6
Ukraine lacks soldiers to stop Russia (elpais.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Russia is very much ending it, hence all the panic over Ukrainian army collapse that's unfolding in western media right now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    Why only now, what's the benefit of keeping it on before

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Because it's a war of attrition and it took a long time for the AFU to reach the point of collapse. Russia didn't do big arrow offensives because those would've been very costly in terms of equipment and manpower as Ukraine found out during its fabled offensive. Instead, Russia chose to use its massive artillery advantage to grind out the AFU instead, and now we're seeing the results of that approach. Here's an analysis from an actual expert if you're interested

    https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    We gotta wonder whose benefit it is to keep on prolonging while the official story is different

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Given that Russia and Ukraine almost came to an agreement two months into the war and the west sabotaged it, I think there's little question about that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    LOL yeah, the current strat has definitely not been costly...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The question is whom it's been more costly for, the west or Russia.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Well lets see, 0 deaths for the west, minor investment compared to running an actual war...

    As of October 2024, the estimated number of Russian deaths and costs in Ukraine are:

    Russian deaths

    The U.S. estimates that Russia has suffered 115,000 deaths and 500,000 injuries in the war.

    Western intelligence estimates vary, but some say the number of dead could be as high as 200,000.

    Russian costs

    Russia's losses in Ukraine are greater than all of its casualties since World War II combined. The war has also set back Russia's military modernization efforts by nearly two decades.

    Ukrainian deaths

    A U.S. official estimates that Ukraine has suffered more than 57,500 deaths and 250,000 injuries. However, Ukraine rarely comments on the scale of its battlefield deaths.

    Armored vehicle losses

    Russia has lost more than 8,000 armored vehicles, including 2,700 tanks. Ukraine has lost nearly 3,000 armored vehicles, including 740 tanks.

    Recruitment

    Russia has relaxed recruitment standards to allow older civilians and convicts to fight.

    Estimates vary widely due to a number of factors, including Ukraine's reluctance to disclose its losses and the fact that U.S. intelligence analysts have focused more on Russia's casualties.

    Ukraine is not in the west. So... If it's Russia Vs. West, they're losing really badly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Well lets see, 0 deaths for the west, minor investment compared to running an actual war…

    Many thousands of western mercenaries have died in Ukraine last I checked, and European economies are in a tailspin right now. IMF just cut the forecast for Germany again https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/imf-cuts-forecasts-german-economy-this-year-next-2024-10-22/

    Meanwhile, Russian economy is growing faster than ever, and the World Bank has now reclassified Russia as a high income country as well https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/leadership/directors/eds23/brief/russia-was-classified-as-high-income-country

    The U.S. estimates that Russia has suffered 115,000 deaths and 500,000 injuries in the war.

    Anybody who accepts these numbers uncritically is incredibly gullible. The only western numbers that had any actual methodology came from mediazona which managed to account for something like 40k casualties. Given that Russia has a population of 144 million, I'll let you do the math on that.

    Russia’s losses in Ukraine are greater than all of its casualties since World War II combined. The war has also set back Russia’s military modernization efforts by nearly two decades.

    😂

    Russia has lost more than 8,000 armored vehicles, including 2,700 tanks. Ukraine has lost nearly 3,000 armored vehicles, including 740 tanks.

    😂

    I love how you just guzzle propaganda completely uncritically. If Russia lost that many vehicles then the war would've been over a long time ago. Nobody with even a minimally functioning brain could believe this.

    Ukraine is not in the west. So… If it’s Russia Vs. West, they’re losing really badly.

    Ukraine is very obviously a western proxy.

    I'll just leave you with an explanation of how the war is going from somebody with an actual clue on the subject, happy coping

    https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    lol "rusi.org" yeah I'm not clicking that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Do explain why you wouldn't click a link from The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) which is the world’s oldest and the UK’s leading defence and security think tank.

    🤡

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Pretending Ukraine was winning was necessary to send them more weapons. They would never get funding for a war of attrition which ends in their loss.

    Now the obvious conclusion is unfolding and our media slowly changes tone as if they are surprised Ukraine cannot win.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Though the weapons have been sent with the premise that Ukraine has been losing

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    No, it was always "Ukraine is winning but might lose if we don't help" because obviously if they just said "Ukraine is winning" then the help would be not needed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It was "Ukraine is on the verge of losing each second but a few weapons can keep their head above water until a peace is negotiated"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No it wasn't, nobody official in Ukraine or west even talked about negotiating peace, the terms was always basically unconditional surrender of Russia and conquest of Crimea.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wow haven't seen claims Russia would surrender, sounds like a far cry

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    I mean they didn't officially called Russia to surrender, but after the first talks were sabotaged by Johnson, official stance of Ukraine, supported by their western helpers was (and still is) that Russia should entirely left borders of Ukraine including Donbas and also give them Crimea. The only situation in which this could happen is Russia's surrender (and historically such maximum one sided demands also only happened after surrendering of one side).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent