Russia has lost 87% of troops it had prior to start of Ukraine war, according to US intelligence assessment

Russia has lost a staggering 87 percent of the total number of active-duty ground troops it had prior to launching its invasion of Ukraine and two-thirds of its pre-invasion tanks, a source familiar with a declassified US intelligence assessment provided to Congress told CNN.

Still, despite heavy losses of men and equipment, Russian President Vladimir Putin is determined to push forward as the war approaches its two-year anniversary early next year and US officials are warning that Ukraine remains deeply vulnerable. A highly anticipated Ukrainian counteroffensive stagnated through the fall, and US officials believe that Kyiv is unlikely to make any major gains over the coming months.

The assessment, sent to Capitol Hill on Monday, comes as some Republicans have balked at the US providing additional funding for Ukraine and the Biden administration has launched a full-court press to try to get supplemental funding through Congress.

mp3,
@mp3@lemmy.ca avatar

Russia had a total standing military of approximately 900,000 active-duty troops

Of the 360,000 troops that entered Ukraine, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to the assessment.

So roughly 87.5% of the initial troops was lost, like the article said so that checks out.

900,000 - 315,000 still means 585,000 troops remaining, and that’s outside the conscription efforts.

Russia has announced plans to increase the size of the armed forces to 1.5 million.

Still a considerable force, as long as the supply chain is able to back it up.

Neato,
Neato avatar

I can't even imagine what 300,000 human corpses does to a place. How do you even manage that over a short period and fairly small location?

remotelove,

You build mobile crematoriums.

Russian use of those is contested, but it is an efficient way to deal with a problem like that. There was some media buzz about those things about a year ago or so.

baked_tea,

More likely mass graves as it currently seems

Nolegjoe,

It’s not 300,000 corpses. It’s 300,000 casualties. That includes KIA, MIA, POW, Injured, etc.

someguy3,

But how many of the 585,000 are front line troops? I imagine most of them are support staff. It’s like a 3:1 ratio or higher support to front line.

YoBuckStopsHere,
@YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world avatar

Russia was putting its support troops on the front line.

ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

So, support is holding the line? Seems like working as intended! 😂

Vilian,

how much of that 900000 is true?

slaacaa,

Brutal numbers. Let’s not forget that Russia can’t just move all its troops west, they still need to protect other borders and regions.

I really hope the US passes a proper aid, and even more so that EU gets themselves together and continues support. Infuriating to see that while Ukrainians are fighting for their lives (and unintentionally also for the safety of Europe), the politicians are haggling over fucking pocket change.

The only way Russia can win if the west stops Ukraine’s support, and they grind them up over the next years. This would be a catastrophic strategic failure, and would mean the end of global US/NATO influence, motivating the start of many more annexations (definitely Taiwan as a start).

KevonLooney,

Yes, for all the people saying “it’s not that many”, this is a huge number. No military campaign can withstand 80% losses. That’s like the losses Napoleon took invading Russia. Or Hitler, invading Russia…

Guys, I’m thinking this invading thing is hard in this part of the world.

DragonTypeWyvern,

There are plenty of people that have had success invading Russia.

On horseback.

From the east.

Mongolia, what’s up? You’ve had a good break, now’s your time to shine again.

wanderingmagus,

throat singing intensifies

otter, (edited )

You want an unstoppable raping, pillaging, murdering force rolling West over every opposition, against all odds, and only stopped by the logistical impasse that is the sea and the festering attrition of greed?

Because, that’s how you get an unstoppable raping, pillaging, murdering force rolling West over every opposition, against all odds, and only stopped by the logistical impasse that is the sea and the festering attrition of greed.

edit: sorry for the historical caricature, kiddos. Lighten up, FFS.

DragonTypeWyvern,

It’s 2023, I’m sure if we ask nicely they’ll just loot and pillage this time.

Handrahen,

We already have a raping, pillaging, murdering force rolling west. It’s called Russia. It’s not unstoppable though. The Ukrainians have proved that. Let’s give them more aid. Lots and lots of aid.

otter,

All the aid, I completely agree! 🤘🏼🇺🇦

GenEcon,

What’s part of the reason Russia wants to occupy Ukraine. Its a lot easier to defend - against what enemy Russia thinks it needs to defend itself. Its not like someone is seriously planning to attack a nuclear power.

otter,

Until they are, of course.

Blackmist,

Hamas has entered the chat.

Sunfoil,

Estimates are they need to lose 500K before they even begin to falter.

wewbull,

Mid 2024 then. They’ve been around 1,000 a day recently.

Redredme,

So, if i must believe this, those 13% left in Ukraine are very capable, very effective troops, able to move over that gigantic front in minutes, seconds even to fill the gaps. They must have some kind of teleportation device. It must be possible, since startrek’s Chekov is Russian after all. He knows how it works.

Or maybe these figures are just pulled out of someone’s ass. Like everything else in this war.

jettrscga,

If 45,000 are left in Ukraine and Ukraine is approximately 400 miles wide, that’s still 112 Russian troops per linear mile to push west.

Obviously they aren’t spaced in one line across the country like that, but it gives some perspective on how many are left and how much space they could fill.

Redredme,

Do really really believe that?

If yes then

A) the Russians must have some supertech to hold back the Ukrainian push of the last few months. Just 112 men per mile againsts those columns of Bradley’s and Leopards. Wow.

