Oh, I know you’ve fully bought the Kremlin’s line about the tanks being some brilliant strategic move to keep the Ukrainian armed forces split instead of a move to overthrow the government. But yeah, I’d say loosing hundreds of tanks and many Russian lives in a failed offensive was pretty bad, and no amount of spin about “strategic realignment” can mask that.
I’ve simply asked you to provide a reference to the alleged destruction of the Russian column that was doing a fixing operation around Kiev. Show me a single credible source supporting the claim of Russia losing hundreds of tanks there.
Okay, so any exact numbers are hard to come by. A few things factors make it difficult: impure motives of various parties, lack of verification,
Russia claimed no casualties in the opening period of the war until that claim was no longer sustainable.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces claimed 1000 tanks destroyed. It’s not clear where the Kyiv Independent is citing to exactly. My guess is that they were inflating statistics, but it’s not inconceivable. Russia’s formations opened them up to attack.
The UK came out with similar figures, but it’s aggregate figures without the backing proof. I doubt you will consider the UK a credible source.
This analysis seems to be the most methodical and transparent. It gives an estimate of over 1000 tanks destroyed as of the end of February. After a cursory glance over the contents, it looks like they’ve done a good job at using open source intel to produce their numbers. The source is definitely pro-Western, but given it’s backing its data with credible evidence I consider the results credible.
Ukrainian armed forces have been consistently lying about everything from ghost of Kiev to snake island. Their reports are highly unreliable and cannot be taken seriously. I’m also not sure why we’d consider UK source credible either to be honest.
This analysis seems to be the most methodical and transparent.
This analysis looks incredibly speculative based on rather questionable methodology actually. If Russia lost over a 1000 tanks since February the war would’ve been long over.
It’s obvious that there are losses on both sides, however pretty much every actual report shows that this is predominantly an artillery battle and Russia has massive artillery superiority over Ukraine. This channel has been doing good coverage of the conflict using western sources, and I recommend checking it out for a different perspective on the conflict.
If Russia lost over a 1000 tanks since February the war would’ve been long over.
Why so? Putin has gambled big on this war as part of the “Greater Russia” idea. It is clear now that Russia cannot overthrow the Ukrainian government, but they want to at least destabilize Ukraine and force it into an uncomfortable bargaining position. Hence reallocating forces to the east. Putin’s rule rests largely on satisfying Russian nationalists and looking tough. Flat out loosing a war could mean loosing more than his position of power. It could mean a one way ticket out a high window.
I’m not sure what makes it clear to you that Russia cannot overthrow the government in Ukraine. The reality of the situation is that Ukraine is being ground down militarily, and the west is losing the economic war with Russia. Russia is currently fighting this war with a very small percentage of its overall military capacity, and they haven’t even bothered to call for general mobilization. Russia just committed 50k troops to doing war games with China and India. This underscores that the conflict in Ukraine isn’t exactly straining their military capacity.
On the other hand, Ukraine lost its military industrial capacity back in March by their own admission. They’re not able to replenish their military losses and rely on supplies from the west that’s now making NATO stocks dangerously low. Arms packages from the west have been steadily reduced as a result, and this offensive looks like a desperate gamble to maintain collapsing support for the war in the west.
If anything, this has gone much better than even Russia could’ve predicted. Europe is now collapsing economically, and it’s not even winter yet. We’re seeing massive strikes and protests happening in many European countries, and these will only grow going forward. Meanwhile, prices in Russia remain stable, and inflation is slowing down with prices on essentials like food, energy, and fuel remaining low. Originally, Russia wanted a buffer from NATO in Ukraine, now it’s looking probable that NATO will collapse entirely within a few years.
Anybody with a couple of brain cells to bang together understands that it’s relative economic damage between the west and Russia that matters. While Russia relies on nice to have things from the west like iPhones and Starbucks, the west relies on bare essentials like food and energy. If shit hits the fan in Russia next year, then it’s hitting the fan on a much bigger scale in the west as well.
It’s also absolutely fantastical to think that Russia can’t replace whatever it is relies on from the west with equivalent products from China and India which constitute world’s major manufacturing hubs.
Russia has already gone through two large economic crises in the 90s and in 2014. There is no indication that this crisis will be any worse than that and people in Russia know what to expect. On the other hand, people in Europe have not experienced anything of the sort since WW2, and European leadership took no steps to prepare for the crisis foolishly thinking that Russia would collapse within a month of western sanctions.
