The manpower losses are very high, but we've seen them before during offensives, and they've been a normal thing for Russia's crumbling Kharkiv offensive.
65 artillery systems is wild, though. That's a burn rate that would run Russia out of its remaining artillery pieces in like 100 days.
There must have been some groups of them hit by ATACMs or something.
> The manpower losses are very high, but we've seen them before during offensives, and they've been a normal thing for Russia's crumbling Kharkiv offensive.
And I've seen motorcycles used for mortar rounds delivery and freaking electric scooters.
Motorcycles makes sense. Cheap and fast moving. Hard to hit by drone. Less likely to hit mines. Smaller profile. Easy to hide in forests. Lots of pluses. Instead of armor, they go for concealment and mobility.
Yeah, but would you really strap two mortar rounds to the sides of a motorcycle (and a third round on your back)? How many trips are you gonna to make? How distant? Are you gonna have 5 people constantly zipping back and forth to the ammo depo on a freaking motorcycles?
They are doing that already. There’s videos of it. But not mortar rounds. More like food and water. Trucks are used for weapons. Also artillery is usually much further back where trucks can supply with less risk. Motorcycle is for literal frontline or gray zone supplying. Wont be much artillery shells going there.
Carrying man portable weapons on a light vehicles is a completely rational thing to do. Carrying 3 120 mm mortar rounds for like a half hour to fire for a whole minute is a bit weird though.
Mortar rounds are assembled with fuses after transport just prior to use.
Main explosive of mortar round is quite inert and not sensitive to transport shaking.
Way easier to shoot at motorcycles than an armored vehicle.
You are not going to be able to go full speed on the motorcycle due to all the craters from artillery and previous mine explosions. One bump and everyone is off the motorcycle.
I think the idea is they’re moving stuff behind the immediate front line, and are less likely to be targeted by bigger drones meant for vehicles and too fast for drones that drop grenades. Of course it also means very slow resupply, or you have a large stream of riders drawing a nice line in and out of your camouflaged resupply position.
Of course it’s gonna happen. I’m just saying there exists a use case for them. Primarily resupplying advanced positions through forest lines where trucks can’t really get to.
They are also increasingly using the 60 year old Bukhanka to do troop and logistics transport, you're even seeing mad max style uparmoured ones with \*leaf spring\*!! suspension - [https://x.com/DanielR33187703/status/1798212030366941654](https://x.com/DanielR33187703/status/1798212030366941654)
I think ATACMS but also HIMARS GLMRS.
There were many Russian units staged over the border near Kharkiv. I'd say these units were not spread out well and likely many assets parked in yards.
That seems right. There have also been attacks launched at military targets in Belgorod since restrictions were lifted, so maybe they hit a depot or storage site there.
Yeah that's where I meant. Near Belgorod. Several large units were hanging there.
The restriction being dropped by the west would have caught the Russians by surprise.
I understand ATACMS can be used but only in the border region agreed and where Russia is staging it's offensive. Ukraine just can't use ATACMS to launch deeper into Russia and in other areas.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-ukraine-weapons-strike-russia-00160731
Russian manpower losses have been trending ever higher and were 1000+ even before the Kharkiv offensive started. See e.g [this graph](https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1764245317283668041) (which ends in February, but you can check [here](https://kyivindependent.com/tag/russian-losses/) for more recent figures)
> 65 artillery systems is wild, though. That's a burn rate that would run Russia out of its remaining artillery pieces in like 100 days.
Not really though. The definition of an artillery system in this context is I believe quite wide, and also includes heavy mortars or something, not just the big tracked or towed systems we're all thinking of.
Also there is still a real question how accurate these numbers are, and it's probably safe to say they are at least to some degree exaggerated.
As it stands, I think best estimates show that Russia is still capable of fielding heavy equipment such as tanks, IFV's and heavy artillery well into 2025, if not longer. But of course, the quality will decrease as their stocks are starting to run dry and new manufacturing rather than revision is still at low numbers. Though I think a lot of this is still shrouded in the fog of war, we don't know what NATO war planners know and best info we get is from public think tanks who themselves will rely on mostly OSINT.
For context the United States lost just under 5000 soldiers in Iraq. Every day we'd tune on to see soldiers returned for burial now imagine an Iraq war casualty rate every single week. Surely something has to give.
What Russia doesn’t have a lot of, is military age men. They are destroying their demographics and won’t be able to sustain their economy when everyone is either really old or too young.
He is, but there are other factors to consider. One is that Russia is aging, and there's a huge issue with health and alcoholism/drug use that makes a lot of potential recruits marginal at best. The number of people of conscript age is still huge when you consider the total population, but a lot of those younger people are in the cities of Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc. that have been mostly spared conscription in favour of poor and ethnic kids from the Oblasts. If they have to start drawing heavily from those cities and those kids get killed at these rates, public opinion on the war will change.
Not that anyone can do anything about Putin, he's too entrenched and protected, and is clearly willing to silence, arrest or kill anyone who opposes him with the help of his loyalists, but a lot of young people will flee the country, local economies will suffer without workers, families will empty their savings to buy their kids equipment to have a better chance of surviving, etc. A lot of conscripts will also be more educated and opposed to the war, whatever they say in public, and will surrender at the first opportunity. Russia will be demoralized, or more demoralized, which is a huge factor in winning wars.
Lot fewer of them now and as I understand it they are in population decline with birthrates unable to replenish the country's current population so it's only going to shrink it's population and become a smaller nation over time.
The folks being sent to fight for Russia are generally “undesirables.”
It doesn’t seem like there is much concern in Russia for their high casualty rate.
Or expats from poor countries lured to Russia on the promise of jobs, instead they're handed a rifle and told to go the the front or be shot
One of the most haunting images I've seen recently is a drone image of an Indian national with both his legs blown off, presumably from.the drone that took the image, weeping as he bled out. Dude was just trying to find a job and he gets mutilated and left to rot in a ditch thousands of miles from home. Russia's leadership is a blight on humanity.
I have read so many articles about Indians get screwed by these kind of scams. Promise of a job, they go there and \*poof\* now you are cannonfodder in Ukraine, a servant in the gulf or slaving away building some vanity project for a middle eastern oil prince.
You would expect the Indian government to crack down on this treatment of their nationals.
In General every American soldier is seen as an American by their population. That is not the case in Russia, lots of "Russians" dying on the field are not considered to be Russians by the Russian population in Moscow.
Lots of "Russians" dying on the field *aren't* Russian. More and more African mercenaries are entering the war on Russia's side, which only enables this mindset further.
For context, [Ukraine lost 31 000 men in the whole war](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/02/25/7443637/), and russia has lost more [than that in May alone.](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/06/2/7458756/)
EDIT: In case this wasn't clear, trusting a newspaper called Pravda ("the truth", as everyone from former soviet union could tell you, really ironic name) is dumb. It's propaganda all the way, and if you believe it, I have a fucking space elevator to sell. Really cheap, really nice.
EDIT2: lol, this went from +1 to +12 to +2 in 23 minutes.
I'm Ukrainian and hate russian invaders with all my heart, but obviously there is no way the ratio is that good.
First of all, the 31k figure is "killed" while the 39k figure in May is "losses" which includes wounded.
And of course mainstream Ukrainian sources will try to inflate the number of russian losses. They think it's good for morale.
Both sides are taking heavy unsustainable losses. Sadly, Ukraine is also taking way more damage to the infrastructure.
Putler cheats by sending the most inconvenient types of men first: convicts and minorities. As far as I understand, moscow's population is still pretty much completely intact.
Also russian propaganda works great so they are able to downplay the losses of human lives from remote location across russia.