Or

B) the Ukrainians are truly shit fighters.

I go for C). These figures which are spoon fed to us are bullshit.

Just look at the numbers of the past year or so. If we believe them the Russian army is no more and has been defeated 6 months ago.

But they aren’t. They’re still there.

fatzgebum,

I think you should read the full article in order to really understand what these numbers mean and what they don’t mean.

otter,

That’s very optimistic of you, thinking they can read.

Longpork_afficianado,

Russia has recruited many more troops since then. The proper way to interpret this information is that the majority of troops currently deployed in Ukraine were conscripted after the start of the war.

mrnotoriousman,

If you knew how to read it's the number of active duty troops before they invaded. They have since conscripted more. And yes, that is still massive.

otter,

There you have it, folks! The latest intel from the Russian front line!

— Oh, I’m getting a report now. This. This is from the front… room… The front room at his nana’s house. Yeah, that checks out.

SCB,

as long as the supply chain is able to back it up.

The amount of heavy lifting this clause is doing cannot b overstated

Magnetar,

The thing is, Ukraine has no real possibility of interrupting the supply chain, since it doesn’t have the weapons to do so, or is not allowed to use on Russian soil in case of western weapons. All it can do is himarsing the last few dozens of kilometers around the front.

And Russia can produce or dig up WW2-level shit from storage for a very long time.

SCB,

Russia hurts its own supply chain because the entire state apparatus functions via corruption at every possible level.

Also Ukraine has absolutely already struck targets on Russian soil with US weapons.

Magnetar,

Not to my knowlege except for some very minor cases, like those incursions into Belgorod. GMLRS, ATACMS, Storm Shadow etc have exclusively been used inside (occupied) Ukraine, as far as I know. The long range drone strikes inside Russia are all claimed to have used only domestic Ukrainian weaponry. Can you give me a source?

SCB,

I was wrong! They were formerly sovet ballistic missiles. I am less good at remembering missile names than I thought

yournamehere,

13% …we can do it guys.

fosforus, (edited )

An unfortunate fact is that we’re never going to beat Russia primarily by killing russians. Russians should be killed when they try to steal and rape our countries and peoples in order to immediately stop them from doing that, but the only way to properly win this is to somehow get to the leaders or their wallets.

mob,

While I agree with the sentiment, it’s not like “we” are trying to beat Russia, right? Ukraine is defending itself. I’d imagine the story would be a little different if the goal was to beat Russia(like a full effort), rather than defend Ukraine.

chiliedogg,

This can be both, and it’s CHEAP.

For less than 1/10th the direct cost of the Iraq war and at the cost of zero American servicemember lives we’ve set back Russia’s military by decades, strengthened NATO, and actually done something positive for a change.

CthuluVoIP,

I don’t disagree from a purely American standpoint, but I’d caution against calling a war where Ukrainians are being so heavily impacted daily and Ukrainian soldiers are fighting and dying “cheap”. It’s an inexpensive investment in the security of the region and the world on the US’s part, but no war is cheap.

chiliedogg,

Those of us who believe Ukrainian lives and freedoms are worth preserving don’t need convincing.

Those that think it’s too expensive to do the right thing need to be shown that even when discounting the moral necessity of the relief, the return on investment is excellent.

fosforus,

Putin has declared that his “special operation” continues until all the goals have been met, and the goals are “demilitarisation, denazification and Ukraine’s neutrality”. The first two don’t mean anything, and Ukraine doesn’t want to do the third one. So if this stubborness continues, I cannot see any other way forward except “beat Russia”.

mob,

Oh yeah, and I’d imagine if something like NATO decided to take that path forward in the future, it would probably be possible to beat Russia by killing Russians. I also imagine it would be relatively quick tbh.

But for humanities sake, I hope they can put together a better, more surgical way to remove the cancer from Russia.

AutistoMephisto,
@AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world avatar

Exactly. The US technically can end the Russo-Ukrainian War any time it wants. All they gotta do is go “boots on the ground”, but that carries problems of its own. Mainly that Russia is a nuclear power and Putin himself has said he’s not afraid to launch.

Ibex0,

I don’t care enough to risk American lives.

friend_of_satan,

That insight makes the large loss of life in this war even more tragic. Fuck war. Fuck Putin for sending these men to kill and die.

guacupado,

I think the hope is that eventually things get bad enough for Russia that a revolution starts within. Because of the threat of nukes, Russia will only fall from its own population.

Saltycracker,

It is incredibly had to believe the news after yesterday they said if we don’t give money to Ukraine, Russia would win.

TserriednichThe4th,

This cannot be true lol. If it is, russians must be feeling this a lot more at home and international news hasnt reported the shock yet

GladiusB,
@GladiusB@lemmy.world avatar

They can’t or won’t leave. And even if they try, the die.

SupraMario,

It’s not hard to do body counts. Satellites don’t have to do much for getting counts of troops. And counting the dead isn’t hard either at this point with constant drones and videos recording 24/7. I’m sure you aren’t arguing the numbers just being surprised, and it’s more shocking that russians haven’t overthrown putin at this point.

