> For instance, yesterday, on April 30th, Ukrainian defenders managed to eliminate 1,120 enemy soldiers.
If the numbers are anywhere close to being accurate, they're massive. They could very well be the highest numbers Europe has seen since World War II.
Losses not equal to kills though. A wounded soldier that limps away from a morter/drone strike is still counted as a "loss" in terms of being removed from the battlefield.
In a way a wounded soldier places a bigger burden on the opponent as they require transportation, healthcare, rehab and eventually disability-support back home. Provided Russia cares enough about the Mobniks they drive inte Ukrainian lines.
Counting casualties in wars is a complicated business.
Prisoners, wounded who can return to the fight, wounded who can't, wounded prisoners, killed, wounded but will die from war wounds. You can also have soldiers whose equipment is in some sense destroyed and then they aren't much use. E.g. A tank driver isn't much use without a tank.
For Russia right now they are also likely 'losing' a lot of soldiers who know if they surrender the Ukrainians will treat them well and even if they have to stay in Ukraine forever after the war it is not a huge problem, if anything it would probably be better than going back to Russia if Ukraine is integrated into the west.
Tank driver isn't much use without a tank? You'll never make it in the Russian army with that kind of attitude. You just promote the driver to infantry and send him in the next wave!
Casualty also means wounded or killed and not just killed. But people mix that one up all the time.
People aren’t great with words.
ETA: in some military contexts, it seems casualties might specifically refer to a death. The use of casualties in civilian reporting, and many military contexts, will usually refer to deaths and non-death reasons that people can no longer fight.
Something i wondered about. If a soldier left the battlefield wounded, got treatment and came back 2 months later. This time he gets killed. Will he count as 2 casualties?
Absolutely. A person can be a casualty twice!
There’s not an easy way to uniquely track enemy soldiers, although Russia themselves might know the true numbers if they keep good records.
Casualty is generally reserved for wounded enough to be unfit for service. Having a sprained ankle takes off you of front line foot a week or two won’t count as a casualty. It’s usually referring to more severe injuries which make coming back to battle at any point unlikely.
That’s correct. People get the two mixed up easily. You could even do propaganda by openly dating correct numbers, just casualties on one side and dead on the other.
„In the war between Australia and the Emus, Australia only had 20.000 dead, while the Emus had 60.000 casualties“ for example. Many would not see the nuance.
Even if the government doesn't care, families often do, so the cost is still there, it is just not coming from the government but the individuals, so it is still a burden for the Russian society.
There once was this guy Basil II and he understood this concept very well. So when he captured 15,000 Bulgar soldiers he had every single one of their eyes plucked out except for one soldier who only had only one plucked out. He was spared his eye so he could lead them back home. 15,000 newly blind soldiers is quite a burden on a society.
Lol, you think Russia gives soldiers wounded in battle the same support as the West. The only thing Russia offers is a small "severance" to the survivors of those KIA as an enrollment incentive..
It kinda sucks to be a Russian guy in your 20s from a less desirable part of the federation as you're now officially designated as cannon fodder.
That would assume that Ruzzia would provide and pay for transportation, healthcare, rehab and eventually disability support for wounded soldiers. Which they won't.
> They could very well be the highest numbers Europe has seen since World War II.
They are. This is without a doubt the bloodiest war in Europe since WW2.
We'll never know the true numbers. But regardless of what people want to believe, there's no shortage of footage showing hundreds of corpses strewn around fighting positions. It's surreal to watch so many dead in one place.
But Russia wants war trophies, more land and Ukrainians removed from this world, so I guess the sacrifices are somehow worth it for them.
I remember that during Covid, researchers refuted the ridiculously low death tolls reported by Russia and China by comparing the numbers of overall deaths in that year to previous years, from which they estimated the Covid related difference.
In India's case you didn't even need data, it was plain for all to see. My father is the operation and maintenance engineer of several crematoriums in one of Indian Metro cities and he would send me pictures of dozens of bodies piled onto each other because even by running the electric crematoriums 24x7 they couldn't cope with the sheer number of bodies. Hospitals would merely put comorbidities as cause of death instead of covid to hide the real count but there was no way to hide the truth in crematoriums.
Terrifying.
WHO’s estimate in October 2021 was 4.7M excess deaths in India - and the official death toll as of now is just over 500k. (For comparison, in the US, excess deaths might add another 100-200k to our official counts)
Yeah the official count was a flat out lie. During the height of second wave in India, the govt stat for my city was that there were daily 50-80 deaths, while in reality the crematoriums managed by my father would often have hundred bodies or more. (Covid patients were being essentially packaged by the hospitals after death because there was a hysteria about dead bodies spreading covid so they were easily identifiable).
During Russian offensives 800+ casualties a day is normal, usually climbs to 1000+ if they're getting particularly screwed over. Usually because of their own bad choices.
There's definitely wiggle room with the numbers, because complete accuracy is just damn close to impossible, even if we disregard propaganda inflated numbers.
Just remember that casualties means wounded and dead, not just dead. Though a large number of wounded won't fight again soon, and some not at all. So effective fighting force does decrease quite a lot.
That said, a thousand casualties is believable, when you consider the amount of troops and size of the frontline involved.
Over a thousand soldiers being neutralized per day is not sustainable for Russia unless they start recruiting mercenaries from among their new friends in Africa.
Well there's your answer, it straight up isn't sustainable. But they have enough troops to continue for quite a while yet.
Let's say out of a thousand, three hundred die, one hundred are too crippled to ever fight again, and the remaining six hundred recover over the course of a few months and are sent to fight again. This is just an example and not necessarily accurate ratios. But this does cause them to have better long term sustain than a thousand casualties a day implies.
And Russia definitely is trying everything it can in order to get more fighters without doing another mobilization round. That does include recruiting people to fight from other nations. Such as those in Africa. However that method doesn't appear to be too effective and popular.
That six hundred is very generous, surgery for most wounds is amputation even if it doesn't make sense. They just don't have skilled medical staff and equipment to manage the colossal casualty rates. Last I heard they were piled up at hospitals in Belarus.
Wounds are often fatal due to exposure to elements, expired Soviet medical equipment, lack of trained and skilled medics outside elite units, lack of CASEVAC, and don't forget survivors usually end up in the next assault wave.
Oh I know the six hundred is overly generous, hence why it was just an example. It simply is impossible to give accurate estimate due to how little accurate information we have on that.
Though I do agree with you, Russia certainly seems to lack a lot in terms of healthcare for their soldiers. Which definitely brings that number way down.
Doubt they're getting compensated either. Should this war end I imagine all those soldiers are going to cause a lot of issues for Russia.
It might be sustainable, at least for some time. I think most estimates now put the Russian army at a stable level of manpower even accounting for losses. They can't run this number all year, but over a few months for an offensive they probabaly can (and have before).
The key consideration here is how we keep Ukraines casualities low enough while defending this offensive and inflicting these losses that Ukraine doesn't get exhausted first. Zelensky failing to sign a bill to reduce mobilisation age for a year is not a good sign, nor is the shameful performance of the US recently and the larger EU states.
> Zelensky failing to sign a bill to reduce mobilisation age for a year is not a good sign
Bad optics, but understandable.
Ukraine's far smaller population wize and they need that generation to rebuild Ukraine after the war and to have kids.
I agree and understand, particularly with US aid being uncertain it wasn't clear that they could arm them particularly well etc. But for Ukraine to win the have to be all in, one does not casually win a conventional war with Russia while pulling punches.
But, now Ukraine is losing ground and could really use those people. Democracy in Ukraine and the West has repeatedly shown poor decision making and swung between doom and gloom and overconfidence and back again, each time failing to make long term decisions and to properly enact them.
I'm really worried about what this year holds for Ukraine. All of us need to get our shit together in our own ways.
>The key consideration here is how we keep Ukraines casualities low enough while defending this offensive and inflicting these losses that Ukraine doesn't get exhausted first.