You might need to provide some citations for this fantastical event you’re citing here.
Oh, I know you’ve fully bought the Kremlin’s line about the tanks being some brilliant strategic move to keep the Ukrainian armed forces split instead of a move to overthrow the government. But yeah, I’d say loosing hundreds of tanks and many Russian lives in a failed offensive was pretty bad, and no amount of spin about “strategic realignment” can mask that.
I’ve simply asked you to provide a reference to the alleged destruction of the Russian column that was doing a fixing operation around Kiev. Show me a single credible source supporting the claim of Russia losing hundreds of tanks there.
Okay, so any exact numbers are hard to come by. A few things factors make it difficult: impure motives of various parties, lack of verification,
Russia claimed no casualties in the opening period of the war until that claim was no longer sustainable.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces claimed 1000 tanks destroyed. It’s not clear where the Kyiv Independent is citing to exactly. My guess is that they were inflating statistics, but it’s not inconceivable. Russia’s formations opened them up to attack.
The UK came out with similar figures, but it’s aggregate figures without the backing proof. I doubt you will consider the UK a credible source.
This analysis seems to be the most methodical and transparent. It gives an estimate of over 1000 tanks destroyed as of the end of February. After a cursory glance over the contents, it looks like they’ve done a good job at using open source intel to produce their numbers. The source is definitely pro-Western, but given it’s backing its data with credible evidence I consider the results credible.
Ukrainian armed forces have been consistently lying about everything from ghost of Kiev to snake island. Their reports are highly unreliable and cannot be taken seriously. I’m also not sure why we’d consider UK source credible either to be honest.
This analysis looks incredibly speculative based on rather questionable methodology actually. If Russia lost over a 1000 tanks since February the war would’ve been long over.
It’s obvious that there are losses on both sides, however pretty much every actual report shows that this is predominantly an artillery battle and Russia has massive artillery superiority over Ukraine. This channel has been doing good coverage of the conflict using western sources, and I recommend checking it out for a different perspective on the conflict.
Why so? Putin has gambled big on this war as part of the “Greater Russia” idea. It is clear now that Russia cannot overthrow the Ukrainian government, but they want to at least destabilize Ukraine and force it into an uncomfortable bargaining position. Hence reallocating forces to the east. Putin’s rule rests largely on satisfying Russian nationalists and looking tough. Flat out loosing a war could mean loosing more than his position of power. It could mean a one way ticket out a high window.
I’m not sure what makes it clear to you that Russia cannot overthrow the government in Ukraine. The reality of the situation is that Ukraine is being ground down militarily, and the west is losing the economic war with Russia. Russia is currently fighting this war with a very small percentage of its overall military capacity, and they haven’t even bothered to call for general mobilization. Russia just committed 50k troops to doing war games with China and India. This underscores that the conflict in Ukraine isn’t exactly straining their military capacity.
On the other hand, Ukraine lost its military industrial capacity back in March by their own admission. They’re not able to replenish their military losses and rely on supplies from the west that’s now making NATO stocks dangerously low. Arms packages from the west have been steadily reduced as a result, and this offensive looks like a desperate gamble to maintain collapsing support for the war in the west.
If anything, this has gone much better than even Russia could’ve predicted. Europe is now collapsing economically, and it’s not even winter yet. We’re seeing massive strikes and protests happening in many European countries, and these will only grow going forward. Meanwhile, prices in Russia remain stable, and inflation is slowing down with prices on essentials like food, energy, and fuel remaining low. Originally, Russia wanted a buffer from NATO in Ukraine, now it’s looking probable that NATO will collapse entirely within a few years.
deleted by creator
Anybody with a couple of brain cells to bang together understands that it’s relative economic damage between the west and Russia that matters. While Russia relies on nice to have things from the west like iPhones and Starbucks, the west relies on bare essentials like food and energy. If shit hits the fan in Russia next year, then it’s hitting the fan on a much bigger scale in the west as well.
It’s also absolutely fantastical to think that Russia can’t replace whatever it is relies on from the west with equivalent products from China and India which constitute world’s major manufacturing hubs.
Russia has already gone through two large economic crises in the 90s and in 2014. There is no indication that this crisis will be any worse than that and people in Russia know what to expect. On the other hand, people in Europe have not experienced anything of the sort since WW2, and European leadership took no steps to prepare for the crisis foolishly thinking that Russia would collapse within a month of western sanctions.