larger?
 
Russia is fighting a war of attrition here, its obviously very costly for them, but in a war of attrition, it helps to have a population much larger than your opponent.

Having said that, they may never run out of men, but equipment? Thats more difficult, at some point, they have to run out of the soviet-era equipment, only question is when.

That assumes most Russian men are willing to go and fight in Ukraine. I think Ukraine has actually more men willing to fight than Putin. I don't say that all of Ukrainians are ready to fight of course, but it's natural that people are more willing to risk their lives to defend themselves and their loved ones than to attack. There are also many women serving in Ukraine's forces, in contrast to Russia. Putin might increase his propaganda to try and find more willing slaves or mercenaries, but there's only so much he can say that he hasn't said yet.
I believe time is in Ukraine's favor here, as long as the west doesn't stop it's support.
 
Because the last credible western estimates we had were a tenth of that (maybe an exaggeration, I don't remember the exact numbers). It seems weird that there are so many killed compared to wounded, isn't the difference usually much larger?
I think the NYT article pointed out that treating and evacuating the wounded has been very hard because of the nature of the war.

The UK MoD last estimates in February were about 40-60K Russian killed. We're about 6 months further now with a Ukrainian counter-offensive going on as well. I do think 120K is on the extremely high side of the range of estimates though.
 
I think the NYT article pointed out that treating and evacuating the wounded has been very hard because of the nature of the war.

The UK MoD last estimates in February were about 40-60K Russian killed. We're about 6 months further now with a Ukrainian counter-offensive going on as well. I do think 120K is on the extremely high side of the range of estimates though.

Well, the more the merrier.
 
And a new war crime. So far 7 dead and over a 100 wounded. I'm sure Useless Nations will condemn this attack.


 
You can be disappointed in how ineffective it is in doing anything about this invasion, but the UN has improved the lives of hundreds of millions of people since it was founded.
During the cold war it definitely had more impact. The stakes were higher and it seemed like both blocks used it is as a place to wage ideological duels.

In the last years though, it does seem like an organisation without any real power. Wonder when this downfall started ? Maybe after Bush invaded Iraq without a security council resolution ?
 
During the cold war it definitely had more impact. The stakes were higher and it seemed like both blocks used it is as a place to wage ideological duels.

In the last years though, it does seem like an organisation without any real power. Wonder when this downfall started ? Maybe after Bush invaded Iraq without a security council resolution ?

Sure, but the UN does a lot more than (fail to) manage geopolitics. We all wish it could do more, but I think we shouldn't forget all the good it actually does.
 
Sure, but the UN does a lot more than (fail to) manage geopolitics. We all wish it could do more, but I think we shouldn't forget all the good it actually does.
It certainly used to but most of those achievements were during the last half of 20th century , I believe.
 
During the cold war it definitely had more impact. The stakes were higher and it seemed like both blocks used it is as a place to wage ideological duels.

In the last years though, it does seem like an organisation without any real power. Wonder when this downfall started ? Maybe after Bush invaded Iraq without a security council resolution ?

It began when the UN failed to get things done in Sierra Leone, Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda and then Kosovo. The 1990s was the decade that convinced me of how useless the United Nations are when they were needed the most.
 
Last edited:
Sure, but the UN does a lot more than (fail to) manage geopolitics. We all wish it could do more, but I think we shouldn't forget all the good it actually does.
I know people involved in humanitarian relief in africa who tell me in some places unicef is the only thing stopping an absolute disaster.
 
I know people involved in humanitarian relief in africa who tell me in some places unicef is the only thing stopping an absolute disaster.

Both my cousins worked on the UN and one of them managed a humanitarian organisation in south Sudan and she has always said everything is a million times worse than people think because nearly all journalists are afraid to venture in there and report.
 
An impressive number from the Netherlands. MH17 sends its regards.


Together with some other countries, Ukraine can get a three-digit number of F-16s.

edit: okay, it seems like these are their planes in total and the exact amount is not clear yet. But it shouldn't be too far off.

 
Last edited:
An impressive number from the Netherlands. MH17 sends its regards.


Together with some other countries, Ukraine can get a three-digit number of F-16s.

edit: okay, it seems like these are their planes in total and the exact amount is not clear yet. But it shouldn't be too far off.



They're well under way with the F35 replacement so I'd think they will let all of them go to Ukraine. They're all MLU models too so will be a great tool if Ukrainian pilots can operate them properly.
 
Denmark confirms the donation of 19 F-16s to Ukraine. The aircrafts will be donated in 3 batches during 2024 and 2025 so it won't affect the Danish airforces transition to F35s.