I was reading about this earlier. Basically the new commander is prioritising attrition over holding territory and to do so they effectively need artillery, ammo, mines and air defence.
That's apparently why we're seeing Russia moving forward while the casualty numbers have also gone up, but it also sounds very reliant on aid.
Just look at the Iran Iraq war... it's definitely sustainable for a county like Russia just as long as the people from Moscow and st Petersburg aren't being called up to fight. They have millions of ethnic minorities that they'll force into battle with 0 regards to long term impacts
They already draw from Central Asian migrants. Even among the Russian casualties, most are probably drawn from remote rural areas far from the seat of power.
It is sustainable for some time. 50 million adult males. Assume 30% can be sent to the front so 15 million. You need reserves and other forces so lets assume 5 million if you don't start sending women. That gives 15 years. Population probably overthrows the government after 5. This is a war of conquest, not defense.
There is one battlefield video of two Russian soldiers walking across a field of trenches that they had taken in a battle. There are what appears to be hundreds of dead Russians in this one small area alone... Truly reminded me of the descriptions of the WW1 battlefields.
The more accurate these numbers are the more suspicious you should be of them. They’re lobbing artillery left and right into tree covered trenches, hitting filled APCs etc. across a massive front. No one will be able to calculate the losses occurring there with any sorts of accuracy, especially not a nation with manpower issues.
It’s like one of those games where you guess cheesepuffs in a jar. Except there’s 10 jars and you can only see like 6 of them.
If western nations lost manpower like this in a month in a pointless war there would be revolutions. Unreal just how far Putin is willing to go to chase the past.
Edit- wow this post blew up. Thanks for all the upvotes guys.
Most of the ethnic Russians who live in the big cities aren't feeling the casualty hits. The [majority of the soldiers being thrown into the meatgrinder are ethnic minorities from Siberia and the Russian Far East](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine). Last year, they were [conscripting criminals to fight](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/europe/russian-army-prisoners-conscripts-ukraine-intl/index.html), and that source of bodies seems to have dried up, since [in March of this year, Russia passed a law expanding the pool of potential recruits to criminal suspects, and suspending the sentences of convicts for them to sign up to fight](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/03/19/russian-lawmakers-pass-bills-allowing-future-suspects-convicts-to-sign-army-contracts-a84535).
Ethnic Russians make up about 72% of Russia's population, so to keep them happy, Putin is throwing the unseen and undesirable members of Russian society into the fight. The casualties haven't been felt by the core of Russian society.
Some napkin math:
* Russian population: 144.2 million
* Ethnic Russian population: 144.2*0.72=103.8 million (taking the above statistic as true)
* Minority Russian population: 144.2-103.8=40.4 million
* Minority Russian men: 40.4/2=20.2 million (I'm not going to assume "fighting age", because I don't think Russia will care if someone is too old or young to fight)
* Russian casualties to-date: 0.5 million, give or take.
There are a lot more men who can die before Russia even begins having to touch the populations in their cities. A revolt is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Now, when they run out of people to man the farms mines, and factories that aren't in or near the cities, that is another story. If I had to bet, Russia will run out of material before it runs out of men.
Argentina did the same in the Paraguayan war, sent all of their black citizens/slaves to fight, and now Afro-Argentine population is like 0.1% or less.
Not true. That's a false equivalency. While many black people died in that war, there was no evil plan behind to get rid of them. We also had a huge outbreak of yellow fever in Buenos Aires which also affected the black population but it was so widespread even the president had to abandon the city for fear of contagion. Finally, unlike other societies, black people assimilated into the general population having babies with non-blacks, and this was later even more "whitened" since we received millions of European immigrants during the late 19th, early 20th. century.
edit. btw. Slavery was completely outlawed in 1853 and the war happened in 1864, 11 years after that. And even before slavery was outlawed in 1853 it was already uncommon since we had 'freedom of the wombs' in 1813 which means no baby born after that year could become a slave.
So that's about 2.5% of the demographic (Russian, minority, male) dead. Maybe round down to 2% for the prisoners and other 'undesirables' Russia has been throwing at this.
I wonder how much of a demographic has to disappear like this before societies start to break down?
As far as I'm aware they've already hit that point. The thing though is that it isn't a house of cards falling down so much as a slow collapse. Birthrates, jobs, economy, everything related will feel the consequences over the course of the years to come and not right away.
Yup, the damage takes about a generation to really show. Unfortunately for the Russian people, Putin doesn't care about the long-term viability of Russian society.
historically speaking? when around 10% of its working adult population is lost, that's the magic number where everyone everywhere has lost at least one productive member of its family and that's usually when the myth of the state being able to protect your family breaks, after that societies tend to collapse, very few have survived untouched such a loss, it has happened to many populations including the Russians, they lost around 35% to 38% of their adult working population in WW1 which directly correlates to the Zar downfall to communism.
So, if we run those numbers to modern day Russia we are talking at least about 7 million casualties before the Russian society starts to really break down.
Edit. At a rate of 0.25 million each year, they should be able to keep the war going for at least another 26 years, hence why Putin is so sure of himself about winning, as horrible and deplorable such a strategy may be.
Just from a quick Google on Russian WWii deaths:
> The Soviet Union lost around 27 million people during the war, including 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian deaths. The largest portion of military dead were 5.7 million ethnic Russians, followed by 1.3 million ethnic Ukrainians.
Russia’s population was around 200 million during WWII. Today it’s less than 150 million. (Again from a quick Google… since the Soviet Union had more territories I’m not sure how the difference is related to territories and actual changes in birth rates and whatnot).
But anyways, it seems to me that Russia can send millions to die, and they very well may do that. Of course wwii was a different kind of war where the stakes were much higher, so public opinion on so many of your people dying was quite different than the current situation in Ukraine. But still, i think they’re still quite far away from the point where Putin is worried about how many Russians are dying.
Is that the ethnic russian population? Because if it’s the total population including former soviet territories then they peaked at near 300million in 1990.
Let's keep the back of the napkin thought experiment going.
140 M total Russians.
70 M are male.
Only 30 Million of those are "fighting age" of about 18-49.
30 Million. About 20% won't be fit for service due to medical, physical, or psychological reasons. That leaves about 24 Million men who could potentially fight, of whom 0.5 Million are already dead.
You could say, well that's only 2% so far.
However, that 2% included probably the most experienced soldiers, those with the strongest motivation to join the military etc. As time goes on those send to the front line will be decreasingly willing or able to fight.
I think that the "combat effectiveness" of the Russian military will decline long before they literally run out of people.
Also worth noting that that 0.5 million isn’t *dead* it’s *casualties*, and includes all wounded, many of whom can be rehabilitated enough to fight, or to serve in other roles.
That's not gonna work as well as did though. There will not be a baby boom after this war, no matter who wins, and Russia's birthrate is declining. So it'll be near disaster when the baby boomers are all retired and no productive tax base to pay for them, made worse by all the younger men sent to die in the invasion.
That's the point isn't it? Russia's demographics will not look this good (in terms of manpower for war) for a long time, so now is the best time for Russia to go full stupid conventional war. Plus if Russia conquered all of Ukraine, that would have been an extra 30-40 million people Russia could over-tax and abuse to keep the main Russian population back home somewhat insulated from the effects of demographic collapse.
It’s not a 50/50 split on gender though since russia has lost huge swaths of men during WWII leading. To an already shifted demographic and has only lost more in Afghanistan, and the Chechen wars.
The even bigger thing overlooked is fighting age. Rough math and this site says only ~34% of russian men are 15-49. That brings the pool to ~7 million
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005416/population-russia-gender-age-group/
Are they going to run out? No. But it will increasingly affect the vocal groups
Criminal suspects? I have a feeling that means people accused but not convicted of a crime can be conscripted, which is absolutely insane and disgusting, and even a child can see how easily abused it is.
Yep, it's anyone who's either under investigation or under criminal prosecution:
>“The legislative initiative makes it possible for those who are under investigation, on trial or have been sentenced to sign a military contract,” said senior State Duma member Pavel Krasheninnikov.
