Kraft

Attrition in my mind is the constant cost of war, where as casulties from offensive operations are seperate. The naming here is pretty irrelevant though because as I said, the ZSU is not suffering more absolute casulties* This is not because the average drone pilot is 10 times better or has 10 times more drones and thus somehow offsets the total lack of shells. Its just a result that attacking in an environment where units can be reliably spotted kilometers away before they even assembled for a large scale attack, and can be killed more easily with the cheap-o FPV PGM, is near suicidal as russian meatwaves prove day in day out. Even if they make it past no mans land, a focused drone effort wipes most of the exposed and often EW-unprotected / unentrenched survivors out before much of any momentum can be gained. Its the same for both sides in this way but as Ukraine is not attacking, its not subject to this exposure as much, just the daily bombing and artillery shelling Yes, I agree with this. Beyond 2025-2026, this war will reach non sustainability for putin and keeping a stalemate will just help get there safer. But this does not refute the idea that the disparity in casualties is caused by offensive actions, which compensate for the firepower difference. *although, when it comes to relative losses I think the picture depends on the weapon system. I made the case for the Avdiivka losses, where russia ended up basically at a zero change with the captured, refurbished and produced vehicles in that timeframe, while the losses to Ukraine are permanent and lowered the capabilities of the armed forces, since there is close to no heavy gear still being supplied in quantity.

My point in the response is to the daily attrition, which has shifted in favor of russia. Ie a situation where neither side attacks Attacking in the current environment successfully at scale is near impossible for anyone. That russia continues to do so evens the casulties out, whether the russian offensive capabilities outlast the defense and results in a crumbling of the front is known not even to the commanders.

You asked for data you got data. If you want to go into dreamland where 1 ZSU drone has the effectiveness of 10 russian ones and cancels out the 10 to 1 artillery shell disadvantage, go ahead. Theres 0 evidence for that though.

Imagies like this exist for both sides Here is the data

Keep in mind a large portion of FPV are used on a single MG, AGS, or even just an empty dugout. Its a systematic way how defenses are continously degraded more than can be replenished before attacks. What makes you think so? There are plenty people who count FPV attacks and russia is just a sliver behind in the number of attacks, and completely dominating with artillery. If you arent seeing the gruesome results, its because you are not frequenting russian TG channels I assume. In attritional casulties russia is doing better, the only reason they have more dead at the end of the day is because of the constant meatwaves that get destroyed. Were it a completely static line with both sides not attacking, russia would be way ahead in causing dead & wounded and not even close to the 3:1 ratio that is needed to maintain force parity

@Battlefront.com I think this is the highest quality upload of your favorite river crossing, sadly quite short and not while they attempted it, the carnage must've surpassed what any movie could ever portait.

I think this is last reserves being commited as the out of EU shells seem all but confirmed to arrive, so no need to pay with lives what artillery can do

The important part is the loss ratio, which at 2.2 while purely on defense is far too low. Not just to attrit russia, but to not be attrited. Not just in vehicles, but FPV strikes are even worse, russia has near parity, but X times the amount of troops on the line to absorb the losses. With every day russia becomes more dominant in the force equation, and the rate at which the front moves increases. Current developments in Orlivka will expadite it

Western resolve in opposing/appeasing putin is starting to bear its first fruits.

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as mine clearing vehicle

On the topic of western aid, the total number of ATGMs supplied to Ukraine by France has been declassified. The number of missiles remains classified, in an effort to maintain strategic ambiguity.

I thought this was the leading theory as to how the situation can and will be resolved in the end? How would they even pressure him if they cant go around his block?

You're saying the wait was for this logistic train: One would think, "urgent need for action" came within 22 months? Lets meet next year to discuss "simple answers" again, btw "its not possible" is the simple answer, it just magically throws away government responsibility. Trademark Scholz excuse too, for things that wound up happening mere weeks later. When it just so happened to become "possible". Dont confuse political will with military limitations, we are talking about the USA that can move entire Divisions around the globe in a matter of days. Im sure they can handle a repair shop.

Yes I corrected the text, similarly, comparison with Iraq or Saudis does the same.

Training for Leopard started in February 2023. They were in active combat, in June 2023. Had there been the will to send these tanks in 2022, they could have been ready by the time the Kherson/ offensive took place/had commenced. It started even later. This is analog to every other weapons system. The "not possible" is just a moral veil for "not in the interest".

Did I say direct involvement? No. My example involved the units that drove into minefields, or as you called it "recon in force". Now, I surely dont have the military education, but least I invoke the russia is hanging on by mere threads idea, this was mostly true during the first counter offensive, which literally saw police, swat and !sailors! in trenches, had they stopped an armored push the size of 5-7 brigades without minebelts, hedgehogs, bunker and tunnel networks, no FPV or Lancets, and closer to parity air power? Or would it had been a complete collapse? You tell me. Now say, that instead of 1970s scraps and rusting cold war stock, more units with the hundreds of available Bradleys and Abrams were involved, the outcome would be the same? But alas, here we are, 2 years later and Kerch bridge attacks upset Mr Putin is still the talking point by which aid is denied. Whatever it takes, though.

Vietnam war saw US soldiers die by soviet and chinese equiptment, how much was the US willing to accept before sending nukes to the soviet union for that? cumulative 1.395 trillion purely military aid, 1.765 trillion infrastructure by soviet union. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80B01495R000500050038-4.pdf Using inflation calculator, cumulative rate of inflation at 594.6%, thats equivalent to 9.690 trillion military aid in todays worth, killing GIs. https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ but sure, sending 31 abrams and a one-use atacms delivery after 2 years is equivalent to cold war tension and escalation. Im not sure, did the soviet union also start by debating whether rockets would be too much to send??

How many tanks, planes, cruise missiles were lost prewar? Oh right, there were none. I specifically mentioned day 1, today would look a lot different had there been the forces that ended up driving into a 40km deep minebelt, which was only possible because of weak and undecisive aid, ready in year 1 when russia was throwing ship crews into trenches.

Chicken and Egg. This war would be over had any major western power fully commited on day 1, instead of discussing if sending 3 boots and a bandage more would upset putin. It will be over if the political games in US and Europe continue on and on, that kill service men and women every day.

It is the most opportune moment before the speaker is bypassed and billions in aid arrive.

Its about 1 km on foot over an empty field from Stepove to Berdychi, even without artillery that would barely work given FPV and a few MGs to hold them in place. Then another 1km before they can really touch defensive positions properly. They could do it at night, but Bradleys there have thermal so even more disadvantage. According to the marks there, they tried to cross on foot too and received drones.

Bradleys are my favorite IFV now, if only they could take on T-90s in CMBS

Making artillery production dependent on China, thats a very big brain move.

Source

They are on that road because they willingly decided to go and kill the defenders at the end of it. They could have started a mutiny, surrendered, gone to prison for resistance, but reality is they volunteered most likely for money and because they belive in it.