ILikeBoobies,

0.2% of population and they have had mobilizations since then so it’s not that big a deal

Like if 120 people died in a city of 60 000. Not really noticeable

muelltonne,

Those 120 people have family and friends. A workplace or a school. So if 120 people die, nearly everyone in a city of 60000 would have known one of the dead.

fosforus,

And most of that 0.2% are poor people from racial groups that Moscow wish didn’t exist. So it’s all working out.

that_guy, (edited )

Of the total population it may be small but the deaths are not a random sampling of the population. They are almost exclusively young men. If we define fighting age as 18-45 Russia has roughly 25 million men. 315k casualties is 1.26% of that population. That alone is a massive amount to lose in such a short period of time. Even before this Russia was in a demographic crisis.

And that 18-45 range is probably too generous. Soldiers are usually young, particularly front line infantry. In the US military like 45% of service members are under 25 and 65% are under 30. When you factor in the number of Russians who fled the country to avoid mobilization (~1 million) 10% of the men between 18 and 30 in 2021 being currently in the military, dead, or fled is a realistic estimate. That’s crazy. Those are numbers we haven’t seen since WWI. And the conflict isn’t over, more will die.

bearwithastick,

You know, sometimes I feel bad about gambling some money away on the stock market and feel a bit like a failure. But then I come across posts like these and I remember that at least I do not fuck up on a colossal scale like this.

BorgDrone,

I remember that at least I do not fuck up on a colossal scale like this.

There is always Thomas Midgley, who invented leaded gasoline and Freon (CFC).

kibiz0r,

Not only invented them, but poisoned the hell outta himself trying to prove they were safe.

And then when he was too bedridden to do anything, he invented an automated bed to help him move around and strangled himself to death in the ropes.

Truly an inspiration.

Bahalex,

Sounds like he won a magical monkey paw from that weird stall at the fair that nobody else seems to remember.

kibiz0r,

His last wish:

“I want one of my inventions to finally do something good for the world!”

choking noises

sukhmel,

Oh, I bet the shareholders would beg to disagree

FlashMobOfOne,
@FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world avatar

Good. Now we can stop flushing our money down this toilet.

QuaternionsRock,

You do realize that the U.S. hasn’t spent an excess dollar on the Ukraine war, right? The budget was $700-some-odd billion whether that goes to shipping or storage costs.

ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

You’re not. Neither is the USA.

But you don’t understand what money is, where it is going, or how this war or its possible results affects the USA.

MilitantAtheist,

Good, now let’s make them lose the rest. Slava Ukraini!

wanderingmagus,

Heroyam Slava

Sanyanov,

With amount of human reserves Russia has, it is practically impossible.

This war simply can’t be won by brute force and total extermination.

Nioxic,

According to wikipedia they have ~1.2 million people in the military. that includes reserve, and paramilitary etc.

WolfhoundRO,

Many of them are spread out garrisoning such a big country and its military facilities. Even if all of them would be engaged, there still would be 50% active military forces, while the other 50% would be the support and officer assets. So we’re looking at a maximum of 5-600.000 soldiers actually fighting on the frontlines

sylver_dragon,

If we could harness the energy of Regan spinning in his grave, we’d have a limitless supply of energy.
Imagine telling any conservative, during the Cold War era, that we could completely fuck Russia’s military power and readiness, for years to come, by sending weapons to a relatively small country. They would be rushing to arm anyone and everyone they could, unintended consequences be damned. And yet, here we are with the GOP blocking exactly that sort of activity. And even better, there is a very real possibility that we aren’t arming future terrorists this time around. Maybe that’s the GOP’s problem, Russia losing in Ukraine won’t create an excuse in 20 years to kill more brown people.

Sagifurius,

Ain’t that literally why they supported the Mujahideen?

lefaucet,

Bingo! You get the prize :)

Reddfugee42,

Religious fanatics.

Not religious fanatics this time.

CosmicCleric,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

If we could harness the energy of Regan spinning in his grave, we’d have a limitless supply of energy.

I had always thought the same thing about Nixon, after he sees what Trump gets away with.

sylver_dragon,

Ya, it’s pretty bad when you can look at Nixon as a “stand up guy” compared to Trump. He at least had the decency to recognize that he had been caught in his bullshit, resign and go away.

CosmicCleric,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Say what you will about the Boomers, but at least they knew when it was time to leave.

theacharnian,
@theacharnian@lemmy.ca avatar

Trump is literally a boomer.

CosmicCleric,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

Way to ruin a joke.

banneryear1868,

Nixon is really interesting as a president it’s kind of a shame how he’s only remembered for Watergate and the drug war now. Most people don’t think “created the EPA” or “desegregation” when they picture Nixon, he also ended the Viet Nam war and draft. Definitely a complex person above a lot of other presidents, poor Quaker upbringing and looked down on by his elite classmates, could have rejected the draft on his Quakerism but became a lieutenant commander, insanely respected as he rose through the ranks and commended by almost everyone he worked with. Did terrible things with Kissinger in South America as a staunch anti-communist. It’s like every stark judgement on him has some extreme counter example. The guy basically was the USA at an insane time in history, definitely a man who fully embodied that period of history.

DeathsEmbrace,

You won’t their are wild cards at play.

Snowpix,
@Snowpix@lemmy.ca avatar

There*. Also, mind elaborating? Or are these wild cards pulled from your rectum?

jimbolauski,

In the world of politics you never give something for free. The Republicans are asking for more stringent border security and more border funding. If democrats were truly committed to supporting Ukraine then they would have made those concessions all ready. The problem is democrats love exploiting brown people for their cheap sweat shop labor.

