"50K Russian Soldiers Confirmed Killed" Topic

Over 50,000 Russian soldiers have been confirmed killed in Ukraine since the start of the Kremlin's invasion over two years ago, according to an independent tally conducted by the BBC's Russian service and the independent Mediazona news website…

Moscow Times: link

Surprisingly:

The BBC said that under the Wagner mercenary group, which started recruiting fighters from Russian prisons shortly after the invasion, those former prisoners had survived for an average of three months.

Those recruited by the Defense Ministry once it took over prison recruitment in early 2023 only lived for an average of two months.

I would suggest checking the original BBC newsitem (link below) rather than a secondary source:

bbc.com/news/world-68819853

IIRC injured to killed in combat is about 5:1, so that means there have been up to 250,000 Russian wounded and killed so far in Putin's stupid war.

That's one way to reduce your prison population.

Russia has almost non existant care for wounded. The ratio is no where near 1:5. I would guess more like 1:1.

And Russian dead is way higher than 50.000. There have been too many reports from russian, Ukrainan and NGO:s sources than to believe only 50.000 dead. And same with russian "treatment" of wounded.

Verified losses of the russian vehicles and a very conservstive count of two dead per vehicle makes the claim of 50.000 too low.

Figures will always vary in a conflict, as we know. But it is pretty certain that they have taken huge losses …

And like with everything else the Russian military does, they don't do very well with WIAs, Medivac, etc. it seems. Those WIAs that became KIAs because of more Russian incompetence is really despicable. And does make it even more clear that Putin, his senior officers, etc. don't care at all about their troops … Very sad …

The figures being presented by the BBC are a verifiable floor, or minimum, based on counting obits' online and in newspapers and apparently also gravestones.

Putin's probably done more to destroy Russian society than their phantasmagorical anti-NATO and Ukraini-Nazi propaganda has imagined!

"Admitted killed," more like.

Putang is willing to lose 50,000 just to take one town.

Russian Life means nothing to this thug!

How many did the Germans kill in WWII?

It only mattered that Stalin lived.

As long as that was true, the war would continue.

Bukermeister

A professor of mine in college summed up the great lesson of Mikhail Gorbachev's political life as, "if you're going to be a dictator, you want to be Stalin. You'll have to drink a half-quart of vodka a day to kill your conscience, but you'll die in your bed."

Nobody knew who Putin was at the time, but this is a lesson that he has clearly learned.

The figures being presented by the BBC are a verifiable floor, or minimum, based on counting obits' online and in newspapers and apparently also gravestones.

Which also means that these 50 000 are not mere numbers; for each one, their name as well as dates of birth and death are known for those maintaining the registry.

The total numbers of death are not known, except maybe for a small group in the Russian military or ministry of defense, but conservative estimates tend to be around 25 000 to 50 000 additional deaths.

As for the seriously wounded, there was a news item recently mentioning that according to official, public Russian statistics, the number of disabled Russian working age men had recently gone up by several hundred thousand. There was an estimate that a lot of these had been injured while taking part in the "special military operation" – though I would presume that also a number of these are people who managed to get themselves registered as disabled to avoid being mobilised into service.

From the BBC report:

"Our analysis does not include the deaths of militia in Russian-occupied Donetsk and Luhansk – in eastern Ukraine. If they were added, the death toll on the Russian side would be even higher."

The same report also quotes Prigozhin, in spring 2022, saying that Wagner had lost 22,000 dead and has analysis suggesting that half of prisoners recruited by Wagner and the defence ministry were dead within 3 or 2 months respectively.

When they say that "The actual number of Russian deaths is likely to be much higher." it is hard not to think that that means several multiples if everybody who fought on the Russian side is counted.

As others have pointed out though, Putin doesn't care. I suppose the question is whether others will care and whether the Russian public have as much tolerance today for casualties as they had in WW2.

analysis suggesting that half of prisoners recruited by Wagner and the defence ministry were dead within 3 or 2 months respectively.

I would like to point out that this particular analysis is not representative of all of the prisoners, but only of a sample of those that had died in the service (non-survivor bias). From the BBC news item:

Our latest analysis focused on the names of 9,000 Russian prison inmates who we know were killed on the front line.

For more than 1,000 of them, we confirmed their military contract start dates and when they were killed.

As for the prisoners who volunteered for Wagner service, some managed to regain their freedom after surviving for six months.