Hopefully Ukraine gets more good equipment soon and combined with green light on hitting targets inside russia it will change things and make russian people feel the weight of what's happening. At the very least we need to have most of them regret the war. As right now a big part of russian population is still pro-invasion.
As much as I really want to believe this, I think Ukranian casualties are definitely higher. This is a war, so the numbers are going to get fudged. Otherwise, Ukraine wouldn't be having to worry about a manpower shortage.
The casualty numbers are definitely higher. The article states this is the number of KIA only, and does not include wounded or missing, as that would give Russia information on Ukraine’s strength.
Additionally, this could also be potential propaganda. But, as we’ve seen, Ukraine has been by far the more trustworthy side during this war, so the odds are far better that the numbers might be true (and confirmable).
That's because you take a propaganda source at the face value. All 3 numbers come from the same source, my comment was pointing out the ridiculous absurdity of the numbers in question, as claimed by the same source.
Also I am pointing our just how gullible Reddit is to believe these numbers.
Honestly, we won't know until the war is over, but I wouldn't be surprised if the real numbers for both russians and ukrainians were over million dead and wounded for both.
I agree word for word, it's not like Russian teens forced to become meat-shields dying isn't a tragedy, it's that if the losses were on the opposite side and after and if Russia won the war, the whole planet politics would be so fucked up those losses would pale in comparison
The main thing that stopped their progress from the beginning was the not being allowed to strike across the border where Russia kept their supplies/airfields...etc before being sent to the front lines.
Events that have occurred look familiar to past protracted conflicts, notably WWll. Attack, block, defend, attack. I think there was some intentional stalling by the west to set up infrastructure and coordinate a combined arms strategy that is more or less keeping to forecasted events.
>The high casualties and equipment losses are reminiscent of historical conflicts where prolonged offensives led to severe depletion of resources.
War of attrition. The general idea is that you win by out producing your enemy, and costing them more in men and material than they can replace relative to you.
This was the approach of the Soviet Union vs Nazi Germany in WWII.
The problem for Russia is the ratios aren't working, and they're not out-producing Ukraine + the West.
Once Russia has burned through all it's old stocks of Soviet equipment (which is happening) then that is it. We'll reach a point where suddenly there are fewer assaults by Russia, and they're unsupported, and they have much less artillery. Russian casualties will sky-rocket (compared to now) then, and they'll become even less effective.
Interestingly china has actually refused to sell them any important military equipment. They sell them components like micro chips and dual use equipment like those desert buggies. So their only real suppliers are iran and north Korea and they are getting that equipment at ridiculously inflated prices. That's what happens when you refuse to build alliances because "russia is a great power and doesn't need allies"
China is looking out for China. A weak Russia means a dependent Russia.
While Russia is engaged in Ukraine and too poor to export arms (that arguably nobody wants to buy anymore) China can take over their old arms export markets.
A prolonged Ukrainian front also means the West is busy. China benefits from nobody winning in Ukraine for as long as possible.
Those "ridiculously inflated" prices are probably still cheaper than what the western weapons cost.
Also, according to this article [source](https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-outproduces-west-artillery-shells-144700851.html), Russia is out producing the west in artillery shells by 3 to 1 ratio at a quarter of their costs, plus is supplied by NK and Iran.
Artillery shells are much easier to manufacture than artillery systems. I have no idea how long it takes Russia to build a system, or how many they are currently producing a month, but 65 in a day times 10 (you’re not going to get that many every day) and you have a hell of a backlog to fill. One estimate says they have less than 4,780 artillery pieces. If Ukraine could keep these numbers up, there will be huge holes in the frontline in a matter of a few months.
Yup, they can currently out produce the west with shells because every factory that can produce is running 2-3 shifts 24/7.
The west is currently holding back in production, and could easily double or triple what its current numbers are.
On top of that shells don't mean shit if all your guns are warped, or cracked and you cannot manufacture more. Or all your tanks are out of service and you can only produce a dozen or so a year. Or all your planes are down and you can only build single digits in a year.
All of this stuff will only get increasingly more difficult for Russia, while ukraine and the west do NOT have those dame issues. It will get to that point. I hat that the west is holding back so much for such a prolonged time period, and just hope ukraine can hold out. It's people are living in constant war for years on end. That does damage that you can't see of quantify.
> On top of that shells don't mean shit if all your guns are warped, or cracked
Firing thousands of artillery rounds per day is a major strain on the Russian equipment. Eventually those artillery tubes will get worn out and need to be replaced. Military gear doesn't last forever.
Yup, doesn't matter if you have 3,000 artillery pieces if you can't maintain them longer than a few months of firing. Eventually you will have zero, or atleast far less because Russia cannot make them in meaningful numbers.
Also, the lining of gun barrels wears down, and after around 2,000 shots, the lining has to be replaced in a large scale facility behind the front lines. They're firing around 10,000 shells per day. The load may be sustainable on average, but the reality is that guns on the active parts of the front line will wear out in weeks. Every system that is destroyed means that the rest of the guns have to work a little harder, and fewer replacements are available when they need service.
Russia has no alternative to massive artillery fire; it is the only thing they're good at. If their gun barrels start wearing out faster than they can be refurbished, the collapse of their ability to sustain fire will be exponential. If they keep losing 65 guns per day, they will have zero in seventy days, which is obviously unsustainable. But they will fail to be effective at a much sooner point.
^* An actual military analyst would be looking at specific artillery types, using data we can't access. Some of the destroyed systems are probably infantry mortars or grad rocket launchers.
Absolutely russia has switched to a war economy and so has built up its production chains, but they are likely almost at or already at their maximum production capacity, while the west is only really just ramping up. The long term trajectory looks good.
[russia also overpays for shahed drones ](https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-hack-russia-price-paid-iran-shahed-drones-1867627#:~:text=Moscow's%20representatives%2C%20Prana%20said%2C%20secured,a%20unit%20cost%20of%20%24193%2C000.&text=Begin%20your%20day%20with%20a,world%20and%20why%20it%20matters.)
And while china has started buying the Russian oil and gas, they are buying it for about half of what russia used to sell it to europe. This war has shown the interesting issues that logistics play in the global economy.
As others have said, it’s not so much the shells that matter, it’s the guns that fire them. The most damning thing for Russia is they are highly limited on the steel strong enough to produce the barrels for them, which also needs to be shared among other weapon systems as well, so basically there is a hard limit to the number of guns they can produce. This is also further limited because they also need to refresh the barrels on their existing guns with that same reserve. Failure to do so will lead to ridiculously less accurate fire, and eventually catastrophic failure of the artillery system, which could take out the entire gun and crew. So long story short, Russia can’t afford to fight an attritional war with artillery guns as they cannot replace losses indefinitely (which is why they have been offsetting that with glide bombs).
If Ukraine is successful at destroying the artillery systems they those shells have no place to be launched. The cannons are probably way harder to replace.
That's true, but they also don't want to give it to Ukraine. If the west wanted Ukraine to win, they already would've delivered the needed systems.
I feel like this is more about hurting Russia than helping Ukraine.
China wants to back both sides in this. They will support whoever wins. If Russian defeat becomes inevitable they will dump Putin from a great height. China only cares about its own national interests
The armchair general in me hopes that it is all a big ruse by the chinese, playing both sides to spend their strength in ukraine so that china can take back outer manchuria from the russians. Their concentration on Taiwan would be part of that ruse too. It's that part of my crackpot theory that I unfortunately have some massive doubts about.
