Yeah, we just can't expect much information from a former KGB agent who eliminates or imprisons opposition and journalists, and controls all media. Most of what we know is from Ukraine, who is biased of course, but also biased in our interests.
I'm unclear - are you having trouble finding the numbers for Ukrainian casualties?How come we actually haven't had an assessment from Ukraine from their losses and not from the Russian media? I mean I understand what you mean, their media is corrupt, but if you go to the source, ie body bags, cant you just count these losses? I mean from our side we can guestamate as to how many died and armory was destroyed, but on the other hand you can actually go to the source on the Ukrainian side and count it... so how come we dont? Id prefer knowing both sides of casualties, even if one side spins it in there favor....lots of questions being asked and a lot of excuses made to make them seem less bad... bias or not id like to hear from both sides....
Oh, I'm sure that Ukraine knows very well what their casualties are. They may even share those numbers with NATO militaries to some extent. The UK Ministry of Defence shares estimates of casualties on both sides from time to time, though I don't know if those estimates are informed by Ukrainian numbers. As for why Ukraine doesn't release casualty figures themselves on a regular basis, they're in an existential battle with Russia and don't want to give any advantage to Russia by telling them how the war is going. Specific casualty numbers weren't released in WWII by either side for exactly the same reason. Ukraine does release civilian casualty information fairly regularly, likely because it serves their information warfare needs. When Russia commits obvious war crimes, Ukraine is more able to get offensive and defensive weapons from NATO.How come we actually haven't had an assessment from Ukraine from their losses and not from the Russian media? I mean I understand what you mean, their media is corrupt, but if you go to the source, ie body bags, cant you just count these losses? I mean from our side we can guestamate as to how many died and armory was destroyed, but on the other hand you can actually go to the source on the Ukrainian side and count it... so how come we dont? Id prefer knowing both sides of casualties, even if one side spins it in there favor....
Last I checked, the contents of the aid packages are announced around the time they’re sent. Some of those reports may be accurate, some may be incomplete, some may be partially or entirely fictitious.
From the reporting I've seen, I suspect that both the Russians and the Ukrainians are planning Spring offensives.
All the news I am hearing points to this also. It amazes me that Russia can still mount an offensive. Both sides have lost a huge number of Soldiers, but he Russians have over 5 times what they lost in Afghanistan and this was a much shorter war.
I thinks its a Feb 24th offensive rather than a spring offensive. Putin will be able to go on TV and say 'A year into our ten day special military operation and we've won a huge victory by taking Bakhmut...'.
"What a waste" is right and Putin shows no sign of stopping. The Russians have kept the waste going on in the Eastern Ukraine since 2014 and I don't think that they will quit now. The Ukraine is suffering so much more than Russia. Putin will not stop as long as he is in power and he could be there another decade or more. The Ukraine needs to be armed so that they neutralize the Russians wearing down their daily lives, so that they can regain some degree of normalcy.
Part of the problem, and one that Putin has certainly been counting on, is that Westerners, and Americans in particular, have a very short attention span. He's likely surprised that we haven't lost interest already. It's still been less than a year. Pfft. That's exactly why the Afghans knew that they would win. They weren't going anywhere. They knew that every foreign invader for two thousand years (or more) had eventually just given up and gone home. The Russians got tired of bleeding their young men after something like 20 years, and the Americans were no different.
Unfortunately, there are rumblings that the US is going to back off on support. Yes, support passed with wide majorities in the last Congress. That was with one-party control. Now with split control there are lots of people talking about reducing the flow of arms and money to Ukraine. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen. There are a few too many influential people who see Putin as a role model rather than a cautionary tale.
I can't see European interest drifting away so quickly. This is on our doorstep.
I 100% agree with all of that. I am just not confident that the House won't back off of future military aid for any number of reasons, particularly when a couple of really-seem-like-they're-crazy members apparently have the Speaker by the short and curlies.
The answer to the first part of the sentence has been covered in this thread, ad infinitum.
I agree. We should note that various commentators will define a proxy war differently and that some only feel that a power being involved by proxy is necessary, even without actively instigating it.
Focus on the bottom part of the screenshot you shared...As if Russia needs to tease the Slumbering Lion... dont you think they have enough fighting and war to deal with? Like provoking us wouldnt even get you anywhere unless they like the taste of Freedom? I dont know but hell they must be on sort of strong Vodka to be flying this close, giving we have been more territorial with our air space
From the few news stories I remember over the last decades, it's mostly "reminding each other that we’re there", and poking at the other's readiness. A cynical person could joke that it's to keep air forces on either side busy and feel important, but it's certainly more than that for those involved. We hear of similar encounters near Taiwan.
