We hear reports of 600,000 dead or injured - if it's 70,000 dead, that strikes me as a low percentage of overall casualties. I wonder how many of the injured can return to the battlefield.
[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)
- Thread starter vegster
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
We hear reports of 600,000 dead or injured - if it's 70,000 dead, that strikes me as a low percentage of overall casualties. I wonder how many of the injured can return to the battlefield.
papachris
Well-known member
A article in our Estonian news today that should serve as a reminder not to let a dictator win and start taking over Europe. Klooga is only about 20km from my home.
news.err.ee
80 years on: Remembering the horrific events at Klooga
Thursday, September 19, marks the 80th anniversary of the mass killing of Jews at the Klooga concentration camp.
news.err.ee
Yes, absolutely.
The article does say that real Russian deaths are likely to be far higher - they have only counted those 'verified' by local news reports, social media posting etc.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,281
Definitely remember the Putin off ramp stuff. He certainly didn't want one.
Even more acutely, still remember those first few nights when Zelensky and his team made those evening videos, "I need ammo not a ride" and going to bed each night wondering if we'd awake to news he'd been assassinated.
The few regulars on this thread have all come a long long way together
And who knew you'd become a drone fetishist and bit of an authority back in 2022!
Here's to Ukraine outright victory, Russian defeat and Putins demise.
Even more acutely, still remember those first few nights when Zelensky and his team made those evening videos, "I need ammo not a ride" and going to bed each night wondering if we'd awake to news he'd been assassinated.
The few regulars on this thread have all come a long long way together
And who knew you'd become a drone fetishist and bit of an authority back in 2022!
Here's to Ukraine outright victory, Russian defeat and Putins demise.
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
@Triggaaar thanks for taking the time and trouble to reply in such detail to me. I don't have time to address all of your points, but I'll do what I can.
First, the links you asked for. Youtube is awash with clips predicting the demise of Russia. Check out Joe Blogs for the economics and Times Radio for the more general and military stuff, (there are many links, most of watch I haven't got round to watching) e.g.
Joe Blogs:
Mark Galeotti:
Michael Clarke:
I'll cover some of your other points in a separate post.
First, the links you asked for. Youtube is awash with clips predicting the demise of Russia. Check out Joe Blogs for the economics and Times Radio for the more general and military stuff, (there are many links, most of watch I haven't got round to watching) e.g.
Joe Blogs:
Mark Galeotti:
Michael Clarke:
I'll cover some of your other points in a separate post.
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
It's a given that we can only speculate how this will all end.
I'm no historian, but I can only recall one instance in the last 150 years where Russia has backed down. In Afghanistan fighting the Muhadajine terrorists (now called Taliban?). From my recollection, they pulled out as eventually they realised is was a conflict in which they could not succeed. Probably similar to the reasons US UK et al left Afghanistan more recently.
Clearly we are in different circumstances. Ukraine is not Afghanistan and the reasons for Russia being there are not the same. But perhaps most different is Putin is not the same as the Russian leader of that Afghan conflict (forgotten who it was now, Bresniev?).
Can anyone remind us the detail of how that conflict was ended? Are there any similarities?
I'm no historian, but I can only recall one instance in the last 150 years where Russia has backed down. In Afghanistan fighting the Muhadajine terrorists (now called Taliban?). From my recollection, they pulled out as eventually they realised is was a conflict in which they could not succeed. Probably similar to the reasons US UK et al left Afghanistan more recently.
Clearly we are in different circumstances. Ukraine is not Afghanistan and the reasons for Russia being there are not the same. But perhaps most different is Putin is not the same as the Russian leader of that Afghan conflict (forgotten who it was now, Bresniev?).
Can anyone remind us the detail of how that conflict was ended? Are there any similarities?
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
@Triggaaar you didn't understand my logic, when I wrote this:
'We don't want them to think they are losing! We want them to think they are winning for as long as possible, so they can be further drained of troops, money, morale and a chance of rebuilding to go again.'
I probably didn't express it very well. I tend to cut corners. I'll approach it from a different angle, to try to closer match Prof. Snyder's view of Russian imperialism.
We are all aware of Russia's sense of entitlement in invading Ukraine. They describe Ukrainians as little Russians, and feel they have the right to kill them indiscriminately.
Remember the 40 mile column of tanks and other vehicles early on in the war? They contained dress uniforms for the Russian occupants to be welcomed with open arms in Kyiv.