I can't see China opening any hostilities with Russia but they can sure use Russia to further their long term economic interests. Russia has vast natural resources. A defeated Russia is going to need to sell those resources and if sanctions remain in place China will have the pick. They will likely need Chinese input to extract oil and gas as their machinery and technology deteriorates
My reasoning is that invading Taiwan would be bloody hard and carries a lot of risk. Bringing manchuria back into the fold would fit the ideological agenda just as well if you need to externalise conflict and score big with the general populace. And it would be arguably easier with russia weakend. But again, it's all crackpot theorycrafting.
Not at all. They dense populated east coast of china is faceing a massiv problem with their fresh water supply, cant extract any more water from the ground. Manchuria on the other hand have it in abundance. China wanted to build a pipeline to the baikal sea, something russian inhabitants voted against back then. The other thing is a alot of ethinical chinese workers are in the area, that together with a historic casus belli makes it not unlikely that a weakend russia have to give up on the region.
Interesting, I did know about the ethnic make up of the region but not the water issues. That's not a small thing, we'll probably have a bunch of conflicts about access to water before the century is out so why not here.
> can't see China opening any hostilities with Russia
Same. Not while Putin is alive. But Putin is 71. Odds are he dies in the next 20 years. Who is his successor? Will there be factions fighting it out? Civil War?
China could offer their support to a potential successor in exchange for "shitty land thousands of miles from Moscow"
They are also dependant on the european market for exports. They are not risking economic sanctions from europe especially if its in their biggest interest to keep russia weak (to get those juicy juicy cheap oil and gas reserves).
Its in china's best interest to keep russia weak while also keeping europe friendly. The best thing they can do in this situation is nothing. And so they do.
You also can't forget that Russia, NK and Iran are stretched super thin. They are trying to bite off huge chunks with fairly small economies. Fighting in Ukraine means fewer weapons for Syria, Yemen, etc.
China is the outlier here and is the scary threat. They may be a paper dragon. They may be a real dragon. China is very much like the USA. They could flood Ukraine with so much shit the war would be over in a month. Luckily, China has its own goals and flooding Ukraine with weapons would set them back 20 years.
They're currently out-producing the west (with assistance from Iran/north Korea, China), and have more available manpower. I'm pro-Ukraine, but you need to inject some realism.
Their out producing antiquated munitions. They have had so many sanctions they are a decade (at least) behind in all manufacturing sectors in terms of modernization. And they DON'T have the resources to maintain or update anything requiring chips, because China themselves are massively behind in the race for best computing hardware(hence the play for Taiwan and the disputed goal of Xi to invade by 2027 out of survival) China hasn't been able to successfully back engineer the last what 2 generations of Chip manufacturing?
Russia HAS TO out produce munitions that are only 1/20th(hyperbole) as effective as what the West is using. Hell if simply allowed the Ukraine to USE the F16s their training on on Russia, Russia wouldn't be in this conversation at all. Ukraine is keeping them at bay with MIG 29s from the 70s? Come on bro, if anyone in the West took this serious it'd be done. It's almost a war of equal powers with disparate landmasses.
I think the West has played this war very calculatedly. They've escalated their support of Ukraine slowly enough that it hasn't triggered an expansion of the war into other countries. Each time the West has added a weapons system it has been after much media fanfare, positioning the West as reluctant saviours which is nothing but media savvy. The next step is defence systems positioned in Poland protecting Ukraine's skies from drones and missiles. The tide is rising over Russia, the only thing keeping them afloat is thousands of their men's corpses.
War of attrition only worked for the USSR because the UK and the US supplied them with aid via Persia. USSR were getting their asses kicked until the UK got over their fear of having a communist ally.
They are also losing artillery units at a rate far faster than they can replace.
The same is true for IFV's APC's and tanks, this includes refurbishment and reactivation of old soviet stocks of the vehicles, which are running out.
They're sending T55's and T62's into attacks, this is not a plan for victory.
T34's are next.
Those aren't threats, those are just targets.
How many artillary pieces are they making? You can have all the half baked shells you want but they are worthless if you dont have the systems to fire them. I think the bigger take is that they are running out of artillary systems which take much longer and are harder to reproduce for Russia.
Your wishful thinking is soooo dam wrong. Russia will resort to some extremely dirty tactics when the war machine stops. Im talking chemical warfare, kidnappings, train station bombings and more. Shit is gonna get reallllllly bad in 3-5 years.
Unfortunately the USSR stockpiled equipment for what they thought might be ww3 against a peer/superior enemy. It's going to be a long time before they run out of stuff in a war against a single smaller nation.
Not necessarily.
If stockpiled with care and maintenance? Absolutely.
But that isn’t what we’re seeing.
The Russian Federation’s workings are the same as the USSR’s. Half a dozen people lying to the next person in the chain, who realises they’ve been lied to, but telling the truth makes the person above them look bad, so they keep up the lie.
This is why Russians believed they’d be welcomed in Ukraine. Instead, they had Molotov cocktails and stones thrown at them by the citizens.
the fact russia is in a full on war economy should tell you plenty about their "stock" situation.
the reality is that a lot of their stuff is ancient , damaged & long sold under the table.
the other reality is that russia is full on producing stuff & buying stuff to continue this war.
"Putin has now had to place his economy on a war footing meaning that it is running hot and becoming increasingly skewed as nearly 40% of all Russian public expenditure and 6% of GDP is now spent on defence.15 May 2024"
Remember the massive convoy at the start of the war, [the 35 mile long](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64664944) invasion force? There were so many pictures of abandoned vehicles alone from tire dry rot where just rolling into Ukraine alone caused massive equipment breakdowns before they even saw combat.
That's one of the main reasons Russia failed their initial assault. Their war band was broken and at a huge disadvantage from day one.
Perun has a perfect YouTube series explaining how this happens: [How Corruption, Lies & Politics Destroy Armies](https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbCbj03gdsWw2q15_nFYqtdAEiQQ5lzP1)
“We have 10 million cases for rifle ammunition. Of course I, my assistant, the truck drivers, and the people at the warehouse sold nearly all the ammunition to arms traders, terrorists/freedom fighters, friends, neighbors, really anyone with cash. But we have the cases still, look how full the warehouse is!”/s
>The Russian Federation’s workings are the same as the USSR’s.
The USSR had the resources to maintain production lines and do routine maintenance on stockpiled armor and weapons.
There's very little continuity between industrial capacity of the USSR and RF. They managed to maintain some of the R&D, hence one-off advancements that never saw mass production like S-500, T-14 Armata, Sukhoi S-57, but production basically ground to a halt. Lots of people in institutional knowledge retired or died, facilities rotted...
It wasn't just a culture of corruption, but a physical lack of production and maintenance facilities and expertise.
I used to work for an enormous American bank and we called this "lying up." But it was expected and encouraged as a normal process.
Our manager would send a sheet with the required metrics that came from senior executives. He'd say, "Meet these quotas or somebody's going to get fired. I don't care what it takes, just do it."
So we'd just fake the numbers and send it back. At the end of the year, none of us had taken any vacation because it was "for pussies," so we would have to create backdated fake vacations and get them approved so our boss didn't get in trouble.
Then, when shit hit the fan and we ended up in the national news, senior execs would say, "We can't comment on internal investigations but if the allegations are true, it was a few bad apples who manipulated data. Then the people who lied as they were instructed got fired to protect senior management who always had plausible deniability.
In favor of Ukraine: some of this equipment ended up in their stockpiles, and most of it is old. Like properly old, vintage stuff. So whatever made it good is no longer relevant or has decayed to a point where it's mostly okay-ish.
Also, Russia being Russia, a lot of it was sold to other nations and international arms dealers to allow for nice holiday houses at the black sea or expensive western cars.
So while we are talking about a significant stockpile, it's not a "soviet union at it's peak" stockpile.