Same as it ever was. These articles reacting with horror to Russian losses miss the point that they would have to be ten or twenty times larger for it to make any difference to the Russian high command, and at least double what we're currently seeing in order for the average Russian in Moscow/St Petersburg or the "2nd tier" cities to really notice the impact as you said.
The people who support the war are probably happy with how things have changed at home in this aspect. Fewer poor, non-russians, petty criminals, etc. floating around now. Long way to go before it becomes a problem for them.
We lost roughly 20,000 people in all of the Korean war. Roughly 60,000 people in Vietnam. Let's throw in say 4,500 for the war on terror. Russia has lost 16 times that just in the last two and a half years in Ukraine. And if these numbers keep up they will lose another 80,000 plus between now and August 2024
Unfortunately this sentiment on the value of human life has been a common theme in Russian politics throughout history. Nearly 2m people died in Stalingrad in ww2...
This is the part that I think the west severely underestimates in its war games. China, Russia, Iran, etc are willing to tolerate “unsustainable” levels of casualties compared to western countries. The US sends home 7000 caskets from Afghanistan and Iraq and the public considers it a failure and a waste, Russia does that in a week and there isn’t even a protest.
If China ever invades Taiwan, I think people seriously underestimate the casualties they would be willing to absorb, numbers that seem inconceivable to western democracies probably won’t even make the news in these totalitarian regimes.
Average person probably underestimates yeah, but I don't Believe for a second Western military commands feel the same. They'll expect mass casualties for sure
It’s a different mindset; Russian population historically has been okay with massive casualties as the “cost of war”. Heck most if the deaths in WWII were Soviet soldiers. It’ll be interesting though the long term repercussions. Russia has also historically has just endless masses of young men to throw at their problems, now with a demographic issue they need those people to have a functioning economy.
My personal theory is that Putin had cancer and wanted to restore some of the Soviet greatness before he died and with his cancer diagnosis he accelerated his plan, somehow he recovered as he's been looking much better last year or so compared to 2022 - mid 2023.
I agree. This was going to be his legacy. He wants to be Peter the great and Stalin who are perceived as making Russia mighty again. Russia is currently advancing slowly in eastern Ukraine but this invasion has not made Russia look mighty. He wants to save face now by stealing some land.
Let's just hope that in the unfortunate situation of Ukraine losing more land that just Crimea, west will keep it's integrity and keep sanctions on Russia, even tho war have officially ended. The idea of "och well, they lost. Let's go back to business" make me feel sick.
Russia wont really exist as a world power in 50-100 years. They have to act. Unfortunately they chose a really dumb way to act.
Putin could have opened russia, connected more with the world, removed corruption and incentivized tourism and business, improved their schooling and accepted a lot of good immigration.
this would have preserved russia and kept them relevant. They could have tried to be a leader in that part of the world.
unfortunately putin is a dickweed and chose this path, which is way way riskier if he fails. Even if he succeeds somehow, itll stall russia.
> Putin could have opened russia, connected more with the world, removed corruption and incentivized tourism and business, improved their schooling and accepted a lot of good immigration.
No, he couldn't.
Putin is certainly bad and made some horrible decision, but he also isn't a miracle worker. Even Putin can't just "remove corruption". The Russian system and society cannot just be altered like that even by as powerful a dictator as Putin.
He has a bootstrapping problem. Anyone "loyal" to Putin is that way because of corruption, so if he wanted to "remove corruption" all his supporters would instantly turn on him. It would be like a Mafia boss trying to stop all crime, it just doesn't work.
Similar problems exist for many of the other things you mentioned. Opening up Russia and connecting it with the world doesn't work when Putin holds power using an "us vs. them" mentality. It is hard to paint "the West" as the boogeyman trying to destroy the people while also courting their tourism and investment. It is hard to promote immigration when part of your power structure is based on racism and ethnocentrism.
Russia has dug itself into a hole from which there is no easy escape. Putin is the asshole at the helm but he can't just redesign the ship under him without sinking.
Yeah, there's basically no way for Putin, who got his position due to massive corruption, to go about undoing the system that got him there. You basically need a new ideological leader who comes to power under claims of being anti-corruption, because anybody who's already in power is already in too deep.
That’s the sad part. In the early 90s people were rooting for Russia like - really rooting for the country to move on from its past.
But alas, we got a wannabe Wish.com Stalin.
One does not simply remove corruption from Russia, see: their entire history. I think it comes with the territory, something about surviving in an area that swings between fertile abundance and barely inhabitable hellscape
Its the Russian way - throw bodies at a problem until it goes away. WW1, WW2, afghanistan - hell even the crimean war. Life has no meaning to their leaders
Except Putin doesn't care because he is sending ethnic minorities disproportionately to minimize Russian losses.
[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine)
Not just that, he is sending older Russians that would have been owed pensions and prisoners to reduce the overall Russian debts to its people. Look at almost all pictures of men fighting in Ukraine, they all look 40+ rather than all the regular 18 year old conscripts who are being kept in blocking units, rear guard or defending other Russian territories.
They know they have a demographic problem, so the Russian solution is to just kill off a lot of people who would soon be drawing pensions. Reduce minority population so ethnic Russians are still in control and empty prisons so they can increase political prisoners and POW without adding substantial burden. It's all quite nefarious.
Yes, it's the basis of power that he uses to get into power in the first place actually. But that's because most people don't know history, they know a couple fun facts
It's actually even worse in Ukraine than Russia, but Ukraine has the advantage of having very wealthy allies supporting it. Russia has zero allies and only a handful of friends of convenience
China is a friend of convenience, not an ally. They support Russia as long as they have something tangible to gain from supporting Russia, which is primarily their natural resources. And China doesn't have to do shit to support Russia financially to continue exploiting their natural resources. In fact the weaker and poorer Russia becomes, the easier it is for them to do it. All China has to do is keep the mines open and keep the railways and pipelines running
Ukraine knows this about themselves too, which is why they are very hestitant to lower the conscription age, it was recently lowered from 27 to 25, even though 18-25 year olds make excellent recruits.
The UK Defense and US intelligence numbers come in lower than Ukraine's, but much closer to Ukraine's number's than Russian numbers. How do the journalists numbers compare to western intelligence estimates?
I thought the independent journalists are only counting new graves in military cemeteries and are overlooking bodies abandoned on the battlefield, returned to families and buried in local towns, or cremated (including mobile crematoriums used on the front). Also I'm not sure if prison battalions or mercs are given military funerals of if this is another area of undercounting.
Here is how this number should be understood:
Militaries like doing head counts, and keeping track of lots of numbers. When soldiers are engaged with the enemy they report how many people they think they killed. A statistician at HQ then aggregates the numbers for all units. The reported number from Ukraine is likely this number taken at face value.
When you are the shooter distinguishing between killed and wounded is impossible because this is a function of medical care. Shooters are also generally being shot at and dont have the clearest view. Shooters also tend to overreport and include decoys or near misses because to their reconning they were hits.
For this reason shooters are good at reporting overall enemy **casualties= killed+wounded+missing+POW.** Honestly reported estimated losses include some extra from error in misses+decoys. So if Russia turns around and says **5,000 killed in April** this isn’t actually a disagreement, it would be a pretty reasonable number of dead given say 2000 error + 13000 wounded. Reasonable numbers for % wounded could be anywhere from 50%-90% depending on speed and quality of medical attention.
Because stupid people will always support evil people who appeal to their base desires, prejudices and fears. The Russian people should overthrow their murderous dictator who is sending their men to die for his own personal glory, but they won’t because a good number of them support his insanity. It’s a story as old as civilization.
Wow, the world has pretty much moved on. We aren't seeing daily articles about Ukraine. And it's so easy to just for a moment think about other matters and forget what an absolute slaughter is going on there. It's insane how little Russia values their citizens lives. And seeing how Russia is sacrificing their citizens must motivate Ukrainians even further. Cause you sure as hell don't want Russia controlling your country, and end up being that worthless meat shield. Fuck Russia and give Ukraine our Gripen fighters!!!