Prisoners who have been recruited by the defense ministry have to make it to the end of the conflict (which is nowhere in sight) if they want to make it to freedom.

But the Ukrainians lost only 31 thousand people (as Zelensky said). But now for some reason they are catastrophically short of manpower: they catch men on the streets, they conscript disabled people into the army, they catch at the border those who are trying to escape mobilization by going to Europe… But the Russian borders are open – our men are calm can travel abroad. The army is replenished with volunteers.
The Russians will fight to the last man if necessary. NATO will not pass.

They're short of men because they're a much smaller country than Soviet Russia.

"The Russians will fight to the last man if necessary. NATO will not pass."

Of course NATO won't pass, they aren't attacking. Russia is the aggressor. Russia is committing war crimes. Russia has devolved to barbarism in the name of Putin's glory.

I've noticed that you're very willing to fight to the last Russian Cuprum, as long as it's not you. When it's your turn to throw your life away so Putin can steal another square yard of another, sovereign, nation, I feel you'll be singing a different tune.

You are very mistaken. All my ancestors were Russian soldiers and not one disgraced the honor of the family. If it's my turn, I will try not to give in to them in any way.

I am not a supporter of Putin, but I am a supporter of my country and people. It is not the Warsaw Pact that has approached your borders – it is you who are coming to us.

YouTube link

The Ogre does what ogres can,
Deeds quite impossible for Man,
But one prize is beyond his reach,
The Ogre cannot master Speech:
About a subjugated plain,
Among its desperate and slain,
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips,
While drivel gushes from his lips.

Why is one cannibal better than another cannibal? By the fact that he arrogated to himself the right to the truth? ;-)

Then go to war, Cuprum. You ing Russian coward!
Pathetic!

Oh, daredevil, are you writing from the trenches of the Ukrainian Foreign Legion? Or from an easy chair in your own home?
Sofa defender of Ukrainian democracy ;-)

I've tagged you with that bit of poetry before, Cuprum, for good reason. W.H. Auden wrote it in 1968 to mock the crudity of the Soviet statements of justification for the invasion of Czechoslovakia. It seems an appropriate response to your attempts to portray the multiple Russian invasions of Ukraine as NATO invasions of Russia.

It may well be in your country that this kind of nonsense is accepted as fact. I have no doubt that you believe it, but I am familiar enough with the history of your country (and I have known enough Russians and Ukrainians) to understand the difference between what happened, and what you are telling us happened.

An Eastern European of my acquaintance, who grew up in Warsaw Pact days, once observed to me that the crudity and stupidity of the official propaganda was the whole point of it. Some portion of the population could always be relied upon to swallow it whole, but the real purpose was to force the line on thise who would not, and by so so doing, to break their self-respect and make them complicit.

I never expected when she told me that to receive such a clear demonstration of the phenomenon; but we are not people who have to bow the knee to our government or to a party line, and I thank you for demonstrating, one way or another, just what totalitarian behavior looks like when dragged out into the light of day before free people, to be seen in all of its crassness.

Nine pound round +1

Some portion of the population could always be relied upon to swallow it whole, but the real purpose was to force the line on thise who would not, and by so so doing, to break their self-respect and make them complicit.

Great reminder! In "Power of the Powerless," Vlaclav Havel who was a Czech pro-democracy student organizer in the 1960s long before he became president of the Czech Republic, describes this very thing. That the State demands you repeat obvious falsehoods and empty ideological slogans that nobody really believes in order to force you to lie to yourself, to break trust with your own reality and sap your will to resist the State.

Nine pound round +2

An easy exercise to demonstrate if you live in a Nazi/totalitarian/repressive/medieval country…

Stand in the main square of your city/town with a board that says: "Down with…" fill in the name of the President or dictator in charge at that time.

Control with a watch the seconds that those who live in that type of country last…

Armand

N-yes…. Some people really prefer to see the situation with only one eye. Well, this just means that it is from his "blind" side that he will receive the blow.

Tango01, do the shootings of demonstrators in the USA protesting against the Vietnam War count?

Nothing could be more illustrative of the kind of thing I am talking about than the preceding post. Confronted with unpleasant arguments, he has nothing to offer other than "well, what about the awful things YOU do?" Following this with some type of bogus attempt at moral equivalence is a classic and entirely typical technique. It's an attempt to embarrass the other side into silence- rather than engage the argument they're making.