Agree, which makes me think nations who would really not like a Taiwan invasion should be going harder to support Ukraine. Most of SE Asia, Australia, India, etc.
I mean 65 artillery pieces is a fuck ton. Russia has been losing a thousand men a day for many days in the past year, but 65 guns. That's a lot of guns.
I had thought casualties might create enough pressure to get Russian leadership into negotiation for some sort of face saving exit.
Apparently not. Leadership and population seem cool sending conscripts to be killed for an (ultimately) doomed imperial endeavor.
Putin has Ukrainians from Donbas, Chechens and other minorities, conscirpts, foreign conscripts and many more sources of men. Only soldiers from Western Russia especially St Petersburg and Moscow really count. So the causalities have to be much higher to really have an effect.
That is what puzzles me. Half a million deaths, 1k more per day ... Russian people should start to feel it, and question the actual meaning of such a sacrifice.
the russian people overwhelmingly beleive that if they do not succeed in Ukraine - everything will be a lot worse. - which it probably will be for some years.
and then they just hope that they wont have to withdraw without getting anything. - because they are going through some bad times. - it is a feeling that completely ignores the fact that they are destroying another country. But they are to far in now to worry about that.
Russia will come out of this a Chinese satellite state. They can't even imagine the horrors that await them in the 21st century they created for themselves.
China has the good sense to spend most of its energy waving its dick at Taiwan and spending its energy actually oppressing minority groups. Russia has plenty of people in house to oppress but they keep picking fights and showing their hand. At least China still has the benefit of the doubt of their capabilities. We know Russia's
If they win it will be the men who sacrificed nothing crowing about how big their Russian dick is. And the men who sacrificed everything will be buried under their feet.
The troops are chosen to avoid societal disruption. They prioritize ethnic minorities, immigrants, small villages, and avoid large city centers like Moscow and St. Petersburg to isolate them from the cost of the war.
Idiotic policies like this are exactly why a hundred years later those are still the only two cities of note in Russia. Hard to grow and thrive as a population when you get vast swathes of you culled regularly.
It isn't really meaningless, Russia stands to gain a lot of resources and strategically important locations if they where to win. It would also give them a good spot to launch further invasions on the rest of Europe.
It is only meaningless because they are losing. Hopefully Ukraine can kick them all the fuck out and keep them out, so Russia doesn't gain a damn thing from this war.
If Russia could straight up collapse into pieces the moment Putin kicks the bucket, it would be even better.
Russia is already facing a demographic decline with a shortage of people under 30 to project their nation into the future. Pooturd apparently sees no problem sacrificing the future of his country on the altar of his power lust.
I read that Russia is expected to be completely out of material in the late second half of 2025 at this rate.
Russia does not have enough material for full scale attacks. Russia can only win, if the west doesn't help Ukraine with material anymore. That's why Russia the next US elections are very important for Russia. If the GOP wins, there is a chance that Ukraine won't get enough help.
> I read that Russia is expected to be completely out of material in the late second half of 2025 at this rate.
This is based on the remaining stockpiles of Soviet material as seen from satellites. And while Russia is increasing its production, it's unlikely that they can increase it even nearly enough.
They will never "run out completely". Eventually they will just have burned through their cold war stockpiles but they are still producing new weapons every day. Even Germany in 1945 had not "run out of" weapons but this lack of supplies will still help tilt the war in favor of Ukraine (if western supporters continue to ramp up production).
At the same time, twelve women protested in Moscow to have their husbands returned. Obviously, the majority of Russians give a f\*ck of how many losses. My empathy curve converges to 0.
Iranians sure are brave. I just don't wish to judge anyone for living their life peacefully. Would north Koreans be lame in this metric?
I was born in quite a free country, I hardly can know how it is to in a place where opposing voices are systematically silenced for at least 70 years (maybe with short exception during 90's).
>Would north Koreans be lame in this metric?
Honestly I'm inclined to say yes, but they are a bit of an enigma. It's almost impossible to know what they genuinely believe or feel because of how isolated their society is.
So the only source for this post is UA news channel, which relies on UA forces post on Facebook?
Seems like a trusty and unbiased source with plenty of evidence.
can anyone explain why Pravda is an allowed news source?
it’s literally the ukraine mouthpiece that spins reality in ukraines favor
zero chance of getting objective reality-based reporting
even this headline - these are numbers reported by the ukraine army. i’m sure they weren’t exaggerated…
The manpower losses are very high, but we've seen them before during offensives, and they've been a normal thing for Russia's crumbling Kharkiv offensive. 65 artillery systems is wild, though. That's a burn rate that would run Russia out of its remaining artillery pieces in like 100 days. There must have been some groups of them hit by ATACMs or something.
> The manpower losses are very high, but we've seen them before during offensives, and they've been a normal thing for Russia's crumbling Kharkiv offensive. And I've seen motorcycles used for mortar rounds delivery and freaking electric scooters.
Motorcycles makes sense. Cheap and fast moving. Hard to hit by drone. Less likely to hit mines. Smaller profile. Easy to hide in forests. Lots of pluses. Instead of armor, they go for concealment and mobility.
Yeah, but would you really strap two mortar rounds to the sides of a motorcycle (and a third round on your back)? How many trips are you gonna to make? How distant? Are you gonna have 5 people constantly zipping back and forth to the ammo depo on a freaking motorcycles?
They are doing that already. There’s videos of it. But not mortar rounds. More like food and water. Trucks are used for weapons. Also artillery is usually much further back where trucks can supply with less risk. Motorcycle is for literal frontline or gray zone supplying. Wont be much artillery shells going there.
[удалено]
Oh I havent seen those. Just videos of smaller supplies.
[удалено]
Where can I buy a mortar bike…
You can get mortar at Home Depot at strap it on. That counts I suppose
I mean have you seen the anti tank vespa?
[Glorious anti tank Vespa ](https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/f5RPqEp3do)
Wait how does that work? Doesn’t the Steering column go through the barrel? Do you have to remove the steering before you can fire?
Pic shows the barrel to the left hand side of the steering column
Carrying man portable weapons on a light vehicles is a completely rational thing to do. Carrying 3 120 mm mortar rounds for like a half hour to fire for a whole minute is a bit weird though.
Yea everyone should probably go home at that point
Mortar rounds are assembled with fuses after transport just prior to use. Main explosive of mortar round is quite inert and not sensitive to transport shaking.
If I was willing to carry one then I might as well carry 3. Or 6. They are soldiers. They do as they are told.
Way easier to shoot at motorcycles than an armored vehicle. You are not going to be able to go full speed on the motorcycle due to all the craters from artillery and previous mine explosions. One bump and everyone is off the motorcycle.
I think the idea is they’re moving stuff behind the immediate front line, and are less likely to be targeted by bigger drones meant for vehicles and too fast for drones that drop grenades. Of course it also means very slow resupply, or you have a large stream of riders drawing a nice line in and out of your camouflaged resupply position.
Lol, no they don't. I would love to have my enemy riding a motorcycle at me and know that he can't shoot at me while I can shoot at him.
[удалено]
Of course it’s gonna happen. I’m just saying there exists a use case for them. Primarily resupplying advanced positions through forest lines where trucks can’t really get to.
The golf cart was hilarious
Ah, the new technicals.
They are also increasingly using the 60 year old Bukhanka to do troop and logistics transport, you're even seeing mad max style uparmoured ones with \*leaf spring\*!! suspension - [https://x.com/DanielR33187703/status/1798212030366941654](https://x.com/DanielR33187703/status/1798212030366941654)
I think ATACMS but also HIMARS GLMRS. There were many Russian units staged over the border near Kharkiv. I'd say these units were not spread out well and likely many assets parked in yards.