Right, things have really gone silent. Which of course is "natural" when it comes to the media. And when you do get articles they tend to be slightly less supportive and talk about "eventual" loss. But i get it, we aren't seeing anything "big" that often anymore.
"Nothing new on the eastern front"
I'm pro ukriane obviously but you guys gotta stop trusting both Russian and Ukrainian forces. They are both in full propaganda mode and can't be trusted
According to David Glantz, total axis casualties on the eastern front amount to 9 million soldiers, compared to 11 million soviet casualties. If you look at actual killed soldiers, the ratio is closer to 1:1, but the overall number of soviet losses gets inflated by the 4 million or so soldiers captured at the beginning of Barbarossa, of which millions died in prison camps due to starvation.
Glantz is obviously a boss on this topic, but I thought the KIA total was closer to 4.5 million Axis vs 7 million Soviet, and that does not include those who died after capture. If you include wounded it's obviously way higher. Estimates still vary quite a lot depending who you read.
That figure also includes POW's, missing, disabled. Krivosheev and Overman claim around 7 million total German dead, missing, and POW. Add the other axis casualties on the Eastern front, and you get 9 million total casualties.
The side with Air and Sea superiority that massively thwarted war-time production of the Axis. And did a lot of damage to the Axis abilities to acquire fuel, steel, weapons, aircraft, etc. Russia does not have that this time, because those allies are aiding Ukraine this time.
There is a UALosses project (you can google it), collecting informations about killed Ukrainian troops from open sources (for example obituaries). So far it has about 45 000 dead identified by name, date and place of birth etc.
It was around 59k deaths three months ago. Ukranian soldier Yuri Pupirin collected and analyzed information from local authorities. He claimed it on a interview with Alexander Shelest on 29 february 2024.
As much as I want Ukraine to win and Russia to lose I just don’t believe any of this anymore, sounds very propagandist to always say Russia have lost so many and Ukraine haven’t. That’s why I don’t read the stories anymore, not so much lack of interest, but lack of trust in the reports.
A fair question, if you arent trying to be inflammatory. Another commenter above, [Gideon\_Lovet](https://www.reddit.com/user/Gideon_Lovet/), said all that need to be said:
>As many external analysts will explain, Ukraine publishes high numbers, and Russia publishes low numbers, so the truth is somewhere in between, close to the average of the two. Ukraine gets numbers based on drone footage, and recovered casualties. They might see a Russian get hit, and consider it a casualty, while the Russian might limp back to their lines, get basic medical care, and remain on the front lines.
>The most accurate reporting for deaths I've seen is independent journalists in Russia compile burial records. But these numbers are delayed as well, since the Russian government has to admit that the soldier died or release the body to relatives. They sometimes don't do this, either because they haven't recovered the body so they are "MIA", or they have and they list them as MIA so they don't have to give death payouts to the families.
How many millions of people did Russia lose during WW2? Granted, they were on the defensive then and in the offensive now, but I'm not sure Putin cares about how many of his people are thrown into a meat grinder.
His legacy as a great leader for Russia is on the line.
These numbers are absolutely absurd lol
Zelensky came out and said Ukraine only suffered 31,000 KIA.
You are telling me in 1 month on the eastern front, Russia lost 20,000 soldiers (lets say wounded + killed) while also enjoying a 10:1 artillery advantage and air superiority? These news figures are actually straight garbage
Worldnews needs to ban blatant propaganda news sources. Pravda and this shit is as bad as RT
I feel like war technology has progressed to the point where Russia’s “win by brute force” method doesn’t work anymore. Winning by smothering the enemy with your forces may have been more viable before our age of advanced tech, but if you can wipe out hundreds of soldiers with a remotely piloted drone, Putin has to think of a new strategy.
Their method would be "working" if Ukraine was not being supplied by other countries with larger economies and war industries. These last few months the Russians have successful caused the UAF to spend most of their ammo stores. This would still be with a horrifically high casualty rate by Russia, but that's how they seem to fight in every major war.
Not really an effective method of fighting a major war but if all Putin cares about is land won, then Russia could technically take ground if the UAF stops getting military and economic aid.
Are we taking these claims seriously? As much as I’d like to see Russia get its ass handed to it, I just don’t see how 20k soldiers died yet they’ve gained a lot of territory and show no signs of stopping.
> For instance, yesterday, on April 30th, Ukrainian defenders managed to eliminate 1,120 enemy soldiers. If the numbers are anywhere close to being accurate, they're massive. They could very well be the highest numbers Europe has seen since World War II.
Losses not equal to kills though. A wounded soldier that limps away from a morter/drone strike is still counted as a "loss" in terms of being removed from the battlefield. In a way a wounded soldier places a bigger burden on the opponent as they require transportation, healthcare, rehab and eventually disability-support back home. Provided Russia cares enough about the Mobniks they drive inte Ukrainian lines.
That makes a lot of sense statistically, although the wording could be improved. People being “eliminated” sounds like being killed.
Counting casualties in wars is a complicated business. Prisoners, wounded who can return to the fight, wounded who can't, wounded prisoners, killed, wounded but will die from war wounds. You can also have soldiers whose equipment is in some sense destroyed and then they aren't much use. E.g. A tank driver isn't much use without a tank. For Russia right now they are also likely 'losing' a lot of soldiers who know if they surrender the Ukrainians will treat them well and even if they have to stay in Ukraine forever after the war it is not a huge problem, if anything it would probably be better than going back to Russia if Ukraine is integrated into the west.
Tank driver isn't much use without a tank? You'll never make it in the Russian army with that kind of attitude. You just promote the driver to infantry and send him in the next wave!
Congratulations, you’ve been promoted… and he’s dead. Congratulations, you’ve been promot… and he’s dead.
>Counting casualties in wars is a complicated business. IBM had a similar thought a few years back.
And that's why the best wars run on SAP.
Casualty also means wounded or killed and not just killed. But people mix that one up all the time. People aren’t great with words. ETA: in some military contexts, it seems casualties might specifically refer to a death. The use of casualties in civilian reporting, and many military contexts, will usually refer to deaths and non-death reasons that people can no longer fight.
Something i wondered about. If a soldier left the battlefield wounded, got treatment and came back 2 months later. This time he gets killed. Will he count as 2 casualties?
Absolutely. A person can be a casualty twice! There’s not an easy way to uniquely track enemy soldiers, although Russia themselves might know the true numbers if they keep good records.
You just bet they don't.
Casualty is generally reserved for wounded enough to be unfit for service. Having a sprained ankle takes off you of front line foot a week or two won’t count as a casualty. It’s usually referring to more severe injuries which make coming back to battle at any point unlikely.
But casualties are what actually matters, not killed, so it evens out.
I agree. Just occasionally someone will claim the casualty number as the number of Russian dead, which tends to overstate by a factor of 3.
That’s correct. People get the two mixed up easily. You could even do propaganda by openly dating correct numbers, just casualties on one side and dead on the other. „In the war between Australia and the Emus, Australia only had 20.000 dead, while the Emus had 60.000 casualties“ for example. Many would not see the nuance.
Yes I no word good
No you is good words personna
Gotta remember that its being translated into English, precise wording may not be reliable.
Even if the government doesn't care, families often do, so the cost is still there, it is just not coming from the government but the individuals, so it is still a burden for the Russian society.
If there's one thing the Russian populace is good at it's suffering.
There once was this guy Basil II and he understood this concept very well. So when he captured 15,000 Bulgar soldiers he had every single one of their eyes plucked out except for one soldier who only had only one plucked out. He was spared his eye so he could lead them back home. 15,000 newly blind soldiers is quite a burden on a society.
>In a way a wounded soldier places a bigger burden on the opponent Russia just abandons their wounded for this reason.
That's gonna be a lot of disabled people begging on the Russian streets in the near future.