They aren't paying you for this, I hope- because you're not really very good at it.

In this case, I answered Tango, not you.

Did you give any arguments? You talked about what happened in a completely different era, when communist ideology dominated. This era is already in the distant past. There have been no ideological dogmas in Russia for a long time. Your words mean nothing. If you want to make arguments, bring them from the current reality.

If you think that in Russia the situation with freedoms and rights is worse than in Ukraine (and only these two warring countries can be legitimately compared as being in similar conditions) – let's discuss.

And to baselessly accuse another person of something reprehensible – is this a trend in the West? Why do most of you seek to discuss not the problem, but the personality of your opponent? I think this is because you are afraid to discuss the problem itself…

I'm well aware you were talking to Tango- it was your attempt to distract from the point he was making with the Kent State pictures that I was referring to. I was reiterating a point I made earlier- that your argumentative technique is crudely, predictably Soviet in style. You may say that the Soviet Union is gone, but even as you do, your posts are clear evidence that the habits of thought persist. Nobody in the West who saw Putin speak with Tucker Carlson will believe for a minute that Soviet styles of thinking and argumentation – among other things – are gone. It's just more of the same crude dishonesty.

That's what keeps my criticism of your conduct from being baseless: if it so happens that it resembles the propaganda official Russian sources serve up, well, you shouldn't be surprised if people wonder if you're a mouthpiece- because it's hard to believe a thinking person would write such nonsense.

Therein lies the problem. You act in exactly the same way – you repeat the cliched postulates of Western propaganda)))
But at the same time, I do not accuse you of being insincere. I'm sure you write what you think.
And I write exactly what I think. And what, according to my observations, the majority of citizens think here (in Russia). And to understand why we think this way, you need to know a lot of facts, starting with ancient Russian history.
I didn't see Putin's interview – it wasn't interesting to me.
For me, Putin is an ideological opponent (I have left-wing convictions – no matter how strange it may sound, I am a left-wing conservative, Putin is a right-wing conservative), an accomplice of the West in the destruction of Russia (up to a certain point), who suddenly realized that without the real sovereignty of Russia, he and the people he represents will gradually lose the country – its "food supply". And this was the main reason for his anti-Western rebellion. Now my views on international issues simply coincided with him. Well, he has strong enough testicles not to bend under external pressure, which is good at the moment. Although I do not consider all of his actions to be correct – but most of them are. And also – the current Russian government itself is largely to blame for the problems that have arisen – it was necessary to resist the encroachments of the West much earlier, it is quite possible that then armed conflicts could have been avoided.
As for the sentiments of the majority of the population, Russians (I now mean all Russian citizens of any nationality), due to our previous history, are extremely afraid of another large-scale Western invasion, really do not accept some Western values (the majority prefer traditional values) and see the current conflict precisely as a military clash between Russia and the collective West, where Ukraine acts as a proxy army. In Russia, this war is perceived as fair, and the Ukrainians (I'm not talking about nationalists now) are pitied as people drawn into the conflict by deception.
This is reality. Whether you like it or not, that's how it is. And as the war progresses, the stakes will increase.

Thanks for your answer Cuprum … but this is not what I ask…

Every country has his violence in history… very few can avoid that accusation….

But my point was that if YOU … today… decided to protest as I have said… surely and without a doubt you ended as Navaly or worst (not mentioning your relatives)…

In other way… I'm pretty sure that the rest of our fellow members here could have not that "problem"…

THAT΄s point the big difference of your country and our΄s…

Armand

You need to compare things that are comparable. Is your country at war?

Can a person come out in Ukraine now with a poster: "Down with the corrupt government of Zelensky"? I doubt that such an act will go unpunished for him.

What nonsense- I'm not "writing the cliched postulates of Western propaganda." I'm pointing out the dishonesty of your arguments. That's not the same thing- and your attempt to cast me as a propagandist in your own style reinforces the argument I'm making: which is that the arguments you're peddling are dishonest and an insult to our collective intelligence.

Your argument that "this is how we see it, and therefore it's reality," while perhaps appearing to you to be true, is reflective of exactly the phenomenon I am describing. Having learned the line, you are parroting it, with little or no understanding of the difference between the context wherein it was hatched, and the larger world.

The Kent State University shootings were a very, very rare anomaly. If one studies, it in a bit more detail, on could see that. That is not Western propaganda … but facts …

Regardless … the Russians will stop attacking the Ukraine when they take enough losses. Even as with now the Russian losses in both men and material is massive. So, it seems the Russians have not taken enough losses … yet.

