“In a war of attrition there are two key processes that determine the eventual outcome. First, each army shrinks as a result of soldiers getting killed, seriously wounded, or captured by the enemy”
I got that far. How is this a war of attrition when Russia started with 90,000 highly trained soldiers in the field but now has 750,000?
Russia has still lost soldiers. But the 80,000 figure was not the total number of soldiers Russia had available to them. It was just a subset of the soldiers they had at their disposal. 750,000 is most likely still not the total number of soldiers Russia has to pull from.
“How is this a war of attrition when Russia started with 90,000 highly trained soldiers in the field but now has 750,000?”
Astute. This is not a war of attrition, it is a war of property and worth. Clearly Russia started with the munitions and manpower to level anything of worth in the Ukraine from the beginning in 2014. I would hope by this time the people throughout the world are beginning to understand that Putin does need a lot of what is there but wants the worth within it. And a lot of it hasn’t been identified and displayed like reactors, CIA prisons, bio/med labs and other military related property that Russia may have owned when the Ukraine split with them in 1991 and claimed to have return to them.
To many toys not to want back. And a lot more than the public knows about and Russia doesn’t want destroyed, along with the support people in those facilities to continue their operations. Leveling those makes the property worthless and a waste of time and funds to do so. Putin’s trying to get it done as cheap as possible without offering the Ukraine, and other pieces, to get support from other nations for their civil war. And now he’s in too deep to back off. And we were stupid enough to get into it just like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Africa, Serbia, Lybia, and a number of other “police actions” that we should have stayed out of.
wy69