Russia-Ukrainian War

[Xerxes]

36 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

I doubt there will be any negotiations this year. It will certainly not before Putin has kicked out the Ukrainians out of Russian land or at least tried. But it will be costly for him no matter what and the cost will be permanent, because he cannot  defend his borders just with conscripts.

 

 

Zelenskyy rolled in the dice and bought some thinly-traded call options, and it went straight in-the-money

 

Expiry date 2025 with upside being juicy enough to make posts on REDDIT on the unrealized gains ..... but far far from enough for being set for retirement.

 

 

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Just for purpose of showing proportions interpartes, from trading economics [today, and all 2023 numbers] :

 

Russia GDP : USD 2,021 B,

 

USA GDP : USD 27,361 B

 

Euro area GDP : USD 15,545 B,

 

Germany GDP : USD 4,456 B

United Kingdom GDP : USD 3,340 B

France GDP : USD 3,031 B

Italy GDP : USD 2,255 B.

 

Please mind the individual proportions.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

I'm still a firm believer that the econoimic consequences of this war already have imposed irrevocable damage to the economy of Russia, and the consequences of that will be for many years to come, the geografic definition of Europe [see Wikipedia] is generally set to the east to be in Russia [at the Ural mountains], and it will change to something like exclusive Russia, like 'Between the Urals and Europe we have the hellhole called Russia [totally isolated from the West]'.

 

For sure. Too bad the country is run by the Russian Mafia, who could give a shit about the population.

It worked for Stalin, it'll work for Putin.

 

I'm not even sure if Putin cares about all his oligarch buddies that are so much poorer now.

 

Russia deserves to be a pariah just like North Korea.

 

[Spekulatius]

He may a not care about his Oligarch but perhaps they take care of him one day. A few decades like they and Russia is just like North a Korea . I’d guess they always be a bit better off because they have more resources.

Imagine what Russia could be like, if they had the right kind of revolution like America had. They would be on par with the rest of Europe. Instead, they made a 70 year detour down the communist lane and now they go on the dead end Putin Neo-Zarist route for an other few decades.

[John Hjorth]

A view into some odd corners of the democracy in a tiny state in the Northern Europe, involving the concept and definition of democracy, energi policy and security policy, all in a friggin' big bunch :

 

Jyllandsposten - Debate - Leader column [August 16^th 2024] : Even if the truth about Nord Stream is inconvenient, it must come out.

 

Translation :

 

Quote

Subtitle :

A series of revelations in the international media have once again cast a spotlight on the sabotage against Nord Stream in 2022, but there is a need for much greater official openness about the matter.

 

Text below photo :

Most worryingly, the attack risks creating a precedent for international sabotage, such as Moscow can hide behind the campaign against Western infrastructure and institutions, which by all accounts is already underway. Archive photo

 

Article body text :

 

The biggest act of sabotage in Europe in a lifetime is being investigated almost two years after the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, still in the deepest secrecy, but stories about the spectacular attack bubble up from the seabed and into the columns of the media from time to time.

 

The past week brought two weighty news related to the mysterious attack in the Baltic Sea at the end of September 2022. Several media were able to tell that the German prosecutor's office has issued an arrest warrant against a Ukrainian diver who is suspected of having played a role in organizing the abutment against the pipeline. A story in the American daily Wall Street Journal depicted in many vivid details a plot that, according to the newspaper, briefly involved the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, and the country's then chief of defense, Valery Zaluzhny. This story also revealed that several Western intelligence agencies were allegedly well informed of the plans for the attack but failed to prevent it. These stories add to earlier depictions of a group of Ukrainian masterminds who presumably had some degree of official cover for the attack on what many in Ukraine perceived as hostile infrastructure supporting and financing Russia's brutal warfare.

 

However, Kyiv denies any involvement, and there are also several alternative theories about who could be behind the attack. Here, i.a. Russia, Poland and the United States, without any of these suspicions being said to have been even approximately made probable.

Virtually everything we know about the attack nearly two years ago has been unearthed by investigative journalists from sources in the intelligence world, among investigators and in the corridors of power in Kyiv and the Western capitals. It is commendable and once again demonstrates the role a free press should play in society, but it is not enough. The Nord Stream sabotage has had far-reaching consequences for energy and security policy not only in the Baltic Sea area, but in large parts of Europe. The environmental impact after the explosions was great, and the economic losses astronomical, but most worryingly, the attack risks creating a precedent for international sabotage, such as Moscow can hide behind the campaign against Western infrastructure and institutions, which by all accounts is already underway.