Part of that IMO is the US leadersuip dragging its feet in supplying the Ukraine with what they need and before they needed it. Risk aversion and fear of escalation may be the death of the Ukraine …

Ha!Ha!… Cuprum… queridisimo amigo… Is that really your justification for my simple question? … Do you want to tell me that before the war with Ukraine that could be done without consequences?… and much before too?… you live in a totalitarian and criminal state and you know it… but I understand… it's what they have shown throughout your life… what I don't understand is that you have said that you have traveled outside your country… therefore you have seen how people live there… you have never seen any difference with respect to the freedom of expression? …

And comparing yourself with other countries at war is the same as saying that in Russia there is more freedom of expression than in Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua or Venezuela…

At least I hope that these innocuous text exchanges entertain you and make you forget for a few minutes the horrible reality that surrounds you…

Armand

the crudity and stupidity of the official propaganda was the whole point of it. Some portion of the population could always be relied upon to swallow it whole, but the real purpose was to force the line on thise who would not, and by so so doing, to break their self-respect and make them complicit.

The most depressing statement I've read recently :(

Is this not what Kennedy did in Vietnam(link below).

Also there are now many stories on the web that insinuate that things are not going peachy for the Ukrainians, including this one.

Let's say the Russians take 4 to 1 casualties to those of the Ukrainians, ( I think that is being generous). Does anyone in here think Putin and those who control Russia, are not ready to accept those high loses? Can the Ukrainians sustain even 4 to 1 loses, if Russia is willing to stay for the long term? Russia has proven in the past, that lives don't really matter much to leadership. Add to all this, that a lot of those casualties have been to those that Russian leaders really care very little about at all, mercenaries, criminals, troops of old republics, Muslims, "unwanted", etc..

Are average Joseph and Svetlina in Russia really being impacted?

Add again to this, Russia is improving their military capabilities, dumping bad leaders, ramping up military production and gaining useful modern battlefield experience. In other words, very similar to what happened on the Eastern front between 1941 and 1944.

I am pro Ukrainian, but I've been trying to look at the realities of the situation.

Subject: New US military advisers could be heading to embassy in Ukraine – POLITICO


link

With one big exception- no Lend Lease for Russia. I guess we'll find out whether that's a decisive difference or not.

Well maybe, unless you substitute Iran, China and India.

Better than nothing, but not exactly the US and the UK, comparatively speaking.

New US military advisers could be heading to embassy in Ukraine

Yeah I heard about 60 too on FOX. Don't know if any others in the media even covered it ? Regardless, I think this Plt + will augment the USMC, etc. there. Purely for defensive purposes. You know "advisors" …

Frankly the Ukraine does not really need US troops. What they need they should have had last year if not sooner. E.g. F-16s, more ADA systems, 155mm ammo, etc., etc.

Nine pound pound – your arguments do not seem fair to me at all. And you know, it's natural, because everyone looks from their own position. Remember the parable of the elephant and the three blind sages.
Your unwillingness to perceive the opponent's position and seek compromises leads to wars… Who gave you the right to consider your position as the truth?

By the way, you greatly overestimate the role of Lend-Lease for the USSR.

Legion 4 – I have been writing for a long time, this war must end with the unconditional surrender of one of the parties. The situation has gone so far that no other outcome will suit either side.

Tango01, I have been to protest rallies here in Russia many times. I went to protest against electoral fraud (but for quite a long time – about fifteen years ago, because I see that Putin is really supported by the majority of the country's population). And I have never been subjected to any kind of repression. Although some representatives of the political spectrum, with whom I stand in solidarity, have been condemned, and, in my opinion, undeservedly. But… This is the left spectrum (Communists and Socialists).
But I have nothing and do not want to have anything to do with the pro-Western opposition that plunged my country into chaos thirty years ago, and now contributes to the desire of the West to dismember and actually destroy Russia. I mean Navalny, Khodorkovsky and other similar people… These are enemies much scarier than Putin and his team.
And you know, the current Russian realities do not seem terrible to me at all. There are political problems, but it will take many years to solve them – people's thinking needs to change. In the meantime, nothing comes out of our liberals and Democrats except autocrats)))

35thOVI, yes. The situation is developing typically for Russia. First, significant defeats, and then a sharp increase in the level of weapons and command. The Russian army will emerge from this war the only one with experience of a large modern war with a regular enemy. You have literally made yourself a new and dangerous opponent out of nothing.

