Which gets into you again insisting that Russia sent its best. It's not even enough of a thought that Russia feels the need to scrape up reinforcements, but you arbitrarily double their losses... just cause? That report was from Tuesday lol (i.e., within the last 24hrs). Why should it be "more like 10%"? Based on what exactly, your word? Russian losses doubled in a 12-hour shift?
The above link cites *US sources* (also cited in the wiki) claiming they (Z) might have lost closer to 2000. That's more along the lines of 1% - not 10.
And, again, the US sent its best - we did not withhold. Air support was insane. Russia COULD have leveled cities with their large volume of ballistics, which represent the focus of their military. They went in overnight as opposed to weeks of cruise missiles and heavy presence in the skies.
Isn't it asinine to suggest they shouldn't take any losses when invading a country of 44 million?
Again, why is Zelenskyy changing his tune?
More like Russia decided the dregs would be sufficient, and so far they are.
I am not doubling their losses, i am saying 5% is already an optimistic estimation and it is probably closer to ten. But for argument's sake, even 5% is a desaster and embarassing.
I don't know what this 'they didnt send their best' kind of imagination is even supposed to mean. So you are telling me they didnt send their best pilots and just let their planes be shot down? Why?
It is asinine to suggest that they would willingly lead a war in which they lose absurd amounts of planes and helicopters and two generals. When are their 'best' going to come? When the war is over?
What is that supposed to accomplish? 10.000 dead boys in something they do not call a war at home? This is pure imagination without any rational basis.
I am not doubling their losses, i am saying 5% is already an optimistic estimation and it is probably closer to ten. But for argument's sake, even 5% is a desaster and embarassing.
I don't know what this 'they didnt send their best' kind of imagination is even supposed to mean. So you are telling me they didnt send their best pilots and just let their planes be shot down? Why?
It is asinine to suggest that they would willingly lead a war in which they lose absurd amounts of planes and helicopters and two generals. When are their 'best' going to come? When the war is over?
What is that supposed to accomplish? 10.000 dead boys in something they do not call a war at home? This is pure imagination without any rational basis.
Clearly the losses are in tolerance. I'm not the cold and callous general determining whatever calculus is agreeable.
Every report I've seen has mentioned them sending older equipment. That's literally one of the points against them in the '40-mile convoy' that might be causing trouble. And yet we know not every plane is the same as another, nor every tank, and so on, and no reports of their top-shelf equipment at all.
So, tell me how much their losses represent as a fraction of the following:
How many tank losses did they deem acceptable? Particularly if sending older models.
How many helos?
Did the Russians not activate their force-fields or something? How else could nominal losses be avoided entirely?
Clearly the losses are in tolerance. I'm not the cold and callous general determining whatever calculus is agreeable.
Every report I've seen has mentioned them sending older equipment. That's literally one of the points against them in the '40-mile convoy' that might be causing trouble. And yet we know not every plane is the same as another, nor every tank, and so on, and no reports of their top-shelf equipment at all.
So, tell me how much their losses represent as a fraction of the following:
Clearly they are not, they are embarassing and one reason why russia even faces the harsh reactions they face now is because their 2 day operation is on day 15 now with no clear end in sight. If they had taken Kyiv quickly, the west would have been surprised if there was already some peace agreement signed by some guy they put there.
But seeing just how sadly and badly the russian army did, it was clear that the west must react with sanctions and military equipment out of sheer pressure at home. That is clearly not what russia wanted and it destroys them.
They did not only send older equipment, they already sent a lot of expensive toys that were destroyed. They are sending older things now out of desperation.
That kind of number game hardly matters as these statistics only exist on paper. The question is whether they can supply the troops they have in Ukraine right now and sustain their attack and that seems more and more impossible as they are already having trouble to do that while the sanctions make it harder to resupply.
Having some broken tanks somewhere in russia is not going to help them win this fight if they are already short on fuel and food.