These are both examples of the most extraordinary Russian arrogance. How did they come to be like this? Well, we know that inside the Kremlin, Putin has eliminated all dissent, to be left with a team of 'yes men and women' or people who are terrified of him. He has surrounded himself with people who tell him what they think he wants to hear. They are afraid of imparting bad news.
Folklore tells us that Putin doesn't use a mobile phone, nor the internet. So it is plausible that he doesn't know the full extent of say, the attack on the ammo dump at Toropets, believing the official Russian account instead.
Further, I read the other day that he is in sole charge of tactical decisions on the front line (yes, that's what I read), and that it takes days for news to trickle up to him, and for him to make whatever decision is needed.
If, IF he continues to think he is winning, his tactics won't be the right ones, will they? They may or may not be correct for a completely different combat situation.
This is why we should want him to continue to think he is winning...
'We don't want them to think they are losing! We want them to think they are winning for as long as possible, so they can be further drained of troops, money, morale and a chance of rebuilding to go again.'
I probably didn't express it very well. I tend to cut corners. I'll approach it from a different angle, to try to closer match Prof. Snyder's view of Russian imperialism.
We are all aware of Russia's sense of entitlement in invading Ukraine. They describe Ukrainians as little Russians, and feel they have the right to kill them indiscriminately.
Remember the 40 mile column of tanks and other vehicles early on in the war? They contained dress uniforms for the Russian occupants to be welcomed with open arms in Kyiv.
These are both examples of the most extraordinary Russian arrogance. How did they come to be like this? Well, we know that inside the Kremlin, Putin has eliminated all dissent, to be left with a team of 'yes men and women' or people who are terrified of him. He has surrounded himself with people who tell him what they think he wants to hear. They are afraid of imparting bad news.
Folklore tells us that Putin doesn't use a mobile phone, nor the internet. So it is plausible that he doesn't know the full extent of say, the attack on the ammo dump at Toropets, believing the official Russian account instead.
Further, I read the other day that he is in sole charge of tactical decisions on the front line (yes, that's what I read), and that it takes days for news to trickle up to him, and for him to make whatever decision is needed.
If, IF he continues to think he is winning, his tactics won't be the right ones, will they? They may or may not be correct for a completely different combat situation.
This is why we should want him to continue to think he is winning...
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,281
Maybe Bias, but General Budanov of Ukraines GUR said last week, Russia will need to have resolution by max early 2026, as economy will start to collapse from mid-late 2025.
Russia faces economic crisis peak by summer 2025, says Ukrainian intelligence - Euromaidan Press
Ukrainian intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov has revealed that North Korean munitions are having a substantial impact on the intensity of combat operations in Ukraine.
euromaidanpress.com
Last edited:
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,281
There have been lots of reports that Putin genuinely believes the shit he's says, like Nazis wandering the streets of Kyiv as that what he's told from his inner circle
Shit in, shit out.
Coupled with his paranoia, going nuts in lockdown and his ex USSR beliefs that the CIA are hiding in every cupboard and out to get him, it's very possible he genuinely lives in some deluded alter reality, rather than being fully aware of actual realities.
Let's hope so, as it may well make him over confident and basing crucial decisions on fallacies.
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
I've only read the headlines, but here they are:Maybe Bias, but General Budanov of Ukraines GUR said last week, Russia will need to have resolution by max early 2026, as economy will start to collapse from mid-late 2025.
Russia faces economic crisis peak by summer 2025, says Ukrainian intelligence - Euromaidan Press
Ukrainian intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov has revealed that North Korean munitions are having a substantial impact on the intensity of combat operations in Ukraine.
'US Security Adviser: Ukraine’s sovereignty crucial in any peace plan
Jake Sullivan, speaking at a conference in Kyiv via video, warned against peace proposals that sideline Ukrainian interests in favor of external agendas.'
Very timely !
Edit: Just realised that the article I'm referring to is the one below the one you linked. Oops.
Last edited:
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
Exactly.
It has always surprised me the scale of the Russian losses, and the propensity of Russia to send new recruits straight into the meat grinder - even though they will be aware of the scale of previous losses.
But perhaps they aren't. Perhaps nobody tells them. Perhaps official true data isn't actually captured. Perhaps the official (false) data of Russian losses is the only data in town.
