Posted on 04/11/2022 5:35:32 AM PDT by marcusmaximus
The Russian army's losses are so high the Kremlin has resorted to recruiting soldiers that have been retired for a decade.
At least 15,000 Russian troops have been killed in Ukraine, with a total 40,000 wounded, dead or captured since Putin's invasion began on February 24.
Intelligence from Britain's Ministry of Defence said Ukraine has killed so many of Putin's soldiers that Moscow is scrambling for extra troops.
The Kremlin has even started to recruit from Russian-occupied Transnistria, in Moldova.
Britain's Ministry of Defence said: 'In response to mounting losses, the Russian armed forces seek to bolster troop numbers with personnel discharged from military service since 2012.
'Efforts to generate more fighting power also include trying to recruit from the unrecognised Transnistria region of Moldova.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
It is a Windows Event Forwarding CONservative.
Apparently it’s some kind of big deal.
It can also stand for Why Ever Fracking CONsider the other trolls’ point of view. But I don’t think that’s nearly as big of a deal.
China. They’re smart enough to know that when they take Siberia, America has no dog in the fight.
But there was a fascinating proposal in the 1980s that America would buy Siberia for $2Trillion, open it up to a new round of homesteading and harness all those resources. Basically a gigantic Alaska.
We will regret not doing that, and also not buying Greenland.
Telling me that the 40,000 foot view is what I/we get thru MSM is folly. What you refer to as “basic news” *is* propaganda.
***See now, you’re demonstrating much of the problem with Putin Puffers and how they became that way. Propaganda doesn’t change basic facts like the sky being blue, it tries to tell you that the sky is less blue today due to global warming. You’re trying to walk back ordinary facts and label them as propaganda. It pushes you into a severe bullshiite corner. The way to tell what is basic news is... do both sides agree with it? Do both sides acknowledge there’s a hostile Russian Army inside Ukraine? Yup. One calls it an invasion [pretty accurate] and the other calls it, you guessed it, a propagandized slogan of “Special Military Exercise”.
Interchangeable terms. Might as well just keep focused on family, friends, job, kids education, church/synagogue, nagging back, yard.
***Good idea for you, FReeper, since you are incapable of simple straightforward sound reasoning.
Bear in mind that ALL news, from MSM to the locals, is run by the AP.
***Bear in mind that the sky is blue.
How the world has changed when such losses are considered staggering. American losses at the Battle of the Bulge were over 90,000 and Russian losses taking Belin were over 80,000.
Based on initial reports of the invading forces (180K) that would make the total casualty figure reported here 22%. That would mean just about every Russian unit would be combat ineffective. Months of Rest, resupply & refit would seem to be required — assuming all the materiel losses could be made good.
Even if we assume that the invasion force was more on the order of 225K that is still about 18%. The effects would be pretty much the same.
Done. You are not convincing me, and I recognize I’m not convincing you.
Good luck. (said without any parting shot)
A story that I read a long time ago about Strategic Arms Limitation negotiations indicated that the Soviets would often stipulate to the numbers of strategic launchers that the US Intelligence Services claimed to have counted. Soon the negotiators realized that the Soviets had really no idea as to what they had actually deployed on their side.
I read (somewhere...) that about 60% of all male deaths in Russia are alcohol-related.
“Yes this thing could go on for years. With that possibility in mind, do ya think Ukraine will join NATO or not? Will they sign away territory for peace and permanent vassalhood?”
My opinion is that it is foolish to try to predict the outcome at this point.
“LOL, *ALL* MSM SMU on Ukraine is propaganda. Made all the more effective by cutting off any other narrative.”
At some point you need to come to grips with what is and is not easily verifiable.
Good thing you passed on the Brooklyn Bridge. It doesn’t really exist. Despite reports to the contrary.
/sarc
No one can predict the future, but when a scientist comes up with a valid theory his predictions around certain scientific results come true. It’s a way to prove your viewpoint is the correct one.
Oh well, with so many parameters it is difficult to even come up with predictable outcomes. My prediction would be: If Finland joins NATO, Russia will not invade. Kind of obvious, I know. But working backwards from that, if Ukraine had joined NATO, Vlad wouldn’t have invaded. So... why didn’t they? The answer appears to be: It’s complicated. Not so complicated any more, is it?
Supposed conservatives that support the World Economic Forum.
OK thanks for that
“The result will be a new Russian civil war.”
And that benefits no one. A fracturing and unstable nuclear-armed Russia is one of the worst things that can happen.
The death of which you dream will be that of Vladimir Putin. He is a podunk ruler with visions of grandeur. Russia is a third world nation like Nigeria has a few cities but otherwise backward
He is 70 and running out of life
“… but when a scientist comes up with a valid theory his predictions around certain scientific results come true.”
It’s also a mistake to treat global affairs such as war the same as science.
You are welcome to have your opinions, be they right or wrong, but to have the attitude that they are in some way related to scientific theory is hubris.
It is not an attempt at prediction, it is a straightforward hypothetical. That’s what the phrase “With that possibility in mind” means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.