According to CNN 75,000 Russians have been killed or wounded in Ukraine.
To put his in perspective, in 1968 at the height of the Vietnam war, the US had just under 17,000 deaths and probably another 51,000 wounded (based on an overall 3/1 ratio wounded/killed). So with 2/3 of the population that we had in 1970, and with Russia only fighting for 5 months so far, they are suffering population relative losses around 3.7 times the rate that we suffered at the height of Vietnam.
What was the estimated strength of the Russian army prior to the invasion?
I recall seeing 200,000.
ouchie!
Ukraine has taken very heavy losses too.
What do you think counts as a win for them? I think the most likely outcomes include Russia gaining Ukrainian territory. How bad does their economy have to be for it to be a loss if they control everything east of the Dnieper? If they get the Donbass + Crimea?
Pushing them back to the 2014 lines or out of Ukraine altogether would be a loss for Russia, I think? However, I think the former is unlikely and the latter even more so. Less likely than Russia making significant advances from the current position, IMO.
I disagree. Ukraine seems to consider anything less a loss, and at the moment seems to be willing to do things like internally admit it is at war to accomplish it. Russia seems to be thinking it can do it on the cheap and take over the whole country.
Simple fact is, that with a motivated population and extensive external support to the defender, it’s much more difficult to take and occupy ground than it is to defend and re-take that ground from a poorly motivated force. Russia has lost something between 1/3 and 1/6 of their invading forces, depending on who’s estimates you agree to. For that, they got their asses handed to them on at least one front, and have what ranges from slow to middling advances to complete setbacks on the others. Given that Ukraine continues to receive its current level of support, how would Russia actually win without owning up to the fact it started a war with its neighbor? Frankly, on a long enough time line, re-taking Crimea even seems doable.
A bit more than that. Ground forces had a paper strength of ~280,000 + ~45,000-60,000 airborne infantry (separate branch sort of like the U.S. marines, they were in the midst of an expansion) + ~12,000 naval infantry (part of the navy) + the ~2,000-2,500 of the elite special operations force ( distinct from the substantial numbers of elite Spetznaz sprinkled throughout the other three services above). So maybe ~350,000+, many of them support services rather than combat troops. This excludes the regular navy, air force, strategic rocket forces and the coastal defense forces exclusive of the naval infantry. And of course ignores reservists.
But there also mercenaries, maybe up to 20,000 by one rough estimate, and the Donbas separatists, maybe another 35,000-45,000. The Russians purportedly leaned very heavily on the latter early on and they took very heavy casualties. Doubtless they are lumped into the Russian totals. So you could take the Russian numbers to maybe ~400,000.
But if that 75,000 figure is accurate (and we just can’t know for sure), it’s still a staggering casualty rate any way you cut it.
Except the mistake or maybe feint towards Kiev, the war has been fought in territory that mostly Russians or very Russian Ukrainians are living in. So the Russian forces have not gone all out. Trying to lessen civilian deaths and destruction of infrastructure.
The Russians consider that this will become Russian territory if this ever ends that way. So don’t burn it all down.
They also hope for an eventual cease fire and negotiation that will end with a neutral Ukraine. So again, try and be a little bit nice, as far as war will allow.
No idea if this will happen. But it is why the war progresses so slowly.
The Ukraine forces have done very well in spite of the limitations they face. But they did not face a full on full force Russian attack.
I hope it comes to an end as soon as possible. I doubt the result will be any best case for anyone involved.
This is not true.
You claimed this previously and we showed definitively that it is not the case. Please stop saying it.
This is a joke. Russians aren’t holding back, they’re incompetent and incapable. This war has revealed what long term corruption can do to a military - it can turn out into a joke.
This statement is completely divorced from reality. Russians have been pummelling population centres with heavy artillery for weeks on end, using cluster munitions, thermobaric bombs and potentially even chemical weapons. Plus there are too many examples of soldiers deliberately terrorising civilians and kidnapping families and children. Russia has broken the Geneva Convention on countless occasions. Just about the only thing they haven’t used are nuclear weapons and that’s only because a) I think that might make even China upset and b) there is no tactical advantage to doing so in this sort of war.
Losing the 2nd second-biggest power plant in Ukraine has to be pretty significant.
It’s coal fired. Ukraine could have disabled it.
Site: Russian forces capture Ukraine’s second-biggest power station | Ukraine | The Guardian
Not really an expert, so I welcome any correction, but I believe the suffix “-sky” (or sometimes “-ski”) can be roughly translated as “belongs to” in the sense of “from the family of”. It follows the same pattern as Anglophone names ending in “-son”. Thus “Zelensky” means literally “from the Zelen family” (Zelen is in fact a Slavic surname, as is, for another instance, “Tchaikov”, hence “Tchaikovsky”). But as the suffixed name is associated with a specific person, it technically carries the gender of that individual, and “Zelenska” is indeed the feminine form.
I don’t believe this is by any means universal, though, especially outside the original home country. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen such usage in Canada or the US where it could undoubtedly cause all manner of legal problems. Here, a surname is just a name common to everyone in the family.
A bit of a side note for those who may be interested in an astonishing compendium of evidence about the almost boundless corruption of Putin and his henchmen, made by Alexei Navalny and released last year after his arrest in Moscow, following his return from Germany. Called Putin’s Palace in English (and also several other titles) it runs a total of 2 hours 20 minutes or so but is in manageable sections. Putin is literally a mob boss running a bunch of gangsters disguised as a government, the only difference from the Mob being that all of them are billionaires many times over.
The first half-hour or so chronicles Putin’s ruthless rise to power and the astounding degree of deeply entrenched theft and corruption throughout the echelons of Russian government, all of it now orchestrated by Putin and run primarily to his benefit and that of his closest henchmen. The next bit examines in detail the incredibly decadent luxuries of the gigantic palace he built for himself, which rivals the luxuries of Louis XIV or the wealthiest czars. Other segments examine other aspects of the vast estate and the incredible secrecy and security that surrounds it.
If anyone is under any illusion that Putin will “see reason” and negotiate peace in Ukraine this ought to set them straight. If he ever does so, it will only be if it’s absolutely in his own self-serving interest and there is no other realistic choice, and not for any other reason. Nor can he ever be trusted. He is actually on record, in the film, as explicitly saying (in a rare moment of candor – maybe he was drunk) “we say one thing, and do another”.
It’s on YouTube and available here, in Russian with English subtitles:
Tell that to the residents of Mariupol, Severodonetsk, and Lysychansk.
mariupol destruction - Google Search
severodonetsk destruction - Google Search
lysychansk destuction - Google Search
There’s also a good Podcast by Gavin Esler about Putin called The Big Steal. Most of it was recorded in 2020 but they have recently released a second series to cover off recent events. Highly recommended.
Does anyone else find it odd that both sides of this conflict are broadcasting their next offensive moves weeks in advance? 
Russia did it in the Donbas region and Ukraine is doing it now in the Kherson oblast.
I gotta believe doing so confers some sort of advantage, but what that would be eludes me.
It means not having to use resources on trying to keep a secret that’s likely not keepable in this age of social media and smartphones.
Could this be the first time in history where both sides in a conflict have nearly real time access to satellite and other remote sensing intelligence?
I’d expect that it’s to save civilian lives by notifying them to get out of the area, entirely.