Thanks. I've watched some of Joe's videos (he blinks too much) and they're interesting. He's certainly highlighting Russia's economic problems, but I don't see that as a conclusion that they'll be out of money next year. The third video was about using the long range missiles, and that didn't give Russia a year either. I didn't watch the other one.
I think I did/do understand that, I just don't see the need for preventing them going again due to troop losses. As long as they have to give back the land, and Ukraine join nato, they won't go again. They only go again if we capitulate and give in to their demands.
Yeah it's quite possible he's really out of touch with the reality, although I personally don't think he's taking front line decisions, as it's just not that feasible.
But if that were to be the case, how do you think it would develop? Russia are dug in and Ukraine don't have the numbers to force them back, so I think you're relying on a coup, based on the idea that Putin thinks he's winning, but those around him have concluded they will lose? I just don't see the need for someone to take the huge risk of trying to remove him. They themselves will be safe, so why risk anything? It won't matter to them if Russia is losing.
The route to victory just looks easier to me if Putin sees it's over, and has to withdraw.
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
I think I see where we differ.
My thinking is that this is about the future security, self-determination and prosperity of Ukraine. Nothing else matters.
I am in favour of the absolute, total collapse of Russia, just to make absolutely sure, belt and braces, that they can never, ever hope to invade another country ever again. You are making the assumption, which may or may not be correct, that Ukraine joining NATO would guarantee against such a future action by Russia. I would counsel against that assumption. A defeated Russia will be bitter and vengeful. It has to be disabled, economically and militarily. Even if Ukraine wins, with all occupied land returned to Ukraine, it would only take a bit of post-war belligerence by Russia to strangle Ukrainian trade from their Sea of Azov ports. And it all starts again.....
Nobody is relying on a coup, which may or may not happen. There are so many factors in play, not to mention the unknown number of 'bulldogs in 'the sack' made famous by Churchill, in the Kremlin. Who is to say that the victorious bulldog won't be worse than Putin?
You think Putin is going to withdraw if he sees it's over? I admire your optimism. Personally, I've never been able to get inside Putin's head and anticipate his next move.
This is why we should force his next move for him. Or rather, gently apprise him of what has happened, and present him with his options.
But there's another important point here. How can any Ukrainian sleep easy, if having won the war, they see Putin still there, bitter and revanchist, still inside the Kremlin?
Ukraine deserves better than that. And the west is too invested in this, to allow Putin to get away with it.
I think Ukraine joining NATO would give them decent security, yes.
While that would be nice, I don't believe it's an achievable aim.
I don't think Russia would be able to do that.
Well he's definitely not going to withdraw if he thinks he's winning, so some chance is better than no chance. And if he's losing and doesn't withdraw, then that would put him in a similar position as you'd like - where he's losing but thinks he's winning. So I don't see any benefit from him thinking he's winning.
I've not disagreed with that. In fact I don't see how he's being forced into anything if he thinks he's winning.
If Ukraine get their land back, their soldiers return home, they join NATO and NATO forces move in to give them added security, while they watch Putin back home try and desperately cling on to power/life, they'll be bloody delighted.
You want Russia to lose everything. That's fine with me, but I don't think it's likely to happen, and I think you're ignoring what would be amazing in favour of what would be perfect.
- Aug 24, 2020
- 7,142
If we continue this discussion, we will end up repeating ourselves.
I want the best possible secure future for Ukraine. I know you do too. What we differ on are the pre-requisites for that to happen.
Sirnormangall
Well-known member
- Sep 21, 2017
- 3,184
The number of Russian dead perhaps excludes those disposed of by the mobile crematoria
Sirnormangall
Well-known member
- Sep 21, 2017
- 3,184
I can’t remember the detail behind the Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan, but I think they began to realise ( like the US) that it was a war that they weren’t going to win. I think too that the casualties became unacceptably high, leading to increasing protest from bereaved Mums and widows. Given the Russian casualties are significantly greater in Ukraine than Afghanistan, as we’ve said on here before, you would have thought Putin will find it increasingly difficult to keep a lid on the voice of the bereaved.
As far as Russia’s previous war record, they didn’t cover themselves in glory in Chechnya, though they would no doubt dismiss that as an internal dust up rather than a war.
I’ve just started to read Mark Galleotti’s “Putin’s Wars” which gives a lot of interesting insight into the Russian armed services and how it’s been allowed to decay over the past 30 years. I think we’d all like to see the back of Putin but we ought to be concerned that it doesn’t then turn into a lawless country where there’s no control over its military arsenal.