Lol, you think Russia gives soldiers wounded in battle the same support as the West. The only thing Russia offers is a small "severance" to the survivors of those KIA as an enrollment incentive.. It kinda sucks to be a Russian guy in your 20s from a less desirable part of the federation as you're now officially designated as cannon fodder.
That would assume that Ruzzia would provide and pay for transportation, healthcare, rehab and eventually disability support for wounded soldiers. Which they won't.
> They could very well be the highest numbers Europe has seen since World War II. They are. This is without a doubt the bloodiest war in Europe since WW2.
Also the most resource intensive It's probably the most resource intensive war since the Korean War?
We'll never know the true numbers. But regardless of what people want to believe, there's no shortage of footage showing hundreds of corpses strewn around fighting positions. It's surreal to watch so many dead in one place. But Russia wants war trophies, more land and Ukrainians removed from this world, so I guess the sacrifices are somehow worth it for them.
I remember that during Covid, researchers refuted the ridiculously low death tolls reported by Russia and China by comparing the numbers of overall deaths in that year to previous years, from which they estimated the Covid related difference.
India too.
In India's case you didn't even need data, it was plain for all to see. My father is the operation and maintenance engineer of several crematoriums in one of Indian Metro cities and he would send me pictures of dozens of bodies piled onto each other because even by running the electric crematoriums 24x7 they couldn't cope with the sheer number of bodies. Hospitals would merely put comorbidities as cause of death instead of covid to hide the real count but there was no way to hide the truth in crematoriums.
Terrifying. WHO’s estimate in October 2021 was 4.7M excess deaths in India - and the official death toll as of now is just over 500k. (For comparison, in the US, excess deaths might add another 100-200k to our official counts)
Yeah the official count was a flat out lie. During the height of second wave in India, the govt stat for my city was that there were daily 50-80 deaths, while in reality the crematoriums managed by my father would often have hundred bodies or more. (Covid patients were being essentially packaged by the hospitals after death because there was a hysteria about dead bodies spreading covid so they were easily identifiable).
During Russian offensives 800+ casualties a day is normal, usually climbs to 1000+ if they're getting particularly screwed over. Usually because of their own bad choices. There's definitely wiggle room with the numbers, because complete accuracy is just damn close to impossible, even if we disregard propaganda inflated numbers. Just remember that casualties means wounded and dead, not just dead. Though a large number of wounded won't fight again soon, and some not at all. So effective fighting force does decrease quite a lot. That said, a thousand casualties is believable, when you consider the amount of troops and size of the frontline involved.
Over a thousand soldiers being neutralized per day is not sustainable for Russia unless they start recruiting mercenaries from among their new friends in Africa.
Well there's your answer, it straight up isn't sustainable. But they have enough troops to continue for quite a while yet. Let's say out of a thousand, three hundred die, one hundred are too crippled to ever fight again, and the remaining six hundred recover over the course of a few months and are sent to fight again. This is just an example and not necessarily accurate ratios. But this does cause them to have better long term sustain than a thousand casualties a day implies. And Russia definitely is trying everything it can in order to get more fighters without doing another mobilization round. That does include recruiting people to fight from other nations. Such as those in Africa. However that method doesn't appear to be too effective and popular.
That six hundred is very generous, surgery for most wounds is amputation even if it doesn't make sense. They just don't have skilled medical staff and equipment to manage the colossal casualty rates. Last I heard they were piled up at hospitals in Belarus. Wounds are often fatal due to exposure to elements, expired Soviet medical equipment, lack of trained and skilled medics outside elite units, lack of CASEVAC, and don't forget survivors usually end up in the next assault wave.
Oh I know the six hundred is overly generous, hence why it was just an example. It simply is impossible to give accurate estimate due to how little accurate information we have on that. Though I do agree with you, Russia certainly seems to lack a lot in terms of healthcare for their soldiers. Which definitely brings that number way down. Doubt they're getting compensated either. Should this war end I imagine all those soldiers are going to cause a lot of issues for Russia.
It might be sustainable, at least for some time. I think most estimates now put the Russian army at a stable level of manpower even accounting for losses. They can't run this number all year, but over a few months for an offensive they probabaly can (and have before). The key consideration here is how we keep Ukraines casualities low enough while defending this offensive and inflicting these losses that Ukraine doesn't get exhausted first. Zelensky failing to sign a bill to reduce mobilisation age for a year is not a good sign, nor is the shameful performance of the US recently and the larger EU states.
> Zelensky failing to sign a bill to reduce mobilisation age for a year is not a good sign Bad optics, but understandable. Ukraine's far smaller population wize and they need that generation to rebuild Ukraine after the war and to have kids.
I agree and understand, particularly with US aid being uncertain it wasn't clear that they could arm them particularly well etc. But for Ukraine to win the have to be all in, one does not casually win a conventional war with Russia while pulling punches. But, now Ukraine is losing ground and could really use those people. Democracy in Ukraine and the West has repeatedly shown poor decision making and swung between doom and gloom and overconfidence and back again, each time failing to make long term decisions and to properly enact them. I'm really worried about what this year holds for Ukraine. All of us need to get our shit together in our own ways.
This year will be risky. After that it should get better. Production will have ramped up in Europe, we'll know who the next president is, etc.
>The key consideration here is how we keep Ukraines casualities low enough while defending this offensive and inflicting these losses that Ukraine doesn't get exhausted first. I was reading about this earlier. Basically the new commander is prioritising attrition over holding territory and to do so they effectively need artillery, ammo, mines and air defence. That's apparently why we're seeing Russia moving forward while the casualty numbers have also gone up, but it also sounds very reliant on aid.
Just look at the Iran Iraq war... it's definitely sustainable for a county like Russia just as long as the people from Moscow and st Petersburg aren't being called up to fight. They have millions of ethnic minorities that they'll force into battle with 0 regards to long term impacts
They already draw from Central Asian migrants. Even among the Russian casualties, most are probably drawn from remote rural areas far from the seat of power.
It is sustainable for some time. 50 million adult males. Assume 30% can be sent to the front so 15 million. You need reserves and other forces so lets assume 5 million if you don't start sending women. That gives 15 years. Population probably overthrows the government after 5. This is a war of conquest, not defense.
There is one battlefield video of two Russian soldiers walking across a field of trenches that they had taken in a battle. There are what appears to be hundreds of dead Russians in this one small area alone... Truly reminded me of the descriptions of the WW1 battlefields.
The more accurate these numbers are the more suspicious you should be of them. They’re lobbing artillery left and right into tree covered trenches, hitting filled APCs etc. across a massive front. No one will be able to calculate the losses occurring there with any sorts of accuracy, especially not a nation with manpower issues. It’s like one of those games where you guess cheesepuffs in a jar. Except there’s 10 jars and you can only see like 6 of them.
They are on pace to match US casualties during the month and a half of fighting in Normandy during WW2.
Did you read the article? I am skeptical about the level of detail but maybe it's accurate. No mention of Ukrainian casualties at all tjough
If western nations lost manpower like this in a month in a pointless war there would be revolutions. Unreal just how far Putin is willing to go to chase the past. Edit- wow this post blew up. Thanks for all the upvotes guys.
Most of the ethnic Russians who live in the big cities aren't feeling the casualty hits. The [majority of the soldiers being thrown into the meatgrinder are ethnic minorities from Siberia and the Russian Far East](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine). Last year, they were [conscripting criminals to fight](https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/europe/russian-army-prisoners-conscripts-ukraine-intl/index.html), and that source of bodies seems to have dried up, since [in March of this year, Russia passed a law expanding the pool of potential recruits to criminal suspects, and suspending the sentences of convicts for them to sign up to fight](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/03/19/russian-lawmakers-pass-bills-allowing-future-suspects-convicts-to-sign-army-contracts-a84535). Ethnic Russians make up about 72% of Russia's population, so to keep them happy, Putin is throwing the unseen and undesirable members of Russian society into the fight. The casualties haven't been felt by the core of Russian society.
