Russia - threadbanned users in OP

The bipartisan legislation introduced in the US Senate seems worthy of discussion.

And cuts the legs out from under the US voices calling for an end to Ukrainian aid - who can object if the Ukrainians are buying American weapons....with confiscated Russian money?

Here's the link for the BBC article.

Interesting read. This is the identified dead from western sources

Not the actual number of dead.

There will be very little data on the prisoner war dead, especially those that were not recovered from the battlefield, as well these are only military graves that the BBC managed to access. We can assume that the real figure is substantially above that.

There have been numerous reports of moskovytes abandoning injured troops and the bodies of there dead being left where they fell as well so to say the number of counted graves is any way indicative of total losses of putin's forces is comical. The war is in Ukraine and that is where putin is loosing troops. I know he would like to exclude the dead he has forced into battle from other parts of the russian federation and part of the number recorded by the Ukrainian armed forces is likely to include even people who were born in Ukraine who were forced to put on russina uniforms but I see no reason to dismiss the figures provided by the armed forces of Ukraine since they are the ones closest to the killing.

There are about 18,000 tanks/vehicles/trucks there. If you average it out at 5 dead per vehicle you get 90,000 dead in vehicles alone. Add to that those killed by bullets, drones, artillery etc.

That's not true.

That's the identified dead. Bagged and tagged. Full names, etc. Which is difficult when Russia is trying to cover everything up and cremete or bury troops without families or the public finding out.

The Russian death till is many x times greater. I'd say the UK and UAF sources are closer to the truth.

This is blatant misrepresentation of the article contents.

The 25,000 is not at attempt at estimating actual deaths. It is tracking deaths that they could verify. It is entirely false to present them as the same.

The BBC Article states:

We identified more than 25,000 named individuals - people we know to have died - setting a bare minimum for Russia's total losses.

The Ukrainian Ministry of Defence estimates there are more than 200,000 Russian casualties - but this also includes the wounded.

Count does not include the Russian-speaking separatists in the Donbas.

Not all of Russia’s deaths are captured by our count - we can only pick up people mentioned in open sources, or on memorials and in cemeteries visited by volunteers. But the volunteers cannot cover all of Russia’s vast expanse.

Russia started this war with 150,000 troops camped out on the border of Ukraine. In September they had to conscript a further 300,000. They have less territory now than the initial 150,000 grabbed in the first weeks of the war. Clearly Russia have lost huge amounts of troops and equipment. Those results are atrocious for a modern army and clearly demonstrate they would have been better off not bothering with this war business at all. That’s all that matters. As long as starting aggressive war can be demonstrated to be a waste of time in the 21st century that is the outcome we all desire. I opposed the Iraq war and that turned out to be a waste ditto Afghanistan. It is tragically stupid that great powers still see it as a valid enterprise but the Russia/Ukraine war is further evidence of its stupidity. War probably worked in the 19th century when great powers faced backward countries with little more than spears and bow and arrows. When all sides have guns and bombs war is just hell for everyone.

I know this war is unprecedented in terms of footage being recorded and posted. But look at it another way, do you really think we've seen all of the damage and destruction caused by this war. Or maybe we've only seen half? Anything outside of drone range (pretty much any HIMARS/stormshadow) strikes will not have drone footage for people to visually confirm it.

Talking about propaganda being propaganda kind of misses the point. If Ukrainian propaganda aids their war aims, then it is good. So my question is whether Ukrainian propaganda hurts Russia psychologically and/or steels Western support. If yes, then more of it. If not, then reconfigure the approach. The first casualty in war is truth, so they say. This is by necessity. The psychological battle is a huge element.

if they use their usual zinc box from soviet times, you can fit 2 in one.

Not just long range strikes, that was just an example. But Ukrainian artillery taking tanks out behind enemy lines and not releasing any drone footage. Tanks being taken out on the Frontline with javelins and no footage released etc...

Not every tank behind the lines that has been damaged/destroyed would be filmed and not all footage would be released.

So it seems that the Russians launched a missile attack on Kyiv while South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and the Egyptian PM were visiting. That doesn't seem to be quite the right way to foster relationships with South Africa just before you're planning a visit there where you may, or may not, be arrested for war crimes. I guess Putin really is a master strategist after all 😂

So if a russian tank is blown up in the forest and no one sees or hears the russian tank being blown up in the forest is there really a russian tank blown up in the forest?