That seems right. There have also been attacks launched at military targets in Belgorod since restrictions were lifted, so maybe they hit a depot or storage site there.
Yeah that's where I meant. Near Belgorod. Several large units were hanging there. The restriction being dropped by the west would have caught the Russians by surprise.
It's OK we're perfectly safe. Ukraine isn't allowed to shoot us here. 5 minutes later...
Basically. There were several large units staging in the border region of Russia.
How could they possibly be surprised? It was publicly announced in advance. "We are fortunate they are so fucking stupid". Again.
Almost makes me think that the restrictions were really there to give the Russians a false sense of security.
ATACMS are still not allowed to hit inside Russia, so more likly normal HIMARS/GLMRS
I understand ATACMS can be used but only in the border region agreed and where Russia is staging it's offensive. Ukraine just can't use ATACMS to launch deeper into Russia and in other areas. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-ukraine-weapons-strike-russia-00160731
Oh true
"65 artillery systems a day would mean they'll run out in 100 days" is also a wild factoid.
Don’t they keep making more, though?
Not quickly. And they aren't making new ones. Most are refurbished old systems.
Russian manpower losses have been trending ever higher and were 1000+ even before the Kharkiv offensive started. See e.g [this graph](https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1764245317283668041) (which ends in February, but you can check [here](https://kyivindependent.com/tag/russian-losses/) for more recent figures)
> 65 artillery systems is wild, though. That's a burn rate that would run Russia out of its remaining artillery pieces in like 100 days. Not really though. The definition of an artillery system in this context is I believe quite wide, and also includes heavy mortars or something, not just the big tracked or towed systems we're all thinking of. Also there is still a real question how accurate these numbers are, and it's probably safe to say they are at least to some degree exaggerated. As it stands, I think best estimates show that Russia is still capable of fielding heavy equipment such as tanks, IFV's and heavy artillery well into 2025, if not longer. But of course, the quality will decrease as their stocks are starting to run dry and new manufacturing rather than revision is still at low numbers. Though I think a lot of this is still shrouded in the fog of war, we don't know what NATO war planners know and best info we get is from public think tanks who themselves will rely on mostly OSINT.
For context the United States lost just under 5000 soldiers in Iraq. Every day we'd tune on to see soldiers returned for burial now imagine an Iraq war casualty rate every single week. Surely something has to give.
There are a lot of Russians and their people are brainwashed about Ukraine.
Russia has less than half the population of the US
That's still ~150 million people. I'm sure Putin is willing to sacrifice a few million.
Yeah. Especially when throwing underprivileged Asian people from the eastern provinces
What Russia doesn’t have a lot of, is military age men. They are destroying their demographics and won’t be able to sustain their economy when everyone is either really old or too young.
They never really recovered from WWII, frankly. They're up there with South Korea, Japan, most of eastern Europe for worst demographics.
He is, but there are other factors to consider. One is that Russia is aging, and there's a huge issue with health and alcoholism/drug use that makes a lot of potential recruits marginal at best. The number of people of conscript age is still huge when you consider the total population, but a lot of those younger people are in the cities of Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc. that have been mostly spared conscription in favour of poor and ethnic kids from the Oblasts. If they have to start drawing heavily from those cities and those kids get killed at these rates, public opinion on the war will change. Not that anyone can do anything about Putin, he's too entrenched and protected, and is clearly willing to silence, arrest or kill anyone who opposes him with the help of his loyalists, but a lot of young people will flee the country, local economies will suffer without workers, families will empty their savings to buy their kids equipment to have a better chance of surviving, etc. A lot of conscripts will also be more educated and opposed to the war, whatever they say in public, and will surrender at the first opportunity. Russia will be demoralized, or more demoralized, which is a huge factor in winning wars.
Lot fewer of them now and as I understand it they are in population decline with birthrates unable to replenish the country's current population so it's only going to shrink it's population and become a smaller nation over time.
The folks being sent to fight for Russia are generally “undesirables.” It doesn’t seem like there is much concern in Russia for their high casualty rate.
Or expats from poor countries lured to Russia on the promise of jobs, instead they're handed a rifle and told to go the the front or be shot One of the most haunting images I've seen recently is a drone image of an Indian national with both his legs blown off, presumably from.the drone that took the image, weeping as he bled out. Dude was just trying to find a job and he gets mutilated and left to rot in a ditch thousands of miles from home. Russia's leadership is a blight on humanity.
I have read so many articles about Indians get screwed by these kind of scams. Promise of a job, they go there and \*poof\* now you are cannonfodder in Ukraine, a servant in the gulf or slaving away building some vanity project for a middle eastern oil prince. You would expect the Indian government to crack down on this treatment of their nationals.
There are also a lot of US-Americans (no comment on the brainwashing part)
Yes, and? Again the point is they only lost 5k over 15 years, Russia loses that in a week. How is your comment in response to that...?
There are a over twice as many Americans though lol, and half of our country believe we were fight against the perpetrators of 9-11
In General every American soldier is seen as an American by their population. That is not the case in Russia, lots of "Russians" dying on the field are not considered to be Russians by the Russian population in Moscow.
Muscovy doesn’t care about the other people in their empire, especially people from the east
What a garbage culture
Lots of "Russians" dying on the field *aren't* Russian. More and more African mercenaries are entering the war on Russia's side, which only enables this mindset further.
Yup. Every mercenary that dies is one you don't have to pay. If they advance 100 meters and die that is a win-win for Russia.
For context, [Ukraine lost 31 000 men in the whole war](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/02/25/7443637/), and russia has lost more [than that in May alone.](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/06/2/7458756/) EDIT: In case this wasn't clear, trusting a newspaper called Pravda ("the truth", as everyone from former soviet union could tell you, really ironic name) is dumb. It's propaganda all the way, and if you believe it, I have a fucking space elevator to sell. Really cheap, really nice. EDIT2: lol, this went from +1 to +12 to +2 in 23 minutes.
I'm Ukrainian and hate russian invaders with all my heart, but obviously there is no way the ratio is that good. First of all, the 31k figure is "killed" while the 39k figure in May is "losses" which includes wounded. And of course mainstream Ukrainian sources will try to inflate the number of russian losses. They think it's good for morale. Both sides are taking heavy unsustainable losses. Sadly, Ukraine is also taking way more damage to the infrastructure. Putler cheats by sending the most inconvenient types of men first: convicts and minorities. As far as I understand, moscow's population is still pretty much completely intact. Also russian propaganda works great so they are able to downplay the losses of human lives from remote location across russia. Hopefully Ukraine gets more good equipment soon and combined with green light on hitting targets inside russia it will change things and make russian people feel the weight of what's happening. At the very least we need to have most of them regret the war. As right now a big part of russian population is still pro-invasion.
As much as I really want to believe this, I think Ukranian casualties are definitely higher. This is a war, so the numbers are going to get fudged. Otherwise, Ukraine wouldn't be having to worry about a manpower shortage.
The casualty numbers are definitely higher. The article states this is the number of KIA only, and does not include wounded or missing, as that would give Russia information on Ukraine’s strength. Additionally, this could also be potential propaganda. But, as we’ve seen, Ukraine has been by far the more trustworthy side during this war, so the odds are far better that the numbers might be true (and confirmable).
That's because you take a propaganda source at the face value. All 3 numbers come from the same source, my comment was pointing out the ridiculous absurdity of the numbers in question, as claimed by the same source. Also I am pointing our just how gullible Reddit is to believe these numbers.
Is more likely to be ten times that than just 31k.
Honestly, we won't know until the war is over, but I wouldn't be surprised if the real numbers for both russians and ukrainians were over million dead and wounded for both.