IHadTwoCows,

Bad news, Sparky: some of us actually lived through all the decades that conservatives imported exploitable brown people to boost profits. The shit you gargle from talk radio shows does not trump our lived experience.

GBU_28,

Jesse what the fuck are you talking about

CosmicCleric,
@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

If democrats were truly committed to supporting Ukraine then they would have made those concessions all ready.

They have been, some substantial compromises actually. The Republicans still wanting more, in a non-compromising sort of way.

Personally I’m hoping the FBI actually does checks on everyone in Congress, to make sure they’re not being compromised to vote in certain ways that certain countries wants.

gamermanh,

Or the Dems know that letting the GOP get their shitty ideas through just because Dems want something isn’t a good idea and are going to try to do it without the traitors’ party’s help

AngryCommieKender,

George W. Bush set the precedent that The US does not negotiate with terrorists. Even when those terrorists are in Congress. They should stop setting precedents they don’t really mean.

TwoGems,
@TwoGems@lemmy.world avatar

deleted_by_moderator

    •
    jimbolauski,

    I hope you have a wonderful day.

    Strykker,

    I hope you shit your self to death. But I guess we don’t all get what we want.

    Fuck you you human trash

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    SCB,

    Border security wouldn’t stop migrant workers. The whole “invasion of the border” thing is never talking about those people, as was proven by farmers lamenting their absence in Florida.

    jimbolauski,

    I wasn’t referencing migrant workers with work visas, I was referencing all the people entering illegally. Of course farm owners are upset, their source of cheap labor dried up.

    SCB,

    Yes, hence my first sentence.

    dragonflyteaparty,

    You know what would actually put a dent in illegal immigration? Fixing their country that we broke. They come here because being undocumented and working under the table with potentially dangerous conditions is better than their home country. Maybe we shouldn’t have destabilized so many democracies in South America.

    webadict,

    If you expect us to take responsibility for our actions, then we’d have to have real solutions, and it’s just easier to complain about things, plus we’d have to arrest a looooooot of war criminals.

    Maggoty,

    Bullshit. You pass a law because it’s the right thing to help the country not because you got something for it.

    jimbolauski,

    That’s cute that you think the world works that way.

    Maggoty,

    The existence of bad people does not invalidate morality.

    jimbolauski,

    The existence of morality does not change how politics works.

    Maggoty,

    That’s demonstrably untrue. Otherwise we’d still be operating under monarchies.

    jimbolauski,

    Many monarchies were overthrown by people some ceeded power so they wouldn’t get overthrown.

    Maggoty,

    That’s the point.

    jimbolauski,

    I’m failing to understand how monarchs ceeding some power to retain others shows that politicians act selflessly.

    Maggoty,

    Because they would never have had to do that if morals and values didn’t change and force the issue.

    jimbolauski,

    The monarch ceeding was not acting selflessly.

    Maggoty,

    No but that doesn’t mean morality didn’t cause them to leave. They didn’t care, everyone else cared.

    jimbolauski,

    Other people wanting power is morality?

    Maggoty,

    You’re dodging the point like Neo in the Matrix. Enough people cared to make it happen. Nobody said anything about the new leadership.

    jimbolauski,

    Nothing that those people did would be considered selfless.

    lefaucet,

    I agree with you, Maggoty, and that why neither one of us will get very far in National politics.

    SwampYankee,

    The problem is democrats love exploiting brown people for their cheap sweat shop labor.

    You could build an IMAX theater with all that projection.

    Furbag,

    Oh yes, more money to fix the perpetual, nebulously defined “border problem”.

    Sometimes compromise is not the solution. This is one of those times. I’m tired of Republican fearmongers getting rich off my tax dollars by funneling it into the border security slush fund.

    Socsa,

    Or is it that the Democrats understand the rhetorical danger of equating an actual war in Europe involving a major nuclear power, with the ego driven pet project of a fascist demagogue?

    Gradually_Adjusting,
    @Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world avatar

    They don’t want to hurt the feelings of anyone they made friends with on their last 4th of July holiday in Moscow

    brain_in_a_box,

    Wow, Ukraine must be really incompetent then, how else could they be losing to such a diminished force?

    prayer,

    What caused the force to become so diminished?

    brain_in_a_box,

    Ah, I see. So Ukraine has taken similar losses then.

    frezik,

    Maybe you should take your brain out of that box and back in your skull.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Alright Vatnik

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    Lol. Vatnik. 🤡

    QuaternionsRock,

    No, Ukraine had munitions reserves. Which are, y’know, an expendable resource. And they expended them.

    brain_in_a_box,

    So Ukraine is out of munitions? Shouldn’t that not be a problem though? I remember that Russia ran out about a year ago.

    QuaternionsRock,

    I remember Russia having issues sourcing munitions some time ago, yes. What is your point exactly? That Russia doesn’t have munitions??? They clearly do…

    brain_in_a_box,

    That sounds like a Kremlin talking point; it was well reported that Russia exhausted their munition a long time ago. There’s a reason they’ve been fighting with shovels and rocks since then.

    QuaternionsRock,

    That sounds like a Kremlin talking point

    Really? Because it seems like Russia would be more incentivized to have westerners believe that Ukraine will be just fine without U.S. aid.