Some napkin math: * Russian population: 144.2 million * Ethnic Russian population: 144.2*0.72=103.8 million (taking the above statistic as true) * Minority Russian population: 144.2-103.8=40.4 million * Minority Russian men: 40.4/2=20.2 million (I'm not going to assume "fighting age", because I don't think Russia will care if someone is too old or young to fight) * Russian casualties to-date: 0.5 million, give or take. There are a lot more men who can die before Russia even begins having to touch the populations in their cities. A revolt is unlikely to happen any time soon. Now, when they run out of people to man the farms mines, and factories that aren't in or near the cities, that is another story. If I had to bet, Russia will run out of material before it runs out of men.
I almost think this is intentional. Putin is ethnically cleansing Russia while also attacking Ukraine. It’s a win win from his perspective.
That is so fucked but you’re probably right.
it's also extremely shortsighted
Russians being shortsighted? I'd say color me shocked but in russia shock color you
You finished this reply thread beautifully. Cheers
aw thanks man. This actually made me smile :)
Stalin did just the same in WWII, so its a tried and tested tradition.
Latvians fought in afganistan, what a fucking shit country omg
The older I get the more I'm convinced this is why countries used to go to war every generation. It cleared out a lot of the downtrodden.
Getting rid of the criminals and others they see as a burden to take some land is probably a good deal in their eyes.
That's russian status quo for centuries. They always did this, always will. That's why they need to keep expanding
Not to mention emptying prisons, which is going to save them an enormous amount of money
Liquidating. Thats the word they use. And it’s absolutely what he is doing. While also taking care of ethnic Ukrainians.
Argentina did the same in the Paraguayan war, sent all of their black citizens/slaves to fight, and now Afro-Argentine population is like 0.1% or less.
Not true. That's a false equivalency. While many black people died in that war, there was no evil plan behind to get rid of them. We also had a huge outbreak of yellow fever in Buenos Aires which also affected the black population but it was so widespread even the president had to abandon the city for fear of contagion. Finally, unlike other societies, black people assimilated into the general population having babies with non-blacks, and this was later even more "whitened" since we received millions of European immigrants during the late 19th, early 20th. century. edit. btw. Slavery was completely outlawed in 1853 and the war happened in 1864, 11 years after that. And even before slavery was outlawed in 1853 it was already uncommon since we had 'freedom of the wombs' in 1813 which means no baby born after that year could become a slave.
where's your source mate?
Same old song from Stalin.
yep, and guess who is going to get moved out east to backfill if the Russians win the war? Ukranians
So that's about 2.5% of the demographic (Russian, minority, male) dead. Maybe round down to 2% for the prisoners and other 'undesirables' Russia has been throwing at this. I wonder how much of a demographic has to disappear like this before societies start to break down?
As far as I'm aware they've already hit that point. The thing though is that it isn't a house of cards falling down so much as a slow collapse. Birthrates, jobs, economy, everything related will feel the consequences over the course of the years to come and not right away.
Yup, the damage takes about a generation to really show. Unfortunately for the Russian people, Putin doesn't care about the long-term viability of Russian society.
>Putin doesn't care about the long-term viability of Russian society. I mean he does, it's just his idea of what that looks like is really fucked up.
historically speaking? when around 10% of its working adult population is lost, that's the magic number where everyone everywhere has lost at least one productive member of its family and that's usually when the myth of the state being able to protect your family breaks, after that societies tend to collapse, very few have survived untouched such a loss, it has happened to many populations including the Russians, they lost around 35% to 38% of their adult working population in WW1 which directly correlates to the Zar downfall to communism. So, if we run those numbers to modern day Russia we are talking at least about 7 million casualties before the Russian society starts to really break down. Edit. At a rate of 0.25 million each year, they should be able to keep the war going for at least another 26 years, hence why Putin is so sure of himself about winning, as horrible and deplorable such a strategy may be.
Just from a quick Google on Russian WWii deaths: > The Soviet Union lost around 27 million people during the war, including 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian deaths. The largest portion of military dead were 5.7 million ethnic Russians, followed by 1.3 million ethnic Ukrainians. Russia’s population was around 200 million during WWII. Today it’s less than 150 million. (Again from a quick Google… since the Soviet Union had more territories I’m not sure how the difference is related to territories and actual changes in birth rates and whatnot). But anyways, it seems to me that Russia can send millions to die, and they very well may do that. Of course wwii was a different kind of war where the stakes were much higher, so public opinion on so many of your people dying was quite different than the current situation in Ukraine. But still, i think they’re still quite far away from the point where Putin is worried about how many Russians are dying.
Russia's population has never reached higher than 150 million. It was 110 million before WWII and 98 million after WWII.
Is that the ethnic russian population? Because if it’s the total population including former soviet territories then they peaked at near 300million in 1990.
Because there is a difference between Soviet and Russia's populations. Russia itself has never reached 150million, but USSR had double that.
The justification used for this war is also a lot more abstract for this war than WWII. Patience for it might run out sooner.
That's why and how Russia won almost every war. Throw in people until the other side run out of other people.
Good ol’ meatwave
140 million and a declining birth rate, that strategy is not going to win much longer
Let's keep the back of the napkin thought experiment going. 140 M total Russians. 70 M are male. Only 30 Million of those are "fighting age" of about 18-49. 30 Million. About 20% won't be fit for service due to medical, physical, or psychological reasons. That leaves about 24 Million men who could potentially fight, of whom 0.5 Million are already dead. You could say, well that's only 2% so far. However, that 2% included probably the most experienced soldiers, those with the strongest motivation to join the military etc. As time goes on those send to the front line will be decreasingly willing or able to fight. I think that the "combat effectiveness" of the Russian military will decline long before they literally run out of people.
Also worth noting that that 0.5 million isn’t *dead* it’s *casualties*, and includes all wounded, many of whom can be rehabilitated enough to fight, or to serve in other roles.
Especially if they plan to actually start a stir with NATO. Germany alone has like 80 millions. And it's just *one* country
You don’t need NATO soldiers, you need NATO air and navy superiority.
That's not gonna work as well as did though. There will not be a baby boom after this war, no matter who wins, and Russia's birthrate is declining. So it'll be near disaster when the baby boomers are all retired and no productive tax base to pay for them, made worse by all the younger men sent to die in the invasion.
That's the point isn't it? Russia's demographics will not look this good (in terms of manpower for war) for a long time, so now is the best time for Russia to go full stupid conventional war. Plus if Russia conquered all of Ukraine, that would have been an extra 30-40 million people Russia could over-tax and abuse to keep the main Russian population back home somewhat insulated from the effects of demographic collapse.
More than a million people, mostly young end education have left Russia as well.
It’s not a 50/50 split on gender though since russia has lost huge swaths of men during WWII leading. To an already shifted demographic and has only lost more in Afghanistan, and the Chechen wars.
The even bigger thing overlooked is fighting age. Rough math and this site says only ~34% of russian men are 15-49. That brings the pool to ~7 million https://www.statista.com/statistics/1005416/population-russia-gender-age-group/ Are they going to run out? No. But it will increasingly affect the vocal groups
This pool also has a lot of overlap with the pool of workers capable of doing physically intensive labor.
World War II’s impact on today’s gender split is minimal. What’s been killing Russian men in insane numbers in modern times is rampant alcoholism.
Russians are used to death. This amount of people doesn't phase them.
Criminal suspects? I have a feeling that means people accused but not convicted of a crime can be conscripted, which is absolutely insane and disgusting, and even a child can see how easily abused it is.
Yep, it's anyone who's either under investigation or under criminal prosecution: >“The legislative initiative makes it possible for those who are under investigation, on trial or have been sentenced to sign a military contract,” said senior State Duma member Pavel Krasheninnikov.
So anyone, then.