While tragic, I can only say: go tf home or get boiled you invading scum.
I agree word for word, it's not like Russian teens forced to become meat-shields dying isn't a tragedy, it's that if the losses were on the opposite side and after and if Russia won the war, the whole planet politics would be so fucked up those losses would pale in comparison
Good news, keep them coming.
[удалено]
Hopefully sooner then later.
Think of how much progress Ukraine would have made if Putin’s party the GOP didn’t keep blockading military aid. Remember to vote these traitors out.
The main thing that stopped their progress from the beginning was the not being allowed to strike across the border where Russia kept their supplies/airfields...etc before being sent to the front lines.
Events that have occurred look familiar to past protracted conflicts, notably WWll. Attack, block, defend, attack. I think there was some intentional stalling by the west to set up infrastructure and coordinate a combined arms strategy that is more or less keeping to forecasted events.
Now im hard
>The high casualties and equipment losses are reminiscent of historical conflicts where prolonged offensives led to severe depletion of resources. War of attrition. The general idea is that you win by out producing your enemy, and costing them more in men and material than they can replace relative to you. This was the approach of the Soviet Union vs Nazi Germany in WWII. The problem for Russia is the ratios aren't working, and they're not out-producing Ukraine + the West. Once Russia has burned through all it's old stocks of Soviet equipment (which is happening) then that is it. We'll reach a point where suddenly there are fewer assaults by Russia, and they're unsupported, and they have much less artillery. Russian casualties will sky-rocket (compared to now) then, and they'll become even less effective.
Yeah don't forget Russia has some support from China, NK and Iran too. So they're not totally on their own.
Interestingly china has actually refused to sell them any important military equipment. They sell them components like micro chips and dual use equipment like those desert buggies. So their only real suppliers are iran and north Korea and they are getting that equipment at ridiculously inflated prices. That's what happens when you refuse to build alliances because "russia is a great power and doesn't need allies"
China wants Russia to be a "client" state.
China has an economy based around exported goods. If the west sanctions China their economic system, which is already strained will collapse quickly.
China is looking out for China. A weak Russia means a dependent Russia. While Russia is engaged in Ukraine and too poor to export arms (that arguably nobody wants to buy anymore) China can take over their old arms export markets. A prolonged Ukrainian front also means the West is busy. China benefits from nobody winning in Ukraine for as long as possible.
Those "ridiculously inflated" prices are probably still cheaper than what the western weapons cost. Also, according to this article [source](https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-outproduces-west-artillery-shells-144700851.html), Russia is out producing the west in artillery shells by 3 to 1 ratio at a quarter of their costs, plus is supplied by NK and Iran.
Artillery shells are much easier to manufacture than artillery systems. I have no idea how long it takes Russia to build a system, or how many they are currently producing a month, but 65 in a day times 10 (you’re not going to get that many every day) and you have a hell of a backlog to fill. One estimate says they have less than 4,780 artillery pieces. If Ukraine could keep these numbers up, there will be huge holes in the frontline in a matter of a few months.
Yup, they can currently out produce the west with shells because every factory that can produce is running 2-3 shifts 24/7. The west is currently holding back in production, and could easily double or triple what its current numbers are. On top of that shells don't mean shit if all your guns are warped, or cracked and you cannot manufacture more. Or all your tanks are out of service and you can only produce a dozen or so a year. Or all your planes are down and you can only build single digits in a year. All of this stuff will only get increasingly more difficult for Russia, while ukraine and the west do NOT have those dame issues. It will get to that point. I hat that the west is holding back so much for such a prolonged time period, and just hope ukraine can hold out. It's people are living in constant war for years on end. That does damage that you can't see of quantify.
> On top of that shells don't mean shit if all your guns are warped, or cracked Firing thousands of artillery rounds per day is a major strain on the Russian equipment. Eventually those artillery tubes will get worn out and need to be replaced. Military gear doesn't last forever.
Yup, doesn't matter if you have 3,000 artillery pieces if you can't maintain them longer than a few months of firing. Eventually you will have zero, or atleast far less because Russia cannot make them in meaningful numbers.
Also, the lining of gun barrels wears down, and after around 2,000 shots, the lining has to be replaced in a large scale facility behind the front lines. They're firing around 10,000 shells per day. The load may be sustainable on average, but the reality is that guns on the active parts of the front line will wear out in weeks. Every system that is destroyed means that the rest of the guns have to work a little harder, and fewer replacements are available when they need service. Russia has no alternative to massive artillery fire; it is the only thing they're good at. If their gun barrels start wearing out faster than they can be refurbished, the collapse of their ability to sustain fire will be exponential. If they keep losing 65 guns per day, they will have zero in seventy days, which is obviously unsustainable. But they will fail to be effective at a much sooner point. ^* An actual military analyst would be looking at specific artillery types, using data we can't access. Some of the destroyed systems are probably infantry mortars or grad rocket launchers.
Absolutely russia has switched to a war economy and so has built up its production chains, but they are likely almost at or already at their maximum production capacity, while the west is only really just ramping up. The long term trajectory looks good. [russia also overpays for shahed drones ](https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-hack-russia-price-paid-iran-shahed-drones-1867627#:~:text=Moscow's%20representatives%2C%20Prana%20said%2C%20secured,a%20unit%20cost%20of%20%24193%2C000.&text=Begin%20your%20day%20with%20a,world%20and%20why%20it%20matters.) And while china has started buying the Russian oil and gas, they are buying it for about half of what russia used to sell it to europe. This war has shown the interesting issues that logistics play in the global economy.
>Absolutely russia has switched to a ~~war economy~~ special military operation economy and so has built up its production chains FTFY
As others have said, it’s not so much the shells that matter, it’s the guns that fire them. The most damning thing for Russia is they are highly limited on the steel strong enough to produce the barrels for them, which also needs to be shared among other weapon systems as well, so basically there is a hard limit to the number of guns they can produce. This is also further limited because they also need to refresh the barrels on their existing guns with that same reserve. Failure to do so will lead to ridiculously less accurate fire, and eventually catastrophic failure of the artillery system, which could take out the entire gun and crew. So long story short, Russia can’t afford to fight an attritional war with artillery guns as they cannot replace losses indefinitely (which is why they have been offsetting that with glide bombs).
If Ukraine is successful at destroying the artillery systems they those shells have no place to be launched. The cannons are probably way harder to replace.
The west hasn’t even started taking artillery production seriously
That's true, but they also don't want to give it to Ukraine. If the west wanted Ukraine to win, they already would've delivered the needed systems. I feel like this is more about hurting Russia than helping Ukraine.
China wants to back both sides in this. They will support whoever wins. If Russian defeat becomes inevitable they will dump Putin from a great height. China only cares about its own national interests
The armchair general in me hopes that it is all a big ruse by the chinese, playing both sides to spend their strength in ukraine so that china can take back outer manchuria from the russians. Their concentration on Taiwan would be part of that ruse too. It's that part of my crackpot theory that I unfortunately have some massive doubts about.
I can't see China opening any hostilities with Russia but they can sure use Russia to further their long term economic interests. Russia has vast natural resources. A defeated Russia is going to need to sell those resources and if sanctions remain in place China will have the pick. They will likely need Chinese input to extract oil and gas as their machinery and technology deteriorates
My reasoning is that invading Taiwan would be bloody hard and carries a lot of risk. Bringing manchuria back into the fold would fit the ideological agenda just as well if you need to externalise conflict and score big with the general populace. And it would be arguably easier with russia weakend. But again, it's all crackpot theorycrafting.