 

Here it is obvious that Germany (whose political beau monde was driving the project for two decades and resolutely turned a blind eye to its risks) bears a special responsibility and can play an important role in unraveling the murky circumstances surrounding the case. After Denmark and Sweden abandoned their investigations earlier this year – without the public becoming significantly wiser on the occasion – it is only under German auspices that a wider investigation is taking place. Berlin should, in cooperation with the Baltic Sea countries, including Denmark, ensure that the public is informed in a timely and thorough manner about what we actually know.

Some will object that the matter of Nord Stream could harm a Ukraine that is bravely fighting for its life against Russian aggression. It's a strange argument. Because even if it were to turn out that the Ukrainian trail points the way to solving the attack - and no one can say that with certainty yet - it does not shake one iota that Ukraine's survival and victory is not only important for moral reasons, but also of vital importance to our own security.

 

It is no longer inconceivable that the truth about the attacks may turn out to be inconvenient. But it is precisely on their ability to handle such inconvenient truths that democracies must be measured.

 

I'll just say : *this*. It's highly likely written by editor in chief Marchen Geertsen.

Edited August 18 by John Hjorth

[ValueArb]

Quote

 

The past week brought two weighty news related to the mysterious attack in the Baltic Sea at the end of September 2022. Several media were able to tell that the German prosecutor's office has issued an arrest warrant against a Ukrainian diver who is suspected of having played a role in organizing the abutment against the pipeline.

 

There are thousands of prosecutors issuing arrest warrants every day, and guess what, some of them are based on flimsy evidence and theories. 

 

Quote

 

A story in the American daily Wall Street Journal depicted in many vivid details a plot that, according to the newspaper, briefly involved the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, and the country's then chief of defense, Valery Zaluzhny. This story also revealed that several Western intelligence agencies were allegedly well informed of the plans for the attack but failed to prevent it. These stories add to earlier depictions of a group of Ukrainian masterminds who presumably had some degree of official cover for the attack on what many in Ukraine perceived as hostile infrastructure supporting and financing Russia's brutal warfare.

 

So Zelensky told Zaluszhny not to do it, but he went ahead and he (or staff involved in attack) informed Western intelligence agencies about the attack ahead of time. Anyone see how absurd this story is? Biden and Zelensky were struggling to keep together a strong european coalition with Germany as a key member to support Ukraine, yet their underlings went full bore on a project that risked shattering German support?

 

And all for a pipeline that was already shut down and not in use? That provided zero revenues and resources to the Russian economy or military?

 

Quote

 

However, Kyiv denies any involvement, and there are also several alternative theories about who could be behind the attack. Here, i.a. Russia, Poland and the United States, without any of these suspicions being said to have been even approximately made probable.

 

So the US did it, again risking the most important coalition, all for a pipeline Germany had already shut down on its own within days of the invasion?

 

Or Russia did it, destroying billions in their own important infrastructure to sell their natural gas to Europe, that was almost certainly to be back in operation as soon as a peace agreement is signed in Ukraine?

 

Or Poland did it, because they just hate Russia so bad they'll risk pissing off Germany just to take out a non operating pipeline.

 

Every single theory is absurd on its face.

 

Quote

Virtually everything we know about the attack nearly two years ago has been unearthed by investigative journalists from sources in the intelligence world, among investigators and in the corridors of power in Kyiv and the Western capitals.

 

Again, the "intelligence world" is also  full of fakes, wannabes and liars, and this wouldn't be the first, second or even hundredth time gullible journalists have been taken in by sources vastly over-representing their knowledge and credentials to spin a dramatic story with zero basis in actual fact.

 

Quote

Here it is obvious that Germany (whose political beau monde was driving the project for two decades and resolutely turned a blind eye to its risks) bears a special responsibility and can play an important role in unraveling the murky circumstances surrounding the case. After Denmark and Sweden abandoned their investigations earlier this year – without the public becoming significantly wiser on the occasion – it is only under German auspices that a wider investigation is taking place. Berlin should, in cooperation with the Baltic Sea countries, including Denmark, ensure that the public is informed in a timely and thorough manner about what we actually know.