    There’s a reason they’ve been fighting with shovels and rocks since then.

    You know that’s not literally true right? Otherwise Ukrainian casualties would be in the single digits…

    Is it possible you could spell out exactly what you think the U.S. and Ukraine should do? I genuinely cannot tell what point you’re trying to make here.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Really? Because it seems like Russia would be more incentivized to have westerners believe that Ukraine will be just fine without U.S. aid.

    So stories that make Russia look weak are Kremlin talking points? What about this story that says Russia has lost 87 percent of its troops? That sure makes it sound like Ukraine will be just fine without US aid.

    You know that’s not literally true right?

    You’re starting to sound like a Russian bot…

    QuaternionsRock,

    You’re starting to sound like a Russian bot…

    Well, considering that I very much support U.S. aid for Ukraine, I think I would be a pretty bad one.

    Edit:

    What about this story that says Russia has lost 87 percent of its troops?

    That’s not what the article says, silly goose

    brain_in_a_box,

    Well, considering that I very much support U.S. aid for Ukraine, I think I would be a pretty bad one.

    Every Russian bot says that though, but then they start saying ‘oh actually Western media is all lies and glorious Russia is totally winning the war!’

    What about this story that says Russia has lost 87 percent of its troops?

    Let me guess, it actually says that Russia is totally winning and actually not getting humiliated by Ukraine?

    QuaternionsRock,

    Every Russian bot says that though, but then they start saying ‘oh actually Western media is all lies and glorious Russia is totally winning the war!’

    Lucky for you, I don’t believe that either.

    Let me guess, it actually says that Russia is totally winning and actually not getting humiliated by Ukraine?

    No, it doesn’t; Russia is getting humiliated by Ukraine. But it also says they’ve expended only about 1/3 of their armed forces:

    Of the 360,000 troops that made up Russia’s pre-invasion ground force, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to the assessment. 2,200 of 3,500 tanks have been lost, according to the assessment. 4,400 of 13,600 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers have also been destroyed, a 32 percent loss rate.

    Before the invasion, Russia had a total standing military of approximately 900,000 active-duty troops, including ground troops, airborne troops, special operations and other uniformed personnel, according to the CIA. Since the start of the invasion, Russia has announced plans to increase the size of the armed forces to 1.5 million. The Russian Ministry of Defense has announced several rounds of conscription, including its regular fall conscription cycle on October 1.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Lucky for you, I don’t believe that either.

    Sure, that’s why you keep repeating vatnik propaganda.

    No, it doesn’t; Russia is getting humiliated by Ukraine. But it also says they’ve expended only about 1/3 of their armed forces:

    Classic bot script “yeah, Russia is totally losing, but also your media is lying to you about the war, and we actually have many more tanks and planes and soldiers! Our air force was secretly not destroyed, and we only started sending untrained conscripts with one rifle per two men as a joke!”

    QuaternionsRock,

    I literally just quoted the article. Which side are you on? Is Western media trustworthy or not???

    we only started sending untrained conscripts with one rifle per two men as a joke!

    Ha, yeah, it’s wild that that’s happening. I don’t expect the last two thirds to be… competent, or well-equipped, FWIW.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Yes, Western media is trustworthy, unlike your disinformatzia. Sorry your shit hole country is getting rolled by the West though.

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    What the hell is wrong with you?

    Stop gagging on a Trump dick for 5 minutes and take some slow breaths and go touch grass, friend.

    brain_in_a_box,

    What a shock, the Russian is also a homophobe.

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    Lol “the Russian”

    Sorry, that was the only part I could make out around the sound of you gargling a Trumps’ balls.

    You seem like an Eric sort of fellow.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Least homophobic Vatnik.

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    You must really love Eric’s taint. Tell us - is it really that tasty, MAGA lover? Does it taste like his daddy’s corn?

    BaronDoggystyleVonWoof,

    To be honest, I didn’t think Russia would make it to two years. I expected riots, revolution, putin getting killed, etc. It’s pretty insane how indifferent the majority of the Russian population is. That makes it even more scary.

    Gullible,

    They did protest. And everyone was arrested. Then they protested the arrests. And everyone was arrested. Then people just silently stood in groups holding blank signs. And everyone was arrested.

    ours,

    So only another military coup could free Russia from Putin’s firm grasp.

    But that’s why he kept his own military led by weak leadership. And the only paramilitary group he allowed to gain strength ended up attempting a coup against him.

    Rubanski,

    And what a whimsical coup it was

    ours,

    Yeah, that was a wild couple of days. Not that Prigozhin and his merry bunch of neo-Nazis would have been that more tempting as leaders of Russia. So the prospects for Russians have usually been “and then it got worse” so it’s hard to blame them for not putting their necks on the line for the next despot.

    DragonTypeWyvern,

    Can’t imagine why a fucking Nazi mercenary marching on Moscow couldn’t gather grass roots support for the revolution.

    Syntha,

    They weren’t attempting a revolution, if anything, it was a coup. You don’t need grassroots support for that.