And I dont know how you can keep claiming that these are normal losses when clearly the US did not have anything near that in iraq, which is just as big as ukraine. In the WHOLE occupation of iraq, less US soldiers died than Russians in just these few days.
As i said, russia is blwoing 20 billion minimum per day and that is money they dont have. The Russians are losing, even if they take Kyiv. They have to get the fuck out of there very soon and are by now desperately trying to get something out of their adventure.
Clearly they are not, they are embarassing and one reason why russia even faces the harsh reactions they face now is because their 2 day operation is on day 15 now with no clear end in sight. If they had taken Kyiv quickly, the west would have been surprised if there was already some peace agreement signed by some guy they put there.
But seeing just how sadly and badly the russian army did, it was clear that the west must react with sanctions and military equipment out of sheer pressure at home. That is clearly not what russia wanted and it destroys them.
They did not only send older equipment, they already sent a lot of expensive toys that were destroyed. They are sending older things now out of desperation.
That kind of number game hardly matters as these statistics only exist on paper. The question is whether they can supply the troops they have in Ukraine right now and sustain their attack and that seems more and more impossible as they are already having trouble to do that while the sanctions make it harder to resupply.
Having some broken tanks somewhere in russia is not going to help them win this fight if they are already short on fuel and food.
And I dont know how you can keep claiming that these are normal losses when clearly the US did not have anything near that in iraq, which is just as big as ukraine. In the WHOLE occupation of iraq, less US soldiers died than Russians in just these few days.
As i said, russia is blwoing 20 billion minimum per day and that is money they dont have. The Russians are losing, even if they take Kyiv. They have to get the fuck out of there very soon and are by now desperately trying to get something out of their adventure.
"2-day operation"? Source on that? Do you have an inside source telling you how long the Russians were prepared to dig in and engage?
The entire point is the Russians are pressing forward, not in retreat. They clearly think losses are in parameters, or else are completely crazy. And losses in such a conflict are unavoidable - is that such a provocative thing to say? Russia has lost small fractions of their total fighting power, and generally, yes, older gear. Ukraine can't even defend itself by any conventional means. Their losses represent significant fractions of their total fighting force. It's closer to an effective total loss at this point.
In a gambit that Putin thinks will be a net gain considering making Ukraine land-locked and secure the strait, acquire land, protect ethnic Russ people, he is losing less than he's gaining, and his military is still at near 100% capacity overall. Of course only time will tell. He's certainly all in for better or for worse for him.
Funny you keep mentioning gulf war/Desert Storm figures, but that was a very limited engagement and a more apt comparison would be the actual invasion and occupying forces of the 2003 Iraq War in which our losses certainly did mount up. Something where we had to actually take the cities and not just strafe from above with superior firepower from the skies.
I mean if those pesky civilians weren't an issue this probably could have been made into a 48hr ordeal. He hasn't started flattening whole cities yet to my knowledge.
Of course not, we shouldn't be ok with it. But this is a wartime scenario and it is their country that is inflicting that much death an misery in ukraine. Any measure that can be taken against their economy that doesn't result in nukes flying is fair game.
It is not their country causing the death and pain, it's Putin that is. Lots of Russians actually protested Putin's actions, putting themselves in danger by doing so. Nothing justifies punishing them or upending their lives over something they had no control or choice over.
It is not their country causing the death and pain, it's Putin that is. Lots of Russians actually protested Putin's actions, putting themselves in danger by doing so. Nothing justifies punishing them or upending their lives over something they had no control or choice over.
Yes. People are more whipped up into spouting jingoist BS than ever, as they always are in times of war. Out the window are diplomacy, objectivity, deescalation, etc. Little do they consider why THIS is worse than the myriad of other things things that are clearly worse (say, in total loss of life or any other measure), in some cases never hearing of them at all, or any events in recent past that make this pale in comparison with ZERO mental rent. But this... THIS is unforgivable!
Just like they were manipulated to hate their neighbors over anything else from masks to jabs to voting history or party affiliation or bending the knee to BLM or any other event that gets them frothy. Generally-speaking, the louder they are and the more hateful their rhetoric against those that oppose them (you're either with us, or you're against us!), the more they have been manipulated.
