• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark

We Never Know

No Slack
Sad deal for everyone involved.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark

The Ukrainian General Staff has now published its current figures on the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine (as of December 19, 2022). Accordingly, Russia has already lost 98,800 soldiers since the end of February – an increase of 520 compared to the previous day. As a result, Russian losses could break the 100,000 mark this week. There are also 5,969 armed vehicles, 4,592 vehicles and tankers, 2,988 tanks, 1,953 artillery systems, 1,657 unmanned aerial vehicles, 410 multiple rocket launchers, 281 airplanes, 264 helicopters, 653 cruise missiles, 212 air defense systems, 175 pieces of special equipment and 16 boats.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
Russia's approach to war seems to be one which takes on losses. They don't seem set up to do the guerilla warfare of Ukraine.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Sad deal for everyone involved.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark

The Ukrainian General Staff has now published its current figures on the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine (as of December 19, 2022). Accordingly, Russia has already lost 98,800 soldiers since the end of February – an increase of 520 compared to the previous day. As a result, Russian losses could break the 100,000 mark this week. There are also 5,969 armed vehicles, 4,592 vehicles and tankers, 2,988 tanks, 1,953 artillery systems, 1,657 unmanned aerial vehicles, 410 multiple rocket launchers, 281 airplanes, 264 helicopters, 653 cruise missiles, 212 air defense systems, 175 pieces of special equipment and 16 boats.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark

It's hard to tell, as different sources conflict with each other: Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War - Wikipedia

With the civilian deaths and the heavy losses on both sides, the final toll for this war could be in the hundreds of thousands.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
It's hard to tell, as different sources conflict with each other: Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War - Wikipedia

With the civilian deaths and the heavy losses on both sides, the final toll for this war could be in the hundreds of thousands.

Wikipedia listed some things inaccurately or misleadingly in the article.

Source: I checked the articles cited as proof of the Wikipedia claims. They didn't match up correctly with the Wikipedia claims.

Edit: Never mind. I'm the one who misread.
 
Last edited:

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
Wikipedia listed some things inaccurately or misleadingly in the article.

Source: I checked the articles cited as proof of the Wikipedia claims. They didn't match up correctly.

ie, if you check the articles Wikipedia referenced for the 100,000 Ukrainian forces losses, the articles say 40,000 Ukrainian forces may have been killed.

Edit: Never mind. I'm the one who misread.
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Wikipedia listed some things inaccurately or misleadingly in the article.

Source: I checked the articles cited as proof of the Wikipedia claims. They didn't match up correctly.

What I took from the Wiki article is that there are multiple sources with different figures regarding the number of casualties. The chart indicates which sources are being used, although it's hard to say exactly how many casualties there actually are. Some are listed as totals of both killed and wounded, while others list it separately. It seems to be a common thing with casualty counts, as there can be wide discrepancies from source to source.

From the chart, it appeared the US source has the highest estimates - losses on both sides around 100,000, not counting civilians, which are estimated about 40,000. At the lower end, estimates are between 10,000 - 20,000.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
What I took from the Wiki article is that there are multiple sources with different figures regarding the number of casualties. The chart indicates which sources are being used, although it's hard to say exactly how many casualties there actually are. Some are listed as totals of both killed and wounded, while others list it separately. It seems to be a common thing with casualty counts, as there can be wide discrepancies from source to source.

From the chart, it appeared the US source has the highest estimates - losses on both sides around 100,000, not counting civilians, which are estimated about 40,000. At the lower end, estimates are between 10,000 - 20,000.

You are right.

It turns out I misread some elements of the sources.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Sad deal for everyone involved.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark

The Ukrainian General Staff has now published its current figures on the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine (as of December 19, 2022). Accordingly, Russia has already lost 98,800 soldiers since the end of February – an increase of 520 compared to the previous day. As a result, Russian losses could break the 100,000 mark this week. There are also 5,969 armed vehicles, 4,592 vehicles and tankers, 2,988 tanks, 1,953 artillery systems, 1,657 unmanned aerial vehicles, 410 multiple rocket launchers, 281 airplanes, 264 helicopters, 653 cruise missiles, 212 air defense systems, 175 pieces of special equipment and 16 boats.

Losses too high: Russia’s army nears alarming mark
The numbers varies a bit from source to source, but I think the main thing to take away from this is that the loses is pretty high.

Also from what has been seen, it seems like a lot of the Russian soldiers are pretty poorly educated and equipped, especially the newly mobilized recruits who are basically just cannon fodder, which is to be expected.

Imagine being mobilized and 1-2 weeks later you find yourself in a wet trench with poor or lacking equipment while mortar fire, or potential drones can drop bombs in your lap at any point. I would expect most of these people to last a very short time.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
What I took from the Wiki article is that there are multiple sources with different figures regarding the number of casualties. The chart indicates which sources are being used, although it's hard to say exactly how many casualties there actually are. Some are listed as totals of both killed and wounded, while others list it separately. It seems to be a common thing with casualty counts, as there can be wide discrepancies from source to source.

From the chart, it appeared the US source has the highest estimates - losses on both sides around 100,000, not counting civilians, which are estimated about 40,000. At the lower end, estimates are between 10,000 - 20,000.
I'd have thought that this kind of information is too fluid, dynamic and uncertain for it to be the subject of a Wiki article.

I'm a bit alarmed by where this way of thinking about the war can lead, though. A war of attrition is the very worst that can be contemplated. And if it comes to that, the ultimate resources of Russia must surely outweigh those of Ukraine. NATO's own stockpiles of weaponry are getting low too, and our capacity to replenish them is not what it needs to be.

One thing, though, has changed on the Left in Britain. One hears no more talk of the supposedly evil nature of arms manufacturers. This has been an eye-opener. People are now coming to realise we do actually need to make these things, horrible though they may be.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
Russia's invasion was unprovoked, and it's military proceeded to commit heinous war crimes, including the rape and torture of children. There's no moral ambiguity here. It's as if the right are becoming cartoon villains.

I think there's something to be said for people getting in touch with their lower selves.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
It's hard to tell, as different sources conflict with each other: Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War - Wikipedia

With the civilian deaths and the heavy losses on both sides, the final toll for this war could be in the hundreds of thousands.
It’s crazy to look at your own life in its entirety, all of the emotions you felt, all the experiences you’ve had, and from beginning to end it feels like an entire world. Then to think that it’s only one life, and imagining a thousand more of these coming to an end, then multiplying that by a hundred. And even then that’s barely a splinter in the world.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I wouldn't have thought Putin to be a fool, but he sure did "screw the pooch" with this enterprise. Even if he had the military might to invade and occupy Ukraine, the cost of holding onto it would have been astronomical. Far greater than Russia could ever afford. So even if he had won his war, he would have lost it all shortly thereafter. And he didn't even have the military might to take over the country, let alone to have ever been able to hold onto it. And that's been a lesson that EVERY imperialist nation in the last 500 years has had to learn, usually the hard way. Including the United States, even with it's global military superiority. It's one thing to conquer people, and something else all together to actually assimilate them. Unless you are offering something significantly better than what they had before you invaded, you don't really have a prayer of assimilating them, because they will resist you every step of the way, to the point of exhaustion. And Putin didn't really even have the Russian people firmly behind him.

It was a doomed idea from the start. Even the U.S. with all it's military might could not occupy and assimilate a small country like Iraq, or Afghanistan. It just does not work that way. I can't imagine how Putin thought his invasion would somehow end any differently.
 
Top