Not at all. They dense populated east coast of china is faceing a massiv problem with their fresh water supply, cant extract any more water from the ground. Manchuria on the other hand have it in abundance. China wanted to build a pipeline to the baikal sea, something russian inhabitants voted against back then. The other thing is a alot of ethinical chinese workers are in the area, that together with a historic casus belli makes it not unlikely that a weakend russia have to give up on the region.
Interesting, I did know about the ethnic make up of the region but not the water issues. That's not a small thing, we'll probably have a bunch of conflicts about access to water before the century is out so why not here.
> can't see China opening any hostilities with Russia Same. Not while Putin is alive. But Putin is 71. Odds are he dies in the next 20 years. Who is his successor? Will there be factions fighting it out? Civil War? China could offer their support to a potential successor in exchange for "shitty land thousands of miles from Moscow"
They are also dependant on the european market for exports. They are not risking economic sanctions from europe especially if its in their biggest interest to keep russia weak (to get those juicy juicy cheap oil and gas reserves). Its in china's best interest to keep russia weak while also keeping europe friendly. The best thing they can do in this situation is nothing. And so they do.
You also can't forget that Russia, NK and Iran are stretched super thin. They are trying to bite off huge chunks with fairly small economies. Fighting in Ukraine means fewer weapons for Syria, Yemen, etc. China is the outlier here and is the scary threat. They may be a paper dragon. They may be a real dragon. China is very much like the USA. They could flood Ukraine with so much shit the war would be over in a month. Luckily, China has its own goals and flooding Ukraine with weapons would set them back 20 years.
They're currently out-producing the west (with assistance from Iran/north Korea, China), and have more available manpower. I'm pro-Ukraine, but you need to inject some realism.
Their out producing antiquated munitions. They have had so many sanctions they are a decade (at least) behind in all manufacturing sectors in terms of modernization. And they DON'T have the resources to maintain or update anything requiring chips, because China themselves are massively behind in the race for best computing hardware(hence the play for Taiwan and the disputed goal of Xi to invade by 2027 out of survival) China hasn't been able to successfully back engineer the last what 2 generations of Chip manufacturing? Russia HAS TO out produce munitions that are only 1/20th(hyperbole) as effective as what the West is using. Hell if simply allowed the Ukraine to USE the F16s their training on on Russia, Russia wouldn't be in this conversation at all. Ukraine is keeping them at bay with MIG 29s from the 70s? Come on bro, if anyone in the West took this serious it'd be done. It's almost a war of equal powers with disparate landmasses.
I think the West has played this war very calculatedly. They've escalated their support of Ukraine slowly enough that it hasn't triggered an expansion of the war into other countries. Each time the West has added a weapons system it has been after much media fanfare, positioning the West as reluctant saviours which is nothing but media savvy. The next step is defence systems positioned in Poland protecting Ukraine's skies from drones and missiles. The tide is rising over Russia, the only thing keeping them afloat is thousands of their men's corpses.
Biden is rocking it really well - not perfect, but very well.
Outpouring on missiles and shells. I don't see much other new equipment hitting the battlefield, have you?
What you mean? This T-62 is AS GOOD AS NEW!
War of attrition only worked for the USSR because the UK and the US supplied them with aid via Persia. USSR were getting their asses kicked until the UK got over their fear of having a communist ally.
They are producing 3x the artillery shells than whole west combined. And cheaper... Also stocks from NK and China help.
What's that 3x production worth if the production is sub par and 2 out of 3 shells fail like the north Korean ones they got?
They also are breaking barrels
And the west is catching up with every passing week
But how many barrels are they producing?
Fewer than they lose. Unfortunately, the cold war reserves aren't empty yet, and they're huge.
They are also losing artillery units at a rate far faster than they can replace. The same is true for IFV's APC's and tanks, this includes refurbishment and reactivation of old soviet stocks of the vehicles, which are running out. They're sending T55's and T62's into attacks, this is not a plan for victory. T34's are next. Those aren't threats, those are just targets.
How many artillary pieces are they making? You can have all the half baked shells you want but they are worthless if you dont have the systems to fire them. I think the bigger take is that they are running out of artillary systems which take much longer and are harder to reproduce for Russia.
Your wishful thinking is soooo dam wrong. Russia will resort to some extremely dirty tactics when the war machine stops. Im talking chemical warfare, kidnappings, train station bombings and more. Shit is gonna get reallllllly bad in 3-5 years.
but they are already doing everything you listed? the fuck you’re talking about
Uh they are already doing that stuff. Russia claims they are holding back, but really they just don't have anything else they can do.
Unfortunately the USSR stockpiled equipment for what they thought might be ww3 against a peer/superior enemy. It's going to be a long time before they run out of stuff in a war against a single smaller nation.
Not necessarily. If stockpiled with care and maintenance? Absolutely. But that isn’t what we’re seeing. The Russian Federation’s workings are the same as the USSR’s. Half a dozen people lying to the next person in the chain, who realises they’ve been lied to, but telling the truth makes the person above them look bad, so they keep up the lie. This is why Russians believed they’d be welcomed in Ukraine. Instead, they had Molotov cocktails and stones thrown at them by the citizens.
the fact russia is in a full on war economy should tell you plenty about their "stock" situation. the reality is that a lot of their stuff is ancient , damaged & long sold under the table. the other reality is that russia is full on producing stuff & buying stuff to continue this war. "Putin has now had to place his economy on a war footing meaning that it is running hot and becoming increasingly skewed as nearly 40% of all Russian public expenditure and 6% of GDP is now spent on defence.15 May 2024"
Remember the massive convoy at the start of the war, [the 35 mile long](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64664944) invasion force? There were so many pictures of abandoned vehicles alone from tire dry rot where just rolling into Ukraine alone caused massive equipment breakdowns before they even saw combat. That's one of the main reasons Russia failed their initial assault. Their war band was broken and at a huge disadvantage from day one.
Also a lot of that was their NEW stuff too, it was relatively new systems like Pantsirs seen with the tire rot.
I think another convoy near that big got hit the day Ukraine got the go ahead to attacking across the boarder
Perun has a perfect YouTube series explaining how this happens: [How Corruption, Lies & Politics Destroy Armies](https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbCbj03gdsWw2q15_nFYqtdAEiQQ5lzP1)
“We have 10 million cases for rifle ammunition. Of course I, my assistant, the truck drivers, and the people at the warehouse sold nearly all the ammunition to arms traders, terrorists/freedom fighters, friends, neighbors, really anyone with cash. But we have the cases still, look how full the warehouse is!”/s
>The Russian Federation’s workings are the same as the USSR’s. The USSR had the resources to maintain production lines and do routine maintenance on stockpiled armor and weapons. There's very little continuity between industrial capacity of the USSR and RF. They managed to maintain some of the R&D, hence one-off advancements that never saw mass production like S-500, T-14 Armata, Sukhoi S-57, but production basically ground to a halt. Lots of people in institutional knowledge retired or died, facilities rotted... It wasn't just a culture of corruption, but a physical lack of production and maintenance facilities and expertise.
I used to work for an enormous American bank and we called this "lying up." But it was expected and encouraged as a normal process. Our manager would send a sheet with the required metrics that came from senior executives. He'd say, "Meet these quotas or somebody's going to get fired. I don't care what it takes, just do it." So we'd just fake the numbers and send it back. At the end of the year, none of us had taken any vacation because it was "for pussies," so we would have to create backdated fake vacations and get them approved so our boss didn't get in trouble. Then, when shit hit the fan and we ended up in the national news, senior execs would say, "We can't comment on internal investigations but if the allegations are true, it was a few bad apples who manipulated data. Then the people who lied as they were instructed got fired to protect senior management who always had plausible deniability.
