why only show one side? complete the picture, post the rest of the article:

"American and Western officials say there is some good news. Russian production is still not keeping pace with how fast the military is burning through ammunition and wearing out equipment. For example, even though Russia is on pace to produce two million rounds of ammunition a year, it fired about 10 million rounds of artillery last year. That has led Moscow to desperately search for alternative sources to increase its stocks, most recently by trying to secure a weapons deal with North Korea, U.S. and Western officials said.

And although Moscow has been successful in smuggling processors and circuit boards, it is facing a shortage of rocket propellant and basic explosives, American officials said, material that can be harder to smuggle than circuit boards. Those shortages are likely to constrain Moscow if it tries to step up further production of ammunition, missile or bomb.

Russa’s increased military production has also come at a great cost to the Russian economy, particularly as interest rates spike in the country. Sanctions have taken a toll on the Russian economy’s overall health, and overcoming Western export bans has not come cheaply, said American and Western officials. The senior Western defense official said that Russia had reallocated nearly a third of its commercial economy toward arms production. The country faces a labor shortage that could make further industrial gains harder to achieve too.

Russia cut back on its attacks on Ukraine’s energy grid during the summer. But as temperatures plunge, some Ukrainian and Western analysts and government officials think Russia could renew the terror campaign on Kyiv, in hopes that it will sap Ukrainians’ will to fight.

U.S. officials hope the steady supply of air defense ammunition and additional help to improve how Ukraine intercepts Russian attacks could help counter a reinforced barrage of missiles. And Ukrainian defenses have — in some situations — grown stronger.

“Ukrainians have become better in defending their infrastructure and building defenses around their power stations and critical power grids,” Mr. Salm said. “They have become better at fixing and making sure that the impact of the power outages and other utility outages are not as harsh.”

Catnip says Ukrainians are losing terribly but the Russians are the ones fleeing Klishchiivka

oh and turns out Russian MOD lied (as usual) and another missile boat was hit in the recent attack

big if true

tampal and ketuk abit will be okay amirite

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Sep 18 2023, 07:16 PM

see if you can get LTZ to answer
looks pretty fucked to me
the fire caused by the missile should have gutted the interior and may have warped the pressure hull

funny why you didn't say the same thing when Russia was trying to take Bakhmut for a year

Ukraine definitely has fewer casualties than Russia; with NATO support they are able to use tactics which conserve manpower. NATO vehicles are also better built and much more survivable.

Europe has not seen the need to switch to a war economy and donated only a small fraction of its arsenal. Most of their weapons are held back for their own possible use. For example, less than 10% of their tanks, less than 20% of their artillery, and no combat jets yet. Ex Soviet stocks, personal equipment and cheap unguided ammo makes up most of the transfers.

In contrast Russia is spending a third of its budget on war and even the most optimistic estimates of its armoury indicates that they've lost far more hardware proportionate to their inventory. For example, at least 2,300 tanks out of a best guess 10,000 including their stored tanks; 500 self-propelled artillery out of a claimed 5,000 stored (which is highly suspect given the ratio of tanks to artillery); 90 combat jets out of 900 (although only 2-300 were deployed); and oh yeah 1 out of 5 cruisers and 1 out of 20 diesel submarines...

The Ukrainian army of course has taken serious losses for their size, nobody will deny that. But morale is high with no need to conscript penal battalions or use barrier troops like Russia has been doing, so that tells you which side is losing more. Soldiers have an instinctive feel for casualty ratios which has often proven right in the past, despite what their generals tell them.

Scott "Paedo" Ritter

and now for the real story:

"exchanging an insignificantly small territory for such a scale of lost forces and means is a crime against our own army."

BIG SUCCESS!!1!

holy shit

If you read what I posted, the opposite is happening: it is Russia which is losing too many men

The reason is that Ukraine is able to use NATO tactics and equipment to reduce casualties. Traditionally Russia has never emphasised survivability, having a large manpower pool. That's coming back to bite them in the ass now

Ukraine is currently limited in its inventory and therefore also in its tactics
bear in mind that just 2 years ago Ukraine was using the same tactics and equipment as Russia, more or less, with the exception of a small brigade-plus of NATO-trained (but not NATO-equipped) troops

it takes time to change that - but the change is in process
the Dutch, Danes and Belgians are transferring several squadrons of F-16s, which again takes time to train pilots for
but once they arrive it will be a game changer as Ukraine can finally contest the air
it also opens the door for US F-16s

According to NATO doctrine, aerial superiority is a prerequisite for successful offensives

Ukraine isn't running short of manpower. they're now better equipped to conserve manpower with more NATO vehicles and precision guided munitions coming in. when Soviet-era vehicles blow up most if not all of the crew goes with it; when modern NATO vehicles are hit, crew survivability is much higher.

Ukraine is far from running short of weapons. It's just that new factories take time to produce new weapons. Quite a few production lines were only started up again in late 2022 or early 2023, and they take time to ramp up

the European nations provide significant support in kind and through the EU framework.
then also most nations are not bothering to transition to a war economy, unlike Russia. Why should they? just 10% of the US defence budget is enough to match the entire Russian wartime budget. there's no need to make the population suffer unnecessarily through a wartime economy... unlike Russians

we are still in a globalised peacetime system so the funding streams look weird, but that is how it is. you can argue that Russia is funding the war against itself also - it sells oil to China, who sells it to everyone else.

the war can stop anytime - Russia can give up.

say hello to ATACMS

the fantasy:

the reality:

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Oct 17 2023, 09:12 PM

ketuk2 sikit okay dah