    DragonTypeWyvern,

    And yet, that was apparently his plan.

    breakfastmtn,
    @breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca avatar

    And it was actually a “coup” against the Minister of Defense which really cranks up the whimsy.

    ammonium,

    Only a very small minority did protest, that’s why it didn’t work.

    sukhmel,

    That’s because Russian “law enforcement” is actually terror, they do everything for the large part of citizens to be too afraid to even speak up not to mention doing anything.

    otter,

    FTFY. ✌🏽

    That’s because Russian “law enforcement” is actually terror, they do everything for the large part of citizens to be too afraid to even speak up not to mention doing anything.

    sukhmel,

    Maybe, but there are at least places where law is virtually non-existent, those places work on the power of customs and traditions not on terror. Not saying that I prefer unwritten laws, that seems too complicated to be realistically used by a large enough society. Also, I personally don’t equate police not held accountable and terror.

    otter,
    1. If you “don’t equate police not held accountable and terror”, you’re white AF.
    2. Law and law enforcement are two entirely different things.
    sukhmel,

    Could you elaborate on the first item?

    The way I see it terror is always directed towards/against something. It’s not just the atrocities committed by someone it’s mainly instigation of fear to blackmail people to act according to someone’s will.

    Uncomtrolled police force leads to it becoming the organized crime itself, to corruption, to overuse of power, and other bad things, but it doesn’t seem to be directed in itself. So this may be an instrument of terror but it doesn’t necessarily imply the terror itself is what I was trying to say.

    otter,

    Terror is not only an active verb. The more insidious and pervasive representation of this is systemic, violent racism by authority figures and the historical lack of justice against said bigotry.

    In practice, police forces are organized crime with a badge. In theory, and I mean in the most fairy tale way possible, they’re shining paladins of virtue. If you’re still gargling that Kool-Aid, no one can help you, but if you want to put down the pitcher, just say the word.

    GTG3000,

    Well you know how it is. Everyone who knows what’s going on left, everyone else just watches TV and believes them because why wouldn’t they.

    IHadTwoCows,

    You think that’s weird, you should see how Americans ignore their corruption.

    Prandom_returns,

    Whataboutism is a moron’s contra-argument.

    dangblingus,

    They don’t know the war is going badly. They don’t know what Western society knows about the war. They’re fed state approved propaganda and nothing more. They’re also plastered constantly which kills motivation for political upheaval.

    IHadTwoCows,

    Good thing Obama made propaganda legal and protected here in the US.

    teichflamme,

    You done commenting “what about the US”?

    IHadTwoCows,

    Fuck no, and I never will be, and anybody who is is a fucking pussy

    teichflamme,

    You sound like a well adjusted adult, so go on

    IHadTwoCows,

    I am indeed. So far, the pacifist doormat tactic isnt working.

    wanderingmagus,

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

    IHadTwoCows,

    So you’re back into a corner and can’t answer it.

    idiomaddict,

    The answer is that neither the US nor Russia is a good place to live, but right now we’re talking about Russia, so bringing up the US is irrelevant. Like it always is with whataboutism, because what else could the answer possibly be?

    IHadTwoCows,

    It depends on who is saying what and why to determine "whata boutism

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    It’s you. You said ‘what about Obama’ like it made you relevant in any way.

    It didn’t, and you’re not.

    BassTurd,

    Did you ask a question?

    Maggoty,

    Protest is met with swift arrest and long prison sentences.

    space,

    Give it time. It took 3 years of war for the 1917 revolution to start.

    Blue_Morpho,

    It’s pretty insane how indifferent the majority of the Russian population is.

    It’s identical in the US. 4 years of Trump and all we got was a pro Trump attempted coup.

    recapitated,

    Trump is too narcissistic and up his own ass to deliberately export pure sadistic evil the way Putin does.

    maynarkh,

    The Kurds beg to differ

    recapitated,

    Yes. He fucked that up… We fucked that up. But I do believe it was out of complete incompetence and absolute density and maybe indifference.

    Chocrates,

    I feel like Ukraine needs to take the fight to Russia for that to work, but that runs the risk of galvanizing the population against Ukraine as well

    cman6,

    One thing I would add is that the Russian people do want change but any attempt at changing the leadership is met with poisoning and/or long prison sentences. I would highly recommend reading about Alexei Navalny or watching the fascinating documentary

    TheBlue22,

    While the army may be extremely disorsgnized, unfortunately, putin has made internal security extremely solid. Add to that the fact that a great amount of people in russia are politicaly passive or pro Z, I don’t think a revolution is coming from the people anytime soon.

    BlackSkinnedJew,

    It’s not indifference they are ok about it, it’s called democracy.

    BitSound,

    They’d have to have a democracy in order for it to be called a democracy

    Infiltrated_ad8271,
    Infiltrated_ad8271 avatar

    Due to putin's lack of qualms about sacrificing civilian men, these numbers may not be militarily very relevant if the professional army and cannon fodder are not segregated.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Hmm, Ukraine must be in a really bad way if it’s losing against militarily irreverent cannon fodder, despite all the advanced western weapons it’s been given.

    Worstdriver,

    Quantity has a quality all its own

    brain_in_a_box,

    But 90 percent of the Russian army has been wiped out, and Ukraine was able to easily demolish the Russian army when it was at full strength.