 

And why did Denmark and Sweden abandon their investigations? Maybe its because they realized there isn't any credible evidence any sabotage took place. Maybe they found their chemical tests frequently produce false positives when done against seabed oceanic samples containing an abundance of natural chemicals and elements, not to mention hundreds of years of human pollution, and realized its almost impossible a diving team could perform the sophisticated deep water diving operations to plant explosives hundreds of meters deep in multiple locations far apart from a tiny yacht.

 

Again there is only one hypothesis that realistically matches the motives of all parties. Summer of 2022 stinging from how unexpectedly harsh European sanctions were, Putin was convinced that the European coalition would crack during a cold winter without Russian natural gas. His staff told their toadies in charge of Gazprom to ensure the pipelines were ready at a moments notice to supply Germany when its leaders finally folded under pressure from citizenry desperate for relief from massive increase in the prices of natural gas needed to keep them warm. Putin would blackmail Germany into dropping support for Ukraine in exchange for turning on the Nordstream spigot, and the European coalition would shatter and weaken, allowing him to grind the increasingly isolated Ukraines under a million boots of the under equipped and under trained Russian military mob. Like all Putin grand strategies, likely an absurd expectation of results but a far from absurd expectation of his mind-set.

 

To use the pipelines requires they be clear of methane hydrates, massive thousand kilo blocks of methane-water ice that form in cold environments like the Baltic. Clearing out these blocks is a delicate and dangerous operation because if pressure/temperature changes too rapidly pockets of the blocks can rapidly disassociated into a water/methane steam, working like a rocket in the tightly contained pipe to shoot a multi-ton ice block down the pipeline at over a hundred miles per hour, and if it reaches a bend in the pipeline, hitting the pipe wall with enough force to crack it which instantly causes a massive explosion as the gas is contained at a pressure hundreds of times higher than earths atmosphere. 

 

So clearing methane hydrates is usually carefully managed from both ends of the pipeline by western experts. But Russia only controlled one end. While you can clear the pipeline from a single end, it is a far more dangerous and difficult operation, requiring those western experts, who, oops, were no longer available due to sanctions. What are the odds the Putin flunkies at Gazprom told their remaining Russian staff on the ground managing the pipelines to stop arguing and clear them now, while the weather was still good and baltic still relatively warm? What part did vodka play in decisions from the top down to the poor ground staff forced to do a more sophisticated and difficult operation than they've ever been allowed to do, with one arm (end of pipeline) tied behind their backs? i'll guarantee no one wanted to tell any superior in the chain that Gazprom's Russian engineers weren't up to the task and that they needed to get the westerners back involved. 

 

But this only makes sense if the explosions occured at locations where the pipeline changed directions, providng that bend in the pipe that the block would strike like a hammer creating the tiny cracks that hundreds of atmospheres of pressure would rip into vast openings in a massive pulse of hundreds of tons of methane expanding like a shockwave into the sea. And what a coincidence that every explosion occured at the only places in that area where the pipeline was bent to head into a different direction? And all nearly at the same time and locations where sea temperature and declining pipeline pressure from the Russian head matched the same trigger values that started the methane hydrates disassociating in one, started it in all.  And some close enough to each other to get a second trigger effect from the pulse wave of pressure from the first to blow.

 

Until actual natural gas drilling experts with deep sea experience are heavily involved in the investigation instead of explosive demolition teams and prosecutors, we'll never know if the most naturally rational hypothesis is the correct one, or if one of the crazy sabotage theories is. Demolition experts and prosecutors look for demolition evidence and sabotage suspects and treat any trace evidence supporting it, no matter how weak, as conclusive because it fits their pre-ordained mission parameters to find the "perpetrators". Its likely they don't even have a concept that pipelines can explode through shoddy maintenance practices (if they were Russian they'd know through long standing Gazprom traditions) nor do they have any motivation to investigate the possibility. Its like Fundamentalist religious believers who can't accept any evidence of a world older than 6,000 years because they have already accepted the truth of a holy book, and their job is to see the world through its teachings and defend that faith, so any evidence to the contrary must be either wrong, faked, or forged. The german prosecutor was tasked to find "the suspects" so he's going to damn well find someone with the necessary skills and a tangential relationship to the presumed perpetrators and pursue them. The demo team is going to highlight any positive traces of explosives they found, and downplay the likelyhood of false positives in that environment or any doubts they have.

 

The day some actual pipeline experts detail why the maintenance failure theory can't be true I'll happily abandon it. But until then every time some journalist writes a new conspiracy article about the Nordstream pipeline failures based on beers with some low level intelligence employees desperate for attention spinning easily rebuttble yarns, I'm going to trot out the only rational hypothesis again.