And actual war allows for the most profits and excitement. Ask yourselves how much these people give two shits about Ukrainians (who they've never thought of in their lives before, much less recent deaths in any other conflict in their lifetime) or anyone else for that matter.
I don't know any of these people so I can't speak on it. I'd simply say "touch grass". Get off of the internet and go spend time with people that aren't politically opinionated. I haven't noticed people being especially upset anywhere except online.
EDIT: To be clear: I mean nothing I've seen is worse than anything I've experienced in my 37 years of life. Not a year has gone by where I haven't heard complaints about gas prices, or political correctness, or left vs. right dynamics. It all seems par for the course.
I don't know any of these people so I can't speak on it. I'd simply say "touch grass". Get off of the internet and go spend time with people that aren't politically opinionated. I haven't noticed people being especially upset anywhere except online.
EDIT: To be clear: I mean nothing I've seen is worse than anything I've experienced in my 37 years of life. Not a year has gone by where I haven't heard complaints about gas prices, or political correctness, or left vs. right dynamics. It all seems par for the course.
I'm not immune. Like I said, I live paycheck to paycheck same as a lot of people I know. I'm just not angry about it. I view this as an opportunity to force people to seek alternate means of fuel for the sake of the planet. That is a good thing that makes me happy. Not angry.
For me, I would say this was new during the 2008 financial crisis.
There were big upticks in suicides, overdoses, violence and crime. There were workers who were laid off who literally shot themselves in their cars in the parking lot of their workplace. Entire families were shot to death by the dads who shot themselves afterward, thinking it was a better fate than losing their house and living on the streets.
All of this is definitely occurring now, though the media isn't reporting it like they did in 2008.
I guess this is "normal" during times of crisis?
How do we return to a stable and balanced economy.
What does our road map look like?
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
...
Ukraine bans export of grains vital to global food supply
Ukraine is banning the export of grains and other products that are vital to the global food supply amid Russia's assault on the country.
The government has put a ban on exporting wheat, oats, millet, buckwheat, sugar, live cattle, meat and other products, The Associated Press reported.
Roman Leshchenko, Ukraine's minister of agrarian and food policy, said the policy is to ensure Ukrainian citizens are able to eat amid a growing humanitarian crisis in the country.
The former mayor for the city of Irpen said people in the city and surrounding villages are starving as Russians take over and don't allow people to leave their homes.
The new policy is going to affect the global market as Ukraine is known as the "breadbasket of Europe."
Agriculture is a large portion of Ukraine's economy with the country exporting $6 billion worth of agricultural products to Europe in 2020.
Ukraine is banning the export of grains and other products that are vital to the global food supply amid Russia's assault on the country.The government has put a ban on exporting wheat, oats, millet, ...
I'm reluctant to try to put a time frame on it because there's never been a point in American history where there wasn't a demographic of impoverished people living terrible lives at the exploitation of the rich. And this is a global thing. India currently has the biggest child labor force on the planet and you never hear about it despite this happening for generations. And America gets almost all of it's brick from India... where these children are working, making bricks for us.
No one seems to care, because we have our own problems to deal with.
There were big upticks in suicides, overdoses, violence and crime. There were workers who were laid off who literally shot themselves in their cars in the parking lot of their workplace. Entire families were shot to death by the dads who shot themselves afterward, thinking it was a better fate than losing their house and living on the streets.
All of this is definitely occurring now, though the media isn't reporting it like they did in 2008.
Again, there's no way to capitalize on it right now so you won't see it pushed openly until a particular group sees value in doing so. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if socialists don't use all of this information as an example of capitalism destroying society. But you won't hear that on CNN or FOX. You'd have to look at the Gravel Institute or whatever Twitch politics streamer that identifies as a socialist that you can think of (Vaush or Hasan)
Don't know. Ideally capitalism will collapse and fail so magnificently that it'll promote a new more socially and morally oriented system. Not necessarily socialism, but something less exploitative than what we've got now.