    Infiltrated_ad8271,
    Infiltrated_ad8271 avatar

    I think that's more to russia's demerit than to ukraine's merit. It seems that they only prepared for a single strike and even then they did it badly, they failed to manage their logistics to the point that they ended up with the embarrassing kilometer long queue of tanks standing in front of kiev.

    brain_in_a_box,

    Nice try Ivan, but everyone knows Ukraine is whupping your ass.

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    Another ‘defeat any day now’ propaganda piece?

    lysol,

    You see, any normal country would have realized the war became way too costly and capitulated. But Russia is not a normal country.

    Saying “Russia is losing” a year ago was not propaganda. It was just a lack of understanding how little Putin cares about the life of his soldiers. We now know he’ll just keep sending more no matter what. He literally can’t lose this war and continue to be president.

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    The worlds largest, most well funded, most highly advanced military in the world cant defeat a military more than half its size that uses old outdated weapons? The US doesnt want to win this war, it wants to prolong it.

    avater, (edited )
    @avater@lemmy.world avatar

    you do know that ukraine is fighting against Russia and that the Nato only supports them and has no active troops on the ground against the russian invaders?

    just checked your older posts, nevermind! Keep putting your dog in stupid pyjamas and repeat your degenerated commie propaganda…

    RunawayFixer,

    Russia wouldn’t even have had to capitulate, a white peace and some empty diplomatic gestures from Ukraine (like signing a piece of paper in which they promise to “denazify”), would have been enough to get a peace that Russia can sell at home. The classic power play of “we’re going home because we accomplished all objectives, we’re definitely not running away with our tail between our legs”. But Putin would rather see hundreds of thousands of Russians die, just so he can pretend one more year to never be wrong about anything.

    xkforce,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    Dont like getting pointed out that you are and have been getting lied to by your ‘lesser evil?’

    xkforce,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    MonsterMonster,

    He’s sounds like a republican.

    thbb,

    Could be both. After all, red is both the color of communism and republicans. May be this is enough commonalities to confuse a MAGA hat wearer

    Honytawk,

    We get lied to even more by the greater evil, so it checks out.

    At least the US isn’t calling it a “military training exercise”

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    The US is selling it as ‘saving democracy’ same lie

    Honytawk,

    Ukrainians elected their president fair and square, so yes it is democracy whether Putin likes it or not.

    Unlike the Russian elections.

    Tell me, what was the term limit when Putin took office again? And how many terms later are we?

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    Is someone unaware how the US overthrows governments that threaten their hegemony and installs a dictator that serves US interests?

    Honytawk,

    You mean that happened in Russia with Putin?

    I should have known

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    The US did that with Boris Yeltsin under Bill Clinton. And Yeltsin appointed Putin. So yes, the US gave us Putin. Exactly the same way they installed Zelensky

    JeffKerman1999,

    Could also be maga

    K1nsey6,
    @K1nsey6@lemmy.world avatar

    You say that like theres a difference between MAGA and BlueMAGA

    Marin_Rider,

    theyre the same picture

    Gigan,
    @Gigan@lemmy.world avatar

    That’s doesn’t seem sustainable

    AllonzeeLV,

    Depends on how many citizens you can threaten/coerce into replacing them.

    NaibofTabr,

    It’s easier when you “recruit” from your prisons.

    IWantToFuckSpez,

    Or trick foreigners into enlisting.

    Dogyote,

    Unfortunately it is

    RaincoatsGeorge,

    Frankly I don’t care. The US wastes trillions of dollars on military spending. We have the most advanced military in the world by a mile but all too often it ends up using it to defend someone else’s financial interests or to pad the pockets of people that make their money through a war economy.

    Russia can get fucked. Every cent spent on the defense of Ukraine is a fully realized fuck you to our enemy. Ukraine did what we could never do. They essentially removed Russia from the equation. Yeah they have many poorly maintained nukes but they know we will fuck their ass if they touch them. They will not be posing a real threat to anyone for generations.

    We aren’t spending this money on the American people and we never were going to do that anyway. Our choices are we fund people actually fighting for their life or we allow that money to get sucked into the military industrial complex for no real return. They’re already getting theirs out of this, the only question that remains is do you back Republicans that have made up a nothing burger about this money because they’ve arbitrarily decided this is the 96th hill they’ll die on, or do you you want to see the money you pay in taxes actually get put to a meaningful purpose.

    IWantToFuckSpez,

    That money still goes to the military industrial complex. It’s used to buy US equipment and ordnance for Ukraine. And the government ain’t buying it at cost. People in the US military industrial complex are getting richer of this war.

    ObviouslyNotBanana,
    @ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world avatar

    Saying that it doesn’t go to the American people isn’t strictly true. It’s not like it’s cash shipped across the Atlantic. The money spent on weapons to Ukraine is injected into local American economies where weapons are produced, as wages that let people consume products which goes to the wages of people who sell those products wages in turn.

    gravitas_deficiency,

    Frankly, it may come to be seen as, in terms of bang for the buck, the single most effective use of US military funding in history.

    Think about it: Russia went from being considered a peer-state of the US to the second most effective army currently conducting combat operations in Ukraine. That’s embarrassing any way you spin it. They have utterly destroyed any real vestige of conventional military power they had, and Ukraine is the one who shattered not only that reputation, but also the capability.

    And not just in terms of physical assets - Putin called up training officers and sent them to the front. You just… you don’t do that. It means that instead of taking another year or two to train a new generation of officers to competence… it takes 10, and even then they’re not very good, because all the institutional knowledge those instructors had was lost. The only reason they’re even considered these days is because they’re a nuclear state.