Edited August 20 by ValueArb
clarity

[John Hjorth]

ChrisO_wiki on X about Russian conscripts in the Ukrainian Kursk offensive [warning : It's a shocking and heartbreaking read] :

 

 

 

[changegonnacome]

 

Good overview - when laid out like this.....the Kursk incursion (the tiny yellow mark 300 miles north of the Donbas) is either a work of military genius or madness.....we'll find out by November.....when perhaps the final 1/3 of the Donbas might fall......evacuating Pokrovsk as the Ukranian's are now is not a good sign

[UK]

 

[John Hjorth]

About the Russian economy :

 

The Guardian - Opinion - Russia [July 24^th 2024] : Russia is lying about its economic strength: sanctions are working – and we need more [Eight European finance ministers].

 

Financial Times - Letter [August 16^th 2024] : West must test Putin’s claims about the Russian economy [From Elisabeth Svantesson, Swedish Minister for Finance, Stockholm, Sweden].

 

Fortune - Commentary - Russia [ August 19 2024] : An economic catastrophe is lurking beneath Russia’s GDP growth as Putin ‘throws everything into the fireplace'.

 

I must appear pretty clear and evident to every reader, that the direction of the development in the Russian economy is unsustainable in every view and perspective other than the near short term.

 

All-in, using national wealth funds purposed for the future on warfare, burning its candle in both ends.

Edited August 22 by John Hjorth
Added link to Fortune article

[changegonnacome]

6 hours ago, John Hjorth said:

Russian economy is unsustainable in every view and perspective other than the near short term.

 

The real exam question is which unsustainable war machine & economy is going to collapse first?......Ukraine's or Russia's....the math would say Ukraine's but they've got the West wild card.......and I don't discount the fact that Russia (like the USSR before it) can on the surface look very much stronger than it is.....only to collapse in astoundingly speedy way that takes everybody by surprise....such is the nature of totalitarian regimes...they implode at the of speed light compared to liberal democracies that tend collapse slowly in full embarrassing view.

[Pelagic]

15 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

The real exam question is which unsustainable war machine & economy is going to collapse first?......Ukraine's or Russia's....the math would say Ukraine's but they've got the West wild card.......and I don't discount the fact that Russia (like the USSR before it) can on the surface look very much stronger than it is.....only to collapse in astoundingly speedy way that takes everybody by surprise....such is the nature of totalitarian regimes...they implode at the of speed light compared to liberal democracies that tend collapse slowly in full embarrassing view.

 

The US and other supporters of Ukraine have done a decent job curtailing Ukraine's ability to truly impact Russia's economy, hoping instead for a gradual weaking that forces them to withdraw from Ukraine. A complete Russian economic collapse is not in the world's interest even if Ukraine would like to take that route to hasten the end of the war. That management works the other way too and so long as Ukraine stays within the guidelines they'll continue to receive support.

 

This happened today and is sort of inline with my above point. If Ukraine can strike ships transiting the Kerch Straight at will with domestically produced missiles, as it appears they did here, that would be like the US having the Mississippi River closed off for export. A meaningful percentage of Russia's non-oil exports flow through there out of the Sea of Azov, limiting those and other Russian exports, including oil, from Black Sea ports would substantially hamper Russia's economy.

 

https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1826635124395696478

[ValueArb]

14 minutes ago, Pelagic said:

 

The US and other supporters of Ukraine have done a decent job curtailing Ukraine's ability to truly impact Russia's economy, hoping instead for a gradual weaking that forces them to withdraw from Ukraine. A complete Russian economic collapse is not in the world's interest even if Ukraine would like to take that route to hasten the end of the war. That management works the other way too and so long as Ukraine stays within the guidelines they'll continue to receive support.

 

This happened today and is sort of inline with my above point. If Ukraine can strike ships transiting the Kerch Straight at will with domestically produced missiles, as it appears they did here, that would be like the US having the Mississippi River closed off for export. A meaningful percentage of Russia's non-oil exports flow through there out of the Sea of Azov, limiting those and other Russian exports, including oil, from Black Sea ports would substantially hamper Russia's economy.

 

https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1826635124395696478

 

This is Bidenism at its finest.

 

The faster Russia's economy collapses the better for the world. It's a criminal regime that's been spreading its poison across the world for too long, and the sooner the world recognizes it's just a third world kleptocracy with little actual economic power the better.

[John Hjorth]

33 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

This is Bidenism at its finest.

 

The faster Russia's economy collapses the better for the world. It's a criminal regime that's been spreading its poison across the world for too long, and the sooner the world recognizes it's just a third world kleptocracy with little actual economic power the better.

 

You certainly need to cool down, - at least bit, @ValueArb.

 

To me, you've lost it here in this topic.

 

I'll likely get some response from you based on this, but please do not expect me to respond.

 

Personallly, I really hate and disgust when other people are trying to explain to me my own opinion.

[Luke]

Russian friends of mine are back home in the summer, difficult to get there. Back then flight from Germany was 2hours, now its an around-the-world trip...told me the war isn't much of a topic in Moscow/Petersburg, a lot less than it is a topic in the west/germany at least. I went through the estimated death count numbers yesterday evening and can only react in shock, so many lives lost for what? Ukraine made 0 progress at the main target regions, invading Russia now is an interesting tactic to get extra negotiating power but does some really see here how they can get the eastern regions back? And even if they would temporarily be able to hold them, do we think Russia would stop? 

 

Russia does not seem completely unwilling to negotiate something and Putin is not completely irrational. Was it worth to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to get nowhere? Is not surrendering the Donbas worth 100k Ukrainians? Would the Ukrainians have lived if there would have been an immediate cease-fire and a deal that's not great but the best one can get? 

 

Harald Kujat quoted this recently on TV: 

 

By Theodor Storm: 

 

1  One asks what comes next,

2  The other only asks, is it right.

3  And this is the difference

4  between the free man and the slave.

 

1	Der eine fragt, was kommt danach,
2	Der andere fragt nur, ist es recht.
3	Und also unterscheidet sich
4	Der Freie von dem Knecht

[changegonnacome]

3 hours ago, Pelagic said:

A complete Russian economic collapse is not in the world's interest even if Ukraine would like to take that route to hasten the end of the war.

 

Indeed - the under appreciated issue with nuclear proliferation.....is a regional despot undergoing regime collapse used to be a local regional phenomenon that we, in the West, kind of cheered on from afar watching on TV.....situations like the one with Russia have a much fatter tail risk now.....morons ignore the tail & advocate for escalation dominance at all junctures like it's the 1920's or something.....cause they haven't quite calibrated their risk management framework to take account of the new tails.

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Luke said:

Russia does not seem completely unwilling to negotiate something and Putin is not completely irrational. Was it worth to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to get nowhere? Is not surrendering the Donbas worth 100k Ukrainians? Would the Ukrainians have lived if there would have been an immediate cease-fire and a deal that's not great but the best one can get? 

 

I thought this looked fairly interesting - regarding how to work toward ending the war, since no one is talking about it.

 

https://www.hoover.org/research/issues-negotiations-looking-toward-end-war-ukraine

 

Ukraine’s goals would presumably include the following, not necessarily in order of importance:

• Have regime change in Moscow to a government more friendly to Ukraine.
• Recover all lost territory.
• Join the EU and NATO.
• Bring back as many displaced Ukrainian citizens as possible.
• Build the strongest military in Europe.
• Acquire significant reparations from Russia and significant aid from others for reconstruction.
• Assure freedom of navigation in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.
• Assure no future attacks from Russia.

 

Russia’s primary goals would likely be the following:

• Have regime change in Kyiv to a government more friendly to Russia.
• Prevent Ukrainian membership in NATO.
• Retain control of as much captured Ukrainian territory as possible, especially Crimea.
• Assure the well-being of whatever Russian minority remains in Ukraine.
• End as much of the sanctions regime as possible.
• Assure freedom of navigation in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.
• Minimize discussion of and punishment for war crimes.
• Restore Russia’s reputation as a responsible great power.

 

My initial thoughts - it will take a long time and many pointless deaths in the meantime.

[Xerxes]

If over the long term Ukraine was going to drift westward anyways, politically and economically (NATO or not), it doesn’t seem illogical for the Kremlin to roll the dice. It was just a matter of time. 
 

This war (despite its enormous cost), at least potentially created another “frozen conflict” to last ages, once there is an armistice in effect. And we are not even there yet. 
 

The alternative would have been dwindling into economic insignificance as Ukraine gained momentum over the next 10-15 years. 

[UK]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-ambassador-says-us-plans-give-ukraine-carte-blanche-weapons-2024-08-23/

 

"I tell you sincerely that the president has made a decision," the TASS state news agency quoted Antonov as saying late on Thursday. "I am firmly convinced that everyone will be severely punished for what has happened in Kursk region." The comments by Antonov, who did not provide further details on Putin's plans, came after the Kremlin leader held a meeting on Thursday with senior officials, including the governors of border regions, over two weeks after Ukraine launched its lightning attack, the biggest incursion into Russia by a foreign power since World War Two.

 

Edited August 23 by UK

[ValueArb]

18 hours ago, Luke said:

Russian friends of mine are back home in the summer, difficult to get there. Back then flight from Germany was 2hours, now its an around-the-world trip...told me the war isn't much of a topic in Moscow/Petersburg, a lot less than it is a topic in the west/germany at least. I went through the estimated death count numbers yesterday evening and can only react in shock, so many lives lost for what? Ukraine made 0 progress at the main target regions, invading Russia now is an interesting tactic to get extra negotiating power but does some really see here how they can get the eastern regions back? And even if they would temporarily be able to hold them, do we think Russia would stop? 

 

Russia does not seem completely unwilling to negotiate something and Putin is not completely irrational. Was it worth to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to get nowhere? Is not surrendering the Donbas worth 100k Ukrainians? Would the Ukrainians have lived if there would have been an immediate cease-fire and a deal that's not great but the best one can get? 

 

Harald Kujat quoted this recently on TV: 

 

By Theodor Storm: 

 

1  One asks what comes next,

2  The other only asks, is it right.

3  And this is the difference

4  between the free man and the slave.

 

1	Der eine fragt, was kommt danach,
2	Der andere fragt nur, ist es recht.
3	Und also unterscheidet sich
4	Der Freie von dem Knecht

 

Those who trade freedom for temporary security will soon find they have neither.

[John Hjorth]

48 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Those who trade freedom for temporary security will soon find they have neither.

 

In many cases and under certain circumstances, this unfortunately and eventually ends up as being the truth. Security and freedom are two separate elements of the concept of independence.

Edited August 23 by John Hjorth

[Xerxes]

19 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Indeed - the under appreciated issue with nuclear proliferation.....is a regional despot undergoing regime collapse used to be a local regional phenomenon that we, in the West, kind of cheered on from afar watching on TV.....situations like the one with Russia have a much fatter tail risk now.....morons ignore the tail & advocate for escalation dominance at all junctures like it's the 1920's or something.....cause they haven't quite calibrated their risk management framework to take account of the new tails.

There has been a certain element of the Western security establishment that have always been eager to collapse’ Russian territorial integrity, at any cost. It is a personal accomplishment for them, if they could pull it off. 
 

Goes back to the days Disraeli, maybe Gladstone, the Great Game, the Crimean War etc.

 

Only the rise of Prussia, put those Western aspirations on hold …. For a while 

[John Hjorth]

19 hours ago, Luke said:

... Was it worth to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to get nowhere? Is not surrendering the Donbas worth 100k Ukrainians? ...

 

@Luke,

 

What did you get to of loss numbers for Ukraine and Russia, respectively? Please share with sources [, how horrible a read for all us here on CoBF it might be, eventually].

 

Thank you in advance.

[cubsfan]

@John Hjorth  John - you might find this discussion interesting re: casualties. Personally, I don't know - but much of this makes sense to me. Given that Russia has likely a 5:1 ratio in artillery and that Russia has air superiority and manpower superiority - this tries to estimate casualty ratio. Most modern wars attribute 80% of casualties to artillery & bombing.

 

Now this clip was censored/removed from YouTube, as it may not be a popular view.

 

https://rumble.com/v5b37dh-judgingfreedom.html

 

If you start at the 5:40 minute mark and go to 14:00 minute - that should do it.

 

Just an FYI

[John Hjorth]

To start another angle to what's  going on in Ukraine and simultainly discussed in this topic :

 

How would you react to [hypotchetical] an Ukrainian citizen registering here on CoBF and posting :

 

'This is really not matter for you to decide on, What's going to happen with and to the citizens of the occupied regions of Ukraniene should be let to decide by it people.'

 

 

[Luke]

3 hours ago, John Hjorth said:

 

@Luke,

 

What did you get to of loss numbers for Ukraine and Russia, respectively? Please share with sources [, how horrible a read for all us here on CoBF it might be, eventually].

 

Thank you in advance.

Easily goes into mid hundred thousands with many more wounded and traumatized.