You have published Putin's stated ratio. So to go to the point: do you give credibility to that or are you trying to squeeze your way out of publishing something you do not believe for its possible propaganda value? Before answering this, make sure you clearly understand the figure Putin gave.
If you ask me "do I give credibility to the figures I post", I will send you here:
So I do give some degree of credibility to figures:
https://www.minusrus.com/en
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Vehicles:
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240503-france-estimates-that-150-000-russian-soldiers-have-been-killed-in-the-ukraine-war
But you can also go to any more official source, they all assume between 465000 / 510000 loses.
If you ask me "do I give credibility to the figures I post", I will send you here:
[...]
Today the official killed / missing in action figure for the Ruzzian army has reached half a million. Figures in war tend to be only estimates, but it is still a dam big estimate.
Today the official killed / missing in action figure for the Ruzzian army has reached half a million. Figures in war tend to be only estimates, but it is still a dam big estimate.
So I do give some degree of credibility to figures:
https://www.minusrus.com/en
Quote
Personnel
~516.080 +1080
~516.080 +1080
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Vehicles:
Quote
(Click on the numbers to get a picture of each individual captured or destroyed vehicle)
Russia - 16199, of which: destroyed: 11633, damaged: 733, abandoned: 924, captured: 2909
Russia - 16199, of which: destroyed: 11633, damaged: 733, abandoned: 924, captured: 2909
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240503-france-estimates-that-150-000-russian-soldiers-have-been-killed-in-the-ukraine-war
But you can also go to any more official source, they all assume between 465000 / 510000 loses.
Claims that Ukraine is loosing up to 50k soldiers/month were published in response to your claims, for a full picture. I give as much credibility on Russian losses coming from the Ukrainian side, as I do for Ukrainian losses coming from the Russian side. It's hard to imagine any more biased sources than direct participants in the conflict. In fact it's kind of their job to lie to their population in order to keep morale from collapsing. But logically speaking citing such information from the involved party is just pure propaganda. But I think it's safe to say that the side that has almost daily air alerts all over the country, countrywide power blackouts, loosing land daily, mobilizing younger population, support of who's leader is dropping, and who's leadership's existence is totally dependent on the direct support from the outside, has few more reasons to exaggerate. In other words, who do you think is more dependent on public opinion, guy who's daily job is to fight for every pair of eyeballs, trying to gather as much publicity as humanly possible in order to bring as much attention/support to Ukraine as possible, or well...Putin?
Sorry but you are not giving an answer, You have published Putin's stated ratio. So to go to the point: do you give credibility to that or are you trying to squeeze your way out of publishing something you do not believe for its possible propaganda value?
I am insisting on this because either you have not thought this figure over or you assume nobody here can do some basic math or you are plain lying. Which one is it?
I'd expect to see war footage all over X, tik tok, etc... not just the lame stream media who has lost all credibility.
Which video would you like to see? I mean, have you tried Google or duckduck? They tend to be available one or two days after the hits are reported. Many times they can be geolocated easily.
Are you questioning the ATACAMS or drone strikes? I mean... there is satellite imagery commercially available all over for most of it. I am just trying figure out if you are trying to spread fud or have some honest interest in war porn.
I do believe that ratio of losses was almost even, but since the failed UA offensive, overwhelming Russian artillery, surprising effects and number of Russian glide bombs, number of Russian drones, and the fact that Ukraine's army is mostly conscripts where majority on Russia's side is contractors I do believe that now the ratio of losses is to Russia's advantage. You can extrapolate the rest, using your own numbers of Russian looses if you wish
Even a 2:1 ratio would yield 1 million Ukrainian soldiers out of action. do you think Ukraine mobilised 1 million soldiers? I don't. Probably more like half of that and the front in manned. See why those numbers are unbelievable?
No i do not, but all that means is that your initial assessment of 500k Russian losses is invalid. Believe both sides acknowledged that most of their losses are not from firearms but from shrapnel. And when one side has overwhelming advantage by thousands/month in almost everything exploding with shrapnel such as artillery shells, glide bombs, long range exploding drones, there just isn't close to enough precision weapons ATACMs/HIMARS/Storm Shadows/Scalp to even make a dent in that. Russia is just pushing one tree line at a time now (i'm sure you've seen those fields littered with shell craters) and with China's backing Russia has proven that they can maintain this, there's really no stopping this. All you can do is keep sending reinforcements to that tree line to slow Russia down, thus lowering age for mobilized conscripts.
Sad part is, after all of the escalations now current US administration cannot back out of this, thus the Irony that Trump is really Ukrainian's only option. After the elections. prior government would claim how Ukraine was totally almost winning before Trump, and Trump will blame Biden for starting a useless war which he ended. Everyone wins (well, except for all of the lost Ukrainians played as pawns by their government). (Russia wins by reasserting itself as regional power, like we're already seeing in Georgia/Armenia.
~
Let's be honest, if Ruzzia cannot "win" this year, it is going to get veeery ugly for them. The only strategy is always doubling the bet, and Martingales always end with a zero.
~
Let's be honest, if Ruzzia cannot "win" this year, it is going to get veeery ugly for them. The only strategy is always doubling the bet, and Martingales always end with a zero.
~
Good words, brother. Indeed, as a gambler I can confirm, martingale is a desperate strategy that you are using being not far from losing everything.
There'll be no "wins" for either side this year.
A very good indicator how well Russia is performing is a watching the inverse correlation of the amount nuclear threats spewing out of them.
When things are looking good, the nuclear threats drop.
When things are looking bad, the nuclear threats ramp up.
Last week the threats went into overdrive. Therefore things are very very bad for Russia.
Typically I'd agree, but in this case you're you're confusing the cause and effect. So in this case, a very good indicator of how well Ukraine is performing is watching inverse correlation of the promises of NATO troops in Ukraine.