\*Insert Fred Armisen 'Straight to jail' meme\*
Same as it ever was. These articles reacting with horror to Russian losses miss the point that they would have to be ten or twenty times larger for it to make any difference to the Russian high command, and at least double what we're currently seeing in order for the average Russian in Moscow/St Petersburg or the "2nd tier" cities to really notice the impact as you said. The people who support the war are probably happy with how things have changed at home in this aspect. Fewer poor, non-russians, petty criminals, etc. floating around now. Long way to go before it becomes a problem for them.
Burning oil refineries, Gazprom losses, rising gas prices, lower fuel availability, etc. will likely have more effect on them than human losses. Sad.
I hope it leads to rebelling in the Siberian and far east states. I'd really want to see Russia break apart into its constituent parts after this.
Isnt this how the revolution started last time?
Peace, Land, Bread
>expanding the pool of potential recruits to criminal suspects Is this trial by combat, or trial by ordeal?
It is deranged.
Turns out that Putin guy, not a great guy
The more I hear about the guy, the less I care for him.
I don’t like him, don’t care for him, never did.
I didn't like Putin before it was even cool to not like him!
He’s a dirty dog!
A real battle axe
I heard he can be a bit of a cunt.
I find him pretty disagreeable
I don't like the cut of his jib. Not one bit.
I used to hate Putin…. I still do, but I used to as well
seriously, the US lost less troops in the entire Iraq and Afghanistan wars combines than what Putin lost just this month.
Tbmf the Russian military is dog shit.
Tits Balls Mother Fucker?
We lost roughly 20,000 people in all of the Korean war. Roughly 60,000 people in Vietnam. Let's throw in say 4,500 for the war on terror. Russia has lost 16 times that just in the last two and a half years in Ukraine. And if these numbers keep up they will lose another 80,000 plus between now and August 2024
tbf the ukrainian army is badass
Putin and a fuck load of Russians.
Unfortunately this sentiment on the value of human life has been a common theme in Russian politics throughout history. Nearly 2m people died in Stalingrad in ww2...
This is the part that I think the west severely underestimates in its war games. China, Russia, Iran, etc are willing to tolerate “unsustainable” levels of casualties compared to western countries. The US sends home 7000 caskets from Afghanistan and Iraq and the public considers it a failure and a waste, Russia does that in a week and there isn’t even a protest. If China ever invades Taiwan, I think people seriously underestimate the casualties they would be willing to absorb, numbers that seem inconceivable to western democracies probably won’t even make the news in these totalitarian regimes.
Average person probably underestimates yeah, but I don't Believe for a second Western military commands feel the same. They'll expect mass casualties for sure
Hardware is the limiting factor of an invasion of Taiwan. The number of bodies is meaningless without a way to transport them.
It’s a different mindset; Russian population historically has been okay with massive casualties as the “cost of war”. Heck most if the deaths in WWII were Soviet soldiers. It’ll be interesting though the long term repercussions. Russia has also historically has just endless masses of young men to throw at their problems, now with a demographic issue they need those people to have a functioning economy.
My personal theory is that Putin had cancer and wanted to restore some of the Soviet greatness before he died and with his cancer diagnosis he accelerated his plan, somehow he recovered as he's been looking much better last year or so compared to 2022 - mid 2023.
I agree. This was going to be his legacy. He wants to be Peter the great and Stalin who are perceived as making Russia mighty again. Russia is currently advancing slowly in eastern Ukraine but this invasion has not made Russia look mighty. He wants to save face now by stealing some land.
Let's just hope that in the unfortunate situation of Ukraine losing more land that just Crimea, west will keep it's integrity and keep sanctions on Russia, even tho war have officially ended. The idea of "och well, they lost. Let's go back to business" make me feel sick.
Russia wont really exist as a world power in 50-100 years. They have to act. Unfortunately they chose a really dumb way to act. Putin could have opened russia, connected more with the world, removed corruption and incentivized tourism and business, improved their schooling and accepted a lot of good immigration. this would have preserved russia and kept them relevant. They could have tried to be a leader in that part of the world. unfortunately putin is a dickweed and chose this path, which is way way riskier if he fails. Even if he succeeds somehow, itll stall russia.
> Putin could have opened russia, connected more with the world, removed corruption and incentivized tourism and business, improved their schooling and accepted a lot of good immigration. No, he couldn't. Putin is certainly bad and made some horrible decision, but he also isn't a miracle worker. Even Putin can't just "remove corruption". The Russian system and society cannot just be altered like that even by as powerful a dictator as Putin. He has a bootstrapping problem. Anyone "loyal" to Putin is that way because of corruption, so if he wanted to "remove corruption" all his supporters would instantly turn on him. It would be like a Mafia boss trying to stop all crime, it just doesn't work. Similar problems exist for many of the other things you mentioned. Opening up Russia and connecting it with the world doesn't work when Putin holds power using an "us vs. them" mentality. It is hard to paint "the West" as the boogeyman trying to destroy the people while also courting their tourism and investment. It is hard to promote immigration when part of your power structure is based on racism and ethnocentrism. Russia has dug itself into a hole from which there is no easy escape. Putin is the asshole at the helm but he can't just redesign the ship under him without sinking.
Yeah, there's basically no way for Putin, who got his position due to massive corruption, to go about undoing the system that got him there. You basically need a new ideological leader who comes to power under claims of being anti-corruption, because anybody who's already in power is already in too deep.
Its kind of par for the course for Russia, though. Outside of a handful of good leader's reigns it's always been a backwards imperialist clusterfuck.
Handful? Like a tiny hand?
That’s the sad part. In the early 90s people were rooting for Russia like - really rooting for the country to move on from its past. But alas, we got a wannabe Wish.com Stalin.
One does not simply remove corruption from Russia, see: their entire history. I think it comes with the territory, something about surviving in an area that swings between fertile abundance and barely inhabitable hellscape
I agree. An opportunity to flourish and become a travel destination, an investment centre and a country that cares for it's people has been wasted.
What you suggest would take decades, Putin doesn't have that, he wants to live to see Russia's greatness restored and it seems no matter the cost.
He HAD decades.... Thats the point. It was wasted and now there is this shit.
Yeah all 18 people that they will have left will really remember vlad fondly. Killed their future and present
Its the Russian way - throw bodies at a problem until it goes away. WW1, WW2, afghanistan - hell even the crimean war. Life has no meaning to their leaders
i assume that's casualties, so most of them are *going home crippled* at that! a living breathing reminder for their village.
Except Putin doesn't care because he is sending ethnic minorities disproportionately to minimize Russian losses. [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russias-ethnic-minorities-disproportionately-conscripted-to-fight-the-war-in-ukraine)
Not just that, he is sending older Russians that would have been owed pensions and prisoners to reduce the overall Russian debts to its people. Look at almost all pictures of men fighting in Ukraine, they all look 40+ rather than all the regular 18 year old conscripts who are being kept in blocking units, rear guard or defending other Russian territories. They know they have a demographic problem, so the Russian solution is to just kill off a lot of people who would soon be drawing pensions. Reduce minority population so ethnic Russians are still in control and empty prisons so they can increase political prisoners and POW without adding substantial burden. It's all quite nefarious.
Many don't realize that honouring pension commitments is one of Putins biggest challenges to staying in power.
Yes, it's the basis of power that he uses to get into power in the first place actually. But that's because most people don't know history, they know a couple fun facts
Per PBS, “The average age of Ukrainian soldiers, like those on the Russian side, is around 40, military analysts say.”
Ya because Ukraine has the same demographic problem as Russia
It's actually even worse in Ukraine than Russia, but Ukraine has the advantage of having very wealthy allies supporting it. Russia has zero allies and only a handful of friends of convenience
China seems to support them more and more, sadly
China is a friend of convenience, not an ally. They support Russia as long as they have something tangible to gain from supporting Russia, which is primarily their natural resources. And China doesn't have to do shit to support Russia financially to continue exploiting their natural resources. In fact the weaker and poorer Russia becomes, the easier it is for them to do it. All China has to do is keep the mines open and keep the railways and pipelines running
Ukraine knows this about themselves too, which is why they are very hestitant to lower the conscription age, it was recently lowered from 27 to 25, even though 18-25 year olds make excellent recruits.