Ukraine bans export of grains vital to global food supply
Ukraine is banning the export of grains and other products that are vital to the global food supply amid Russia's assault on the country.
The government has put a ban on exporting wheat, oats, millet, buckwheat, sugar, live cattle, meat and other products, The Associated Press reported.
Roman Leshchenko, Ukraine's minister of agrarian and food policy, said the policy is to ensure Ukrainian citizens are able to eat amid a growing humanitarian crisis in the country.
The former mayor for the city of Irpen said people in the city and surrounding villages are starving as Russians take over and don't allow people to leave their homes.
The new policy is going to affect the global market as Ukraine is known as the "breadbasket of Europe."
Agriculture is a large portion of Ukraine's economy with the country exporting $6 billion worth of agricultural products to Europe in 2020.
Ukraine is banning the export of grains and other products that are vital to the global food supply amid Russia's assault on the country.The government has put a ban on exporting wheat, oats, millet, ...
^This. But that is still the tip of the iceberg. The part that will hurt economies the most is derivatives and subproducts from those. Obviously flour (say hi to bread at twice the price) but also glucose (and many types of sugars), maltodextrin, a variety of starches (which were already scarce thanks to covid), vegetable fats, vinegar, other sweeteners.... And people are wasting their time worrying about gasoline and, I assume because why not, toilet paper.
^This. But that is still the tip of the iceberg. The part that will hurt economies the most is derivatives and subproducts from those. Obviously flour (say hi to bread at twice the price) but also glucose (and many types of sugars), maltodextrin, a variety of starches (which were already scarce thanks to covid), vegetable fats, vinegar, other sweeteners.... And people are wasting their time worrying about gasoline and, I assume because why not, toilet paper.
Cutting off Russia means a lot more of this all over. Ukraine produces a lot of wheat, but so does Russia. Then, there's aluminum, titanium, the obvious energy production, potash and fertilizers, and a few others.
Crude of course affects all other commodities from production costs to transport costs. Fertilizers means food costs across the board will be hurting, not just wheat-derived products. And vegetable feed costs go up as well, thus so do meat and dairy. Everything is obviously interrelated.
There are estimates that Russia has ~30% of the WORLD'S natural resources. Let that sink in.
Non-West-aligned countries will continue to be buyers though, so our loss is their gains. To include their energy and arms.
Like with most autocracies/plutocracies, if Russia's wealth was less centralized and effectively nationalized, its people would be able to enjoy some of the highest quality of life. Alas, the wealth gap is a big deal. Overthrowing Putin, his duma, and the oligarchs would go a long way, but good luck with that.
"Russia's vast geography is an important determinant of its economic activity, with some sources estimating that the nation contains over 30% of the world's natural resources.[32][33][34]"
A 30% decrease in supply does not equate to 'just' a 30% jump in end-user prices, as if that needs to be said.
Then, good luck traveling if you can't use one of the largest land-masses in existence.
This doesn't even get into the vicious-cycle of the devaluation of the dollar, which happens in concert with real price increases due to lack of supply and supply-chain disruptions.
EVERYTHING is about to get more expensive.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
And, FFS, if I were living hand-to-mouth I couldn't imagine wasting time on this forum or elsewhere as opposed to spending more time on a side-hustle, starting a business, realigning my education for me to be a more valuable employee or whatever. Sheesh.
If you don't have access to more than 500 at any given time wtf are you doing here, reading manga, playing games, etc? No wonder people want to push socialism with that mentality. Wow.
And russia is about to default on it's debt... Which I suppose is the point but still, that's also gonna hurt financial markets everywhere. Along with the grain export ban in ukraine... I wonder if this is enough of a push to have china and india turn on russia (along with the increasingly likely scenario that russia's military was a joke all along -though it could all be anti russian propaganda).... the stakes keep getting bigger and bigger and the costs of this keeps spiraling out of control and spreading further. If china turns on russia... oh boy.