Oh, yes, I forgot. Yes, I have been to the USA. In Europe, just passing through. I didn't feel any significant difference. Well, unless in Russia it is much safer to walk on the streets, and in any area of the city and at any time of the day or night)))

What a good experience yours… at least you haven't had to avoid people falling from the windows…

Let me insist… just to understand… if any Russian uses the system that I mentioned to you with the legend "Down with Putin"… would there be any kind of consequence?

Armand

Of course they will. If this action is not agreed upon in advance, it will be illegal and will be punished accordingly. And during the war, it is unlikely that anyone will agree on such an action. And that's right. Even if Putin is a corrupt official, no one needs upheavals in power during the war, otherwise the fate of Libya or Iraq may await us. First, victory, and only then internal affairs.

Cuprum, in my country, we don't worry about whether arguments are "fair"- we care whether they are right or wrong, and true or false. We are free people, and our Constitution guarantees that each of us can seek the truth, and argue for it. It doesn't come from some central authority, ministry or party. I believe in objective truth- if you don't, well, fine for you- but if you say there is no such thing, than why would we take anything you say on faith?

I consider my personal truth to be objective. I was interested in current processes a lot and in detail – it was interesting to me. And I got exactly the impression I'm talking about. And I don't care whether you believe what I say or not. Each person analyzes the available information himself and draws his own conclusions. And this is his inalienable right. But in order to draw the right conclusions, you need to have complete information.
All I am trying to do is to bring to you those facts that are either suppressed or distorted by Western propaganda. And I do the same here (in Russia) with my interlocutors, only here I am already bringing to their attention those facts that Russian propaganda is suppressing or distorting (and there are also many of them).
The war is now going on in the information field. And the real facts are drowning in a sea of information garbage.
And you don't need to tell me about the level of freedom now in Russia. In some ways it is catastrophically low, but in some ways it even surpasses the West, no matter how strange it may seem to you. Fortunately, the world is not black and white)))

"Personal truth" is by definition not objective: if such a thing could be said to exist, it would necessarily be subjective.

Nobody has complete information- and as I said before, you are making statements that are completely, demonstrably, provably untrue.

You also fail to understand a critical difference between our systems: in this country, the government does not control the news. What you call "propaganda," the official flow of information, is a tiny portion of the information available to us, and we can deride, accept, mock or reject it as we please.

"I am not a supporter of Putin, but I am a supporter of my country and people. It is not the Warsaw Pact that has approached your borders – it is you who are coming to us."

By invitation of the former Warpact nations. After invasion and oppression by the Russians they don't want it to happen again.

"Tango01, do the shootings of demonstrators in the USA protesting against the Vietnam War count?"

"There have been no ideological dogmas in Russia for a long time."

Yup, just a cult of personality

Cuprum, my apologies. The four students killed and nine wounded at Kent State are comparable to the 137 Czechs killed and 500+ wounded plus the 3,000 killed, 17,000 wounded and 2,000 Hungarians executed in 1956 by the Soviets.

Not to mention the National Guard troops who shot protestors at Kent State were prosecuted. How many Soviets were prosecuted in Czechoslovakia or Hungary?

"Why do most of you seek to discuss not the problem, but the personality of your opponent?"

People discuss the problem on a regular basis, the dictator running your country. You refuse to acknowledge that he's a dictator or that he's the problem. You're so excited that Russia is a world power again you're blinded to the fact he kills political opponents and rigs the elections. And you're blinded to the fact that Russia's power is illusionary. It's a paper tiger and holds great power status only because other countries say it does. Similar to the Italians in the 19th century.

"The current Russian government itself is largely to blame for the problems that have arisen – it was necessary to resist the encroachments of the West much earlier, it is quite possible that then armed conflicts could have been avoided."

Translation: If you would just do what we want, we wouldn't have to invade other countries.

I'm trying to follow cuprum's arguments.
NATO is advancing on Russia, without moving.
Clever stuff that.
Odd that long range weapons supplied to Ukraine come with an agreement not to use them on Russian territory.

"We've" made a dangerous enemy.
Which is using up it's best weapons and has to bring long obsolete tanks out of storage.

Nahhhh.
Still makes no sense.
What's that you're smoking?