I think family members are still entitled to the owed pensions.
oh you
Not if their dead soldier went AWOL, which is often what their superiors decide happened. Not dead = no pension.
Russias ethnic minorities love imperialism and murdering Ukrainians, look up Bucha.
It feels better being second lowest on the totem pole.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The UK Defense and US intelligence numbers come in lower than Ukraine's, but much closer to Ukraine's number's than Russian numbers. How do the journalists numbers compare to western intelligence estimates? I thought the independent journalists are only counting new graves in military cemeteries and are overlooking bodies abandoned on the battlefield, returned to families and buried in local towns, or cremated (including mobile crematoriums used on the front). Also I'm not sure if prison battalions or mercs are given military funerals of if this is another area of undercounting.
No, I don't think they are verified or could be. Exaggeration is essential toward morale.
Here is how this number should be understood: Militaries like doing head counts, and keeping track of lots of numbers. When soldiers are engaged with the enemy they report how many people they think they killed. A statistician at HQ then aggregates the numbers for all units. The reported number from Ukraine is likely this number taken at face value. When you are the shooter distinguishing between killed and wounded is impossible because this is a function of medical care. Shooters are also generally being shot at and dont have the clearest view. Shooters also tend to overreport and include decoys or near misses because to their reconning they were hits. For this reason shooters are good at reporting overall enemy **casualties= killed+wounded+missing+POW.** Honestly reported estimated losses include some extra from error in misses+decoys. So if Russia turns around and says **5,000 killed in April** this isn’t actually a disagreement, it would be a pretty reasonable number of dead given say 2000 error + 13000 wounded. Reasonable numbers for % wounded could be anywhere from 50%-90% depending on speed and quality of medical attention.
Of course not. Nobody will give you anything but propaganda during the active war, the number of loses is classified information.
This is just sad. Why do people have to die like dogs for someone else? Why?
Because stupid people will always support evil people who appeal to their base desires, prejudices and fears. The Russian people should overthrow their murderous dictator who is sending their men to die for his own personal glory, but they won’t because a good number of them support his insanity. It’s a story as old as civilization.
For absolutely no reason.
Wow, the world has pretty much moved on. We aren't seeing daily articles about Ukraine. And it's so easy to just for a moment think about other matters and forget what an absolute slaughter is going on there. It's insane how little Russia values their citizens lives. And seeing how Russia is sacrificing their citizens must motivate Ukrainians even further. Cause you sure as hell don't want Russia controlling your country, and end up being that worthless meat shield. Fuck Russia and give Ukraine our Gripen fighters!!!
For real. If Ukraine falls today, their sons will be the meat shield for Russia's conquest of Poland.
I remember when we saw Zelensky‘s speeches each week in the beginning of the war.. on reddit
Right, things have really gone silent. Which of course is "natural" when it comes to the media. And when you do get articles they tend to be slightly less supportive and talk about "eventual" loss. But i get it, we aren't seeing anything "big" that often anymore. "Nothing new on the eastern front"
I'm pro ukriane obviously but you guys gotta stop trusting both Russian and Ukrainian forces. They are both in full propaganda mode and can't be trusted
Germany lost 4 million soldiers in WW2, Soviet Union lost near 10m, guess who won.
According to David Glantz, total axis casualties on the eastern front amount to 9 million soldiers, compared to 11 million soviet casualties. If you look at actual killed soldiers, the ratio is closer to 1:1, but the overall number of soviet losses gets inflated by the 4 million or so soldiers captured at the beginning of Barbarossa, of which millions died in prison camps due to starvation.
Calling the open fields where they were left to starve and freeze prisons is generous. Keitel deserved his 40 minutes.
Glantz is obviously a boss on this topic, but I thought the KIA total was closer to 4.5 million Axis vs 7 million Soviet, and that does not include those who died after capture. If you include wounded it's obviously way higher. Estimates still vary quite a lot depending who you read.
That figure also includes POW's, missing, disabled. Krivosheev and Overman claim around 7 million total German dead, missing, and POW. Add the other axis casualties on the Eastern front, and you get 9 million total casualties.
[удалено]
The west won.
The west
The side with Air and Sea superiority that massively thwarted war-time production of the Axis. And did a lot of damage to the Axis abilities to acquire fuel, steel, weapons, aircraft, etc. Russia does not have that this time, because those allies are aiding Ukraine this time.
Germany, because they're an overall better country than Russia as it sits today.
I wonder how many Ukrainians were killed. Any ideas?
There is a UALosses project (you can google it), collecting informations about killed Ukrainian troops from open sources (for example obituaries). So far it has about 45 000 dead identified by name, date and place of birth etc.
It was around 59k deaths three months ago. Ukranian soldier Yuri Pupirin collected and analyzed information from local authorities. He claimed it on a interview with Alexander Shelest on 29 february 2024.
Story is that they’re currently just throwing themselves at the wall before the US aid starts reaching the front line. Wild if anywhere close to true.
It certainly feels like they’re trying to bruteforce the front line before new equipment arrives.
At this point we shouldn’t trust any figures given out by any countries’ ministry of defense - truth will come out after the war ends
As much as I want Ukraine to win and Russia to lose I just don’t believe any of this anymore, sounds very propagandist to always say Russia have lost so many and Ukraine haven’t. That’s why I don’t read the stories anymore, not so much lack of interest, but lack of trust in the reports.
which side of the propaganda do you think we are being fed?
A fair question, if you arent trying to be inflammatory. Another commenter above, [Gideon\_Lovet](https://www.reddit.com/user/Gideon_Lovet/), said all that need to be said: >As many external analysts will explain, Ukraine publishes high numbers, and Russia publishes low numbers, so the truth is somewhere in between, close to the average of the two. Ukraine gets numbers based on drone footage, and recovered casualties. They might see a Russian get hit, and consider it a casualty, while the Russian might limp back to their lines, get basic medical care, and remain on the front lines. >The most accurate reporting for deaths I've seen is independent journalists in Russia compile burial records. But these numbers are delayed as well, since the Russian government has to admit that the soldier died or release the body to relatives. They sometimes don't do this, either because they haven't recovered the body so they are "MIA", or they have and they list them as MIA so they don't have to give death payouts to the families.
I don’t buy it. Can’t trust either side when it comes to data.
How many millions of people did Russia lose during WW2? Granted, they were on the defensive then and in the offensive now, but I'm not sure Putin cares about how many of his people are thrown into a meat grinder. His legacy as a great leader for Russia is on the line.
These numbers are absolutely absurd lol Zelensky came out and said Ukraine only suffered 31,000 KIA. You are telling me in 1 month on the eastern front, Russia lost 20,000 soldiers (lets say wounded + killed) while also enjoying a 10:1 artillery advantage and air superiority? These news figures are actually straight garbage Worldnews needs to ban blatant propaganda news sources. Pravda and this shit is as bad as RT
I feel like war technology has progressed to the point where Russia’s “win by brute force” method doesn’t work anymore. Winning by smothering the enemy with your forces may have been more viable before our age of advanced tech, but if you can wipe out hundreds of soldiers with a remotely piloted drone, Putin has to think of a new strategy.
Their method would be "working" if Ukraine was not being supplied by other countries with larger economies and war industries. These last few months the Russians have successful caused the UAF to spend most of their ammo stores. This would still be with a horrifically high casualty rate by Russia, but that's how they seem to fight in every major war. Not really an effective method of fighting a major war but if all Putin cares about is land won, then Russia could technically take ground if the UAF stops getting military and economic aid.
Are we taking these claims seriously? As much as I’d like to see Russia get its ass handed to it, I just don’t see how 20k soldiers died yet they’ve gained a lot of territory and show no signs of stopping.
Now he is gathering more people from emigrants, debtors and people with multi-colored hair