But we can all remember Ursula von der Leyen letting the cat out of the bag in November 2022 when she blurted out the 100,000 dead up to that time. She was admonished within hours for revealing Ukrainian state secrets - the reference was removed but of course remains available elsewhere.
Not much to be said really about how the media conduct themselves during this war.
Having said that I believe Russia's losses are also also immense and that some of the commentators we listen to such as Scott Ritter are seriously underestimating them. We are told even by our side that the military tactics in Ukraine resemble those of WW1 so why wouldn't the casualties also?
Posted by John Monro on February 25, 2024, 9:38 pm, in reply to "Why rehash this?"
No need to be so confrontational, sashimi. I am still entitled to my views even if others disagree and have said so previously (and you've entirely ignored the more important and current part of my short posting.....) If Ukraine can try to restrict information on casualties, how can you then seem to suggest that Russia is unable to do the same? My own estimation that the number of Russian casualties (dead and seriously wounded)is high also (I don't quote an actual number but it'll be greatly over 100,000 I am certain) is conjecture founded on a bit of common sense and historical perspective, and quoting any number of others whose information is probably no more reliable and who tend to gloss over Russia's own problems does not impress me that much. I may be wrong, but so can others. Cheers.
I think sashimi is right in pulling up the evidence from Medusa up ..
For example, this is the 'latest' information from Medusa, judge it yourself (from my Simplicius post, 4 thread down):
First thing to say, consider 'cui bono', a useful tool in this situation. This KIA Ukr figures are stated by this 'Curchilian' figurehead, coke sniffing, penis piano player, for his Ukr (and probably USUK audience) audience. Why wouldn't he downplay these, no?
You are entitled to your views, but the facts are plain, just look at the graph. BBC approved etc.
Yes, the latest Simplicitus goes through casualties in excruciating detail, as Tomski says. Just follow Simplicitus, he is pretty exhaustive about continuously re-assessing casualties.
Apologies for misspelling etc. Written in a hurry : ) nm
"Having said that I believe Russia's losses are also also immense and that some of the commentators we listen to such as Scott Ritter are seriously underestimating them. "
Well, as this is primarily an artillery war, it's axiomatic that there has to be a direct correlation between the number of artillery shells fired and the number of casualties incurred on both sides.
The Russians are by all accounts sending over more than five times the number of shells...which suggests that the casualty rate is 1 Russian to at least 5 Ukranians.
Any vagaries such as proposed Ukrainian "better targetting" due to using extensive NATO surveillance could be cancelled by the ratio of missile & drone use: something again in Russia's favour.
of course 5 to 1 is a low baseline estimate: some say the artillery fire ratio is about 10-1 in Russias favour.
Re: Revealed at last, Ukraine casualties during the war so far 31,000
Well, as this is primarily an artillery war, it's axiomatic that there has to be a direct correlation between the number of artillery shells fired and the number of casualties incurred on both sides.
Generally speaking, this statement about artillery war being the main driver is correct, except there is also the increasing use by RF of 1500 kg etc. FAB bombs, which is also creating a major havoc especially in Avdeevka and surrounds. Nevermind the drones.
I tried to look for credible sources for the 31,000 KIA for Ukr KIA casualties but none were available during my short google search (I know for certain that factoid is wrong btw). From memory, it is more likely to be 10X that, if not more.
and a warning to us Brits that we'll be next......
Well what you say may be true but the first hand accounts of quite a few mercenary soldiers,, some from New Zealand,, confirm that the Russians do sometimes attack WW1 style in "waves" and sustain very heavy casualties. They may be propagandising but I'm not sure why they would, because these same witnesses talk also of the heavy losses from their own side. The battle for Bakhmut alone cost the lives of perhaps up to 30,000 of Wagner and regular troops. There is info coming from Avdiivka that similar or worse Russian losses were sustained there. They may be sending more shells,, but the defenders were well dug in and infantry attacks make the Russian soldiers extremely vulnerable.
I don't wish to argue too much about this, but those posting to counter what I claim about Russian casualties are I'd contend on no better ground to tell me I'm wrong than I am to say I may be right. All this irrelevant was we already know is horrible worth avoiding at almost any cost. This fighting should stop now. But no more will Biden do this for Ukraine than he'll do for the Palestinians. A senile old man to take the world to WW3, probably appropriate as all wars are stupid, and a WW more so than any other..
and here's Biden's cheerleader, General Sir Patrick Sanders upping the ante against Russia
You are not being told that you are wrong per se, you are being advised to follow sources that analyze this issue exhaustively - and by follow, I mean follow for a few months or more, as others here have done.
Nobody who takes the time to do this, will necessarily believe anything, but they will develop an educated sense for what is clearly erroneous i.e. falls outside either the upper or lower extreme for what could possibly be true.
