CBC:
While securing accurate fatality numbers from a war zone is very difficult, evidence is mounting that the Russian military casualty rate in Ukraine is extremely high.
Well of course they’re high, the Crack Baby of Kiev murdered tens of thousands all by himself.
NATO has estimated the number of Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine since the invasion began at between 7,000 and 15,000. That higher estimate roughly equals the number of Soviet soldiers killed in over a decade of fighting in Afghanistan.
Yes yes, 30,000 Russian troops have been killed, and Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. I’m so glad that these propagandists took a break from helpfully informing us that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself to make sure that we all know that ludicrous casualty estimations are very reality based.
According to a report in the New York Times in mid-March, United States intelligence officials said they were confident that up to 7,000 Russians had been killed by that point in the conflict.
The Washington Post reported around the same time that a Russian news website posted a file — and then swiftly took it down again — claiming that up to 10,000 soldiers had been killed so far in the conflict.
BTW, that Russian “news website,” is an Alex Jones-tier tabloid rag. It would be like if InfoWars claimed that 400,000 US soldiers died in Iraq, before retracting that claim. Said tabloit has no actual ties to the Russian government, and no actual insider information. But apparently we’re all supposed to believe some ludicrous casualty figures because the Russian Alex-Jones said so.
Stephen Saideman, the Paterson Chair in International Affairs at Carleton University and the director of the Canadian Defence and Security Network, told CBC News that experts don’t like to place their trust in figures provided by either Russia or Ukraine.
Stephen Saideman
I’m sorry, is anyone else getting a whiff of brimstone and gelfilte fish?
Experts from the U.S. and NATO use models to calculate losses that are informed by intelligence on the ground, satellite imagery and awareness of the Russian military, making them the most trustworthy sources we’re likely to get, said Saideman and Dorn.
Satellites can see things, therefore we’ve got super accurate casualty estimations. This is a type of “argumentation,” that is almost too stupid to respond to. I’ll just go and direct you to this piece of mine, where you can see for yourselves how hard it is to actually find things with a satellite.
“We know the size of a Russian battalion, we know how many guys go into a Russian tank, which tank takes four, which tank takes three, and we have plenty of video and pictures,” Saideman said.
We know the population of New York City. We know it’s exact distance from Boston, down the the micrometer. Therefore, the US Military took 37,548.2 casualties in Iraq.
Sean Maloney is a professor of military history at the Royal Military College who served as the Canadian army’s historian for the conflict in Afghanistan. He told CBC that, based on his knowledge of Russia’s military and sources inside of Belarus and Russia, the high-end NATO estimate of Russian casualties is likely accurate.
Sean Maloney
This little faggot is Sean Maloney, a Queens University prof and chairman of the “Centre for International and Defence Policy.” You can take a look at his profile page here.
“I am confident, with the sources that I have, that the number of Russians killed in action is above 15,000,” Maloney said.
Funny because with the unnamed sources that I have I’m quite confident that negative a billion Russian soldiers have been killed in Ukraine. At this rate the Russian military will soon overwhelm the entire World. We have very little hope left.
Also, the Pentagon doesn’t appear to agree with this guy.
The US Defense Department told lawmakers Tuesday it estimates between 2,000 and 4,000 Russian soldiers have been killed in Moscow’s nearly two-week-old invasion of Ukraine.
But no apparently we’re all supposed to believe this one guy over the US Pentagon. And I mean, it’s the Pentagon, if anything they’re lying upwards. But apparently this one guy, Sean Maloney, has “his sources,” which tell him that in excess of 15k Russkies have been killed. Okay Sean, I believe you.
Now, back to our scheduled CBC propaganda.
If that estimate is accurate –
It isn’t.
it raises a question: Why has a single month of war in Ukraine killed almost as many Russian soldiers as did the Soviet Union’s decade-long war in Afghanistan?
It hasn’t.
“This was always going to be bloodier than the wars that we’ve become accustomed to because it’s just a higher level of explosive power meeting a higher level of explosive power,” Saideman said.
Right of course. A higher level of “explosive power.” That’s why the Russkies had a 40 mile supply convoy outside Kiev just totally unharmed.
It’s because the Ukrainian Military is chock full of “explosive power.” Not enough to, like, fire some long range cruise missiles and blow them up, drop dumb bombs from airplanes, destroy them with artillery, or even sneak some infantry there with javelins, or even just good old fashioned rifles. But they have this generic, unquantified attribute called “explosive power,” which is why his KIA estimation is literally 5x higher than the US Pentagons. Well that and he totally has access to better information.
Another reason for the large number of casualties, said Saideman, is poor Russian strategy.
“The Russians did not prepare the battlefield at all,” he said. “They did not do many of the things that America/NATO doctrine would usually do, which is to take as much of the anti-aircraft ability away, hit the command nodes.
No they just destroyed the Ukrainian Air Force on day 1. You really don’t need to take Saideman seriously here, he’s got a ludicrous casualty estimation and he’s desperately trying to work backwards to justify it.
“The fact that Ukrainians still have power, they still have the Internet, they still have communications means it’s a lot easier for the Ukrainians to make smart decisions and communicate them effectively.”
Although this one part is actually true. The Russians have been reluctant to take out power, because that would cause undue suffering and mass civilian casualties. Not because they just had no idea that taking out power would be a good thing. Once again, the WMD Liars attempt to refrain humanitarian action as stupidity.
Saideman said that during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, a group of mothers organized to press the regime to end the war and bring their sons home. In the short term, he said, battlefield losses in Ukraine will require Putin to spend more resources to hold on to power. In the longer term, he added, it could go one of two ways.
“At some point there will be a large gathering of people and the Russian oppression apparatus will show up and they’ll face a choice of whether to shoot at these protesters or not,” he said. “And we never know how that will play out until it actually plays out.”
I’m sure that Putin is really feeling the heat from the little people who, in Canada, the CBC bans from commenting on their articles. Let’s go take a look at his approval numbers, shall we?
Well okay but he must be like single digits then. I mean the WMD Liars tell me that –
Oh, his approval ratings are in the 70’s. I guess he’s just seconds away from a pitchfork wielding crowd of Russkies demanding his overthrow.