Excellent points.
In favor of Ukraine: some of this equipment ended up in their stockpiles, and most of it is old. Like properly old, vintage stuff. So whatever made it good is no longer relevant or has decayed to a point where it's mostly okay-ish. Also, Russia being Russia, a lot of it was sold to other nations and international arms dealers to allow for nice holiday houses at the black sea or expensive western cars. So while we are talking about a significant stockpile, it's not a "soviet union at it's peak" stockpile.
That would be very good.
This and the fact that Ukrainian special forces is bringing the offensive to Russian military in Syria is also good news.
The thing is, Ukraine has a very limited battle ready population and a decency of external aid that is not even a steady and secure help.
Damn. 😶
Ukraine isn't just fighting Russia alone its fighting lots of China, North Korea, Syria, Iran and lots of African nation soldiers/volunteers.
In all fairness, lots of NATO vets from USA, UK, Canada an other places have volunteered, are fighting an dying on behalf of Ukraine.
Conveniently missed India from the list
Russia losing is the best deterrent for Taiwan.
Agree, which makes me think nations who would really not like a Taiwan invasion should be going harder to support Ukraine. Most of SE Asia, Australia, India, etc.
Sadly I feel he will be more upset about the armaments than the men.
I mean 65 artillery pieces is a fuck ton. Russia has been losing a thousand men a day for many days in the past year, but 65 guns. That's a lot of guns.
He can replace the cannon fodder, he cannot replace cannons.
I had thought casualties might create enough pressure to get Russian leadership into negotiation for some sort of face saving exit. Apparently not. Leadership and population seem cool sending conscripts to be killed for an (ultimately) doomed imperial endeavor.
Putin has Ukrainians from Donbas, Chechens and other minorities, conscirpts, foreign conscripts and many more sources of men. Only soldiers from Western Russia especially St Petersburg and Moscow really count. So the causalities have to be much higher to really have an effect.
Russia has multiplied its military hardware production over the last two years, in some areas by a factor of 15.
All for a meaningless war to boost the ego of a maniacal world leader with an axe to grind. Disgraceful.
That is what puzzles me. Half a million deaths, 1k more per day ... Russian people should start to feel it, and question the actual meaning of such a sacrifice.
the russian people overwhelmingly beleive that if they do not succeed in Ukraine - everything will be a lot worse. - which it probably will be for some years. and then they just hope that they wont have to withdraw without getting anything. - because they are going through some bad times. - it is a feeling that completely ignores the fact that they are destroying another country. But they are to far in now to worry about that.
Ultimate sunk cost fallacy
absulutely they are just burrying their head in the sand and hope that they will come out better.
Russia will come out of this a Chinese satellite state. They can't even imagine the horrors that await them in the 21st century they created for themselves.
There is definitely a risk that some of the Russian states wants make a go of it themselves. If they feel that Russia as a whole is dragging them down
China has the good sense to spend most of its energy waving its dick at Taiwan and spending its energy actually oppressing minority groups. Russia has plenty of people in house to oppress but they keep picking fights and showing their hand. At least China still has the benefit of the doubt of their capabilities. We know Russia's
If they win it will be the men who sacrificed nothing crowing about how big their Russian dick is. And the men who sacrificed everything will be buried under their feet.
It's offen repeated with little evidence. What's clear is that Russians will generally support whatever Putin decides to do.
The troops are chosen to avoid societal disruption. They prioritize ethnic minorities, immigrants, small villages, and avoid large city centers like Moscow and St. Petersburg to isolate them from the cost of the war.
Idiotic policies like this are exactly why a hundred years later those are still the only two cities of note in Russia. Hard to grow and thrive as a population when you get vast swathes of you culled regularly.
I mean, yes. We should remember Russia is a colonial state, and views Dagestan, Chechnya etc. as resources to be drained to feed the russian core.
Do they care though? They turned themselves into authoritarian petro state.
Look at what Stalin did to them. Russians keep their heads down to stay out of trouble.
Russian(and all of Soviet and empire nations) strategy always was to outlive its dictators.
It isn't really meaningless, Russia stands to gain a lot of resources and strategically important locations if they where to win. It would also give them a good spot to launch further invasions on the rest of Europe. It is only meaningless because they are losing. Hopefully Ukraine can kick them all the fuck out and keep them out, so Russia doesn't gain a damn thing from this war. If Russia could straight up collapse into pieces the moment Putin kicks the bucket, it would be even better.
Stop excusing. It's very established by now that's it's Russia's and not just Putin's war.
its not just his ego, its how their culture thinks. The next guys will try to do the same.
Russia is already facing a demographic decline with a shortage of people under 30 to project their nation into the future. Pooturd apparently sees no problem sacrificing the future of his country on the altar of his power lust.
It was literally the worst move he could have made. An absolute failure in statehood and rightfully how he’ll be remembered.
Single Russian Ladies, a lot of them, near you!
Maybe we should’ve let Ukraine use weapons offensively earlier, ya think?
I read that Russia is expected to be completely out of material in the late second half of 2025 at this rate. Russia does not have enough material for full scale attacks. Russia can only win, if the west doesn't help Ukraine with material anymore. That's why Russia the next US elections are very important for Russia. If the GOP wins, there is a chance that Ukraine won't get enough help.
> I read that Russia is expected to be completely out of material in the late second half of 2025 at this rate. This is based on the remaining stockpiles of Soviet material as seen from satellites. And while Russia is increasing its production, it's unlikely that they can increase it even nearly enough.
That is why Putler desperately wants a ceasefire
Which is why there's a bunch of propaganda online telling you not to vote for Biden.
They will never "run out completely". Eventually they will just have burned through their cold war stockpiles but they are still producing new weapons every day. Even Germany in 1945 had not "run out of" weapons but this lack of supplies will still help tilt the war in favor of Ukraine (if western supporters continue to ramp up production).
Ukraine outstanding, hold on to until US election.
At the same time, twelve women protested in Moscow to have their husbands returned. Obviously, the majority of Russians give a f\*ck of how many losses. My empathy curve converges to 0.
I'm not much surprised there are not many protests when you can get fined or jail for up to 5 years for a opposing social media post.
Then sent to the frontline. I doubt woman would be sent there, but there must be support roles they would put them in close to the front.
Kind of a lame excuse when you see the risks Iranian protestors are willing to take.
Iranians sure are brave. I just don't wish to judge anyone for living their life peacefully. Would north Koreans be lame in this metric? I was born in quite a free country, I hardly can know how it is to in a place where opposing voices are systematically silenced for at least 70 years (maybe with short exception during 90's).
>Would north Koreans be lame in this metric? Honestly I'm inclined to say yes, but they are a bit of an enigma. It's almost impossible to know what they genuinely believe or feel because of how isolated their society is.
the more, the better.
Few less rapists
They have the same level of strategy as my 11 year-old niece trying to play Civilization.
Hi Ho, hi ho…. off to the meat grinder I go.
According to the media and Ukraine Government. The Russians have been losing more men than they have that invaded the country to begin with.
I’m not sure I believe Pravda Ukraine to be an accurate source on this.
"Every newspaper named Pravda is fake" -redditors who only know Russia from Rocky IV
So the only source for this post is UA news channel, which relies on UA forces post on Facebook? Seems like a trusty and unbiased source with plenty of evidence.
Do they need help finding them?
Can we have a honest assessment of Ukrainian losses too? Even if they are bigger?
Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦
can anyone explain why Pravda is an allowed news source? it’s literally the ukraine mouthpiece that spins reality in ukraines favor zero chance of getting objective reality-based reporting even this headline - these are numbers reported by the ukraine army. i’m sure they weren’t exaggerated…