I think the ratio of shelling is about the only non- vested interest way of judging. Obviously assaulting a defensive position is going to increase your casulties, but of course this has happened on both sides. My impression is that the Russians have been quite canny about this in Avdiivca and appear to have used their advantages to good effect. On that I recall reading reports from Ukrainian (Azov)reinforcements of the futility involved because there were effectively no actual defences left to man: quite a startling admission considering the years of Labour the Ukrainians had put into fortifying the site.
What's true is that we are all playing armchair generals or rather statisticians without data and aside from the artillery count, its all mere surmise. -The intuitive "winning side" ready-reckoner I tend to use is to take the claims of the Ukrainian government and then reverse the numbers.
..on both sides there will of-course be the issue of "replacements" esp. when those doing the replacing are conscripted (or in Russia's case recently conscripted), raw troops..I am right in presuming that the Ukrainian army had been made up of professional soldiers before this aren't I? There is a direct correlation between level of training & tactics employed (witness the Somme), and we should expect casualties during the "deep" phase of this war to be horrendous for this very reason (those that survived having been trained in and by combat). How much is known about the tactics? Journalism, of-course, having been strangled since the outset.
Nb. He! He!
"..those that survive having been trained in and by combat"
Posted by Gerard on February 28, 2024, 3:43 pm, in reply to "Conscripts.."
(re: vagaries of this non-edit-able format), meaning those raw troops who emerge from the crucible of "deep war" as hardened killers...I wonder what that means for the denouement? Like many of you I suspect it will be a Russian "victory", whatever that may mean..I don't see how Russia can "lose" without an escalation by NATO that seems most unlikely short of some other "provocation" (as NATO would see it), by Russia..
If you don't advance in waves or waves of columns, you get caught in crossfire. Just because they were invented in the Great War (in the modern era) doesn't mean that they are bad, stupid or callous. When advancing behind a creeping barrage they are the only tactic that can work with relatively low casualties. On the southern flank of the British Fourth Army in 1 July 1916, XIII and XV corps defeated the Germans, as did the French on both sides of the Somme, by advancing in waves behind a creeper. The defences of the German 2nd Army collapsed. Unfortunately it was in the north that success mattered most and there the Germans smashed the attack.The last working-class hero in England.
Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 Jasper the Ruffian cat ? ? ? - 4 November 2021
Ukraine has lost up to 300,000 soldiers (Aleksey Arestovichex, ex Zelensky aide)
Ukraine has lost up to 300,000 soldiers during its conflict with Russia, Aleksey Arestovich, a former aide to President Vladimir Zelensky, has claimed.
Arestovich made the revelation on Friday while speaking to journalist Yulia Latynina via video link. The former presidential aide was addressing the recent admission made by top Ukrainian MP David Arakhamia, who said the Istanbul talks between Moscow and Kiev were derailed by then-UK PM Boris Johnson, who urged Ukraine to “just continue fighting” instead of attempting to reach a deal with Russia.
“I was a member of the Istanbul negotiating team, but even I don’t know how it happened that we decided to break off the Istanbul [talks],” Arestovich stated.
The initiatives floated during the Istanbul talks were actually “very good,” he admitted, claiming that Ukraine’s neutrality and its non-alignment with NATO was a “red line” for Moscow.
Refusing to negotiate, however, has only resulted in heavy casualties, while its prospects to join NATO still remain dubious, he suggested.
“Where is NATO? Does it accept us or not? And will it accept us? ... Then the 200 thousand [Ukrainian servicemen] or whatever, 300 thousand, would still be alive,” the ex-aide said.
The remarks come as Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu revealed Moscow’s latest estimates on Kiev’s casualties. Speaking during a ministerial meeting on Friday, Shoigu claimed that the Ukrainian military has lost more than 125,000 troops and around 16,000 military hardware pieces since the beginning of its botched counteroffensive, which started in early June. The country’s efforts, as well as Western aid, have not yielded any tangible result, the minister added.
“The total mobilization in Ukraine, delivery of Western arms, and deployment of strategic reserves by the Ukrainian command have not changed the situation on the battlefield,” Shoigu explained. “Those desperate actions simply increased the losses of the Ukrainian armed forces.”
In recent weeks, top Ukrainian officials admitted the counteroffensive had failed to reach the desired outcome, and they seemed to shift blame for the failure on each other. Early in November, for instance, Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s top general, said the battlefield situation had reached a “stalemate,” with Kiev unlikely to achieve a breakthrough unless it received a wonder-weapon of sorts.
The assessment has been vehemently rejected by Zelensky, who insisted the counteroffensive was still making progress. In an interview with AP published on Friday, however, Zelensky finally admitted that it had failed, stating that he considers the fact that his country’s troops are not retreating at the moment a “satisfying” enough result.