    ObviouslyNotBanana,
    @ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world avatar

    All while letting Rob who works at Lockheed Martin buy a new truck from all the overtime he can clock since the defence industry is working full time. It’s not perfect, but it’s literally injecting money into the American economy to show Russia what is what without sending any troops whatsoever.

    RaincoatsGeorge,

    I had not heard that. That is just madness. Its got to be one of the worst cases of unchecked hubris in history. I mean in the 1600s someone would have plunged a dagger into his neck by now. Usually people see the writing on the wall and get to finding a more competent leader but he’s spent decades building this impenetrable circle of loyalists that know they must be absolutely devoted or they’re going to be next on the defenestration block.

    No one dares tell these men about their collosal fuck ups. Nope, everything’s going great, we will have this done in 2 more months sir!

    If not for nukes I think he would have been long dead by now. If not by the Russian people then surely nato would have rolled over Russia and we would be well into the process of ‘denazifying’ the country.

    Aceticon,

    That argument is just a variant of the Broken Window Falacy.

    The resources that are spent in stuff that’s blown up could otherwise be spent in stuff that provided years of benefit to people, so it is wasted - sure the money itself circulates within the US economy, but what matters is were you spend human time and material resources, not the movement of trade tokens per-se.

    In Economic terms, making weapons for Ukraine to use against Russia is a good investment, especially for Europa, because it stops Russia from advancing further, killing people and destroying stuff, not to mention gaining control over lot of resources, not because of some economically falacious argument that has been disproven decades ago.

    ObviouslyNotBanana,
    @ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world avatar

    There’s no fallacy, since I’m not pretending that isn’t the case. Saying it doesn’t go to the American people isn’t strictly true. It’s an investment into the defense industry. That is wages and jobs. Those equal consumption further down the line. Could the resources be spent somewhere else? Sure. But I didn’t argue against that. I specifically took issue with saying that the money doesn’t go to the American people.

    The people on the right, not the politicians but the actual people, hear how America is pretty much shipping cash to Ukraine (because the news they watch leave out the facts) which is where they get the idea of “Zelenskiy buying cocaine on their tab”. We have to make clear when we discuss these things that America is investing this money in local production. The products of those jobs are what is shipped to Ukraine. The money stays in America, and Zelenskiy isn’t buying a new yacht with them (which is one of the talking points I’ve heard from the right).

    I do not disagree that there’s a discussion to be had, but I think it’s important to be clear about what the discussion actually is. I’m also in strong doubts about whether it needs to be a choice between weapons and other things. The United States can do both. The fact that both isn’t done speaks to the idea that not investing in arms for Ukraine wouldn’t mean that other investments were made instead.

    Aceticon,

    For clarity:

    • If the two only options were to spend the money in the US making weapons or spend it outside the US making weapons, then it’s better for the US to spend it in the US making weapons as what’s created using the resources is weapons either way and if spent in the US other benifits of spending that money (as you pointed out: “wages and jobs”) are captured in the US.
    • However if the options being considered are spend the money making weapons or spend it making something else, economically it’s probably better to spend it something else because it would still generate “wages and jobs” and in addition to that there could be other benefits from that something else (imagine for examples if it went into bridges and roads: unless they’re “bridges to nowhere” those thinks tend to keep on delivering economic benefits long after the money was spent) which weapons do not bring.

    That said, the World is as it is, Russia acts as it acts, so in overall other nations have to spend that money in weapons and military because of them anyway, and even in a pure, cold “financial analysis” (i.e. moral aside) the single most efficient way of achieving the desired result (stop Russia from fucking things up for everybody else) is by helping Ukraine militarily.

    In fact, I think Europe (were I am) is still not doing enough in that front.

    My point was entirelly on, in abstract, that using a country’s money to make weapons is generally not a good investment from an economic point of view.

    BaronDoggystyleVonWoof,

    It really is the cheapest way to destroy an enemy.

    1. You don’t need to send your own men to die.
    2. You don’t need to a full scale invasion, just let them bleed dry.
    3. Be the “good guy” in supporting Ukraine.

    There really is only win win for the US.

    workerONE,

    We also got to see what Russia was capable of in a war, which was priceless.

    Blum0108,

    I think he meant not sustainable for Russia

    MonkderZweite,

    or to pad the pockets of people that make their money through a war economy.

    It’s only about that. Inbetween was some “foreign interests” (called “oil”) but that’s history now.

    Well, that and kicking China.

    tacosplease,

    We spent 5% of our military budget to help Ukraine take out most of our biggest adversary’s army, and the Republicans think it’s not worth the cost.

    Retrograde,
    @Retrograde@lemmy.world avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Corkyskog,

    I don’t believe anyone is born stupid.

    JustMy2c,

    They’re trained to be. Either as business owners by access to private clubs etc. Or as plebs by ‘news’ ‘media’

    ASeriesOfPoorChoices,

    It’s certainly biodegradable.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • world@lemmy.world
  • khanakhh
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • ethstaker
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • everett
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • InstantRegret
  • megavids
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Durango
  • normalnudes
  • cubers
  • tacticalgear
  • cisconetworking
  • tester
  • modclub
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • Leos
  • JUstTest
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •