this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
890 points (97.4% liked)

World News

39082 readers
2997 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 133 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

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.

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 116 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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@lemm.ee 57 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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@literature.cafe 48 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

throat singing intensifies

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] Handrahen@lemmy.world 35 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 11 months ago

All the aid, I completely agree! 🤘🏼🇺🇦

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 5 points 11 months ago

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

[–] GenEcon@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago

Until they are, of course.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 0 points 11 months ago

Hamas has entered the chat.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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@feddit.de -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

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

[–] Neato@kbin.social 31 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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?

[–] Nolegjoe@lemmy.world 78 points 11 months ago

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

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 27 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

More likely mass graves as it currently seems

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Russia was putting its support troops on the front line.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

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

[–] Sunfoil@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 6 points 11 months ago

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

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago

how much of that 900000 is true?