How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[NamEndedAllen]

2 hours ago, Huba said:

In any case, money seems to not be a problem for the US military...

What *does* seem to be a problem is for the USA and Europe to decide whether they are in this for Ukraine to *win*, or just to bleed and freeze while tying down much of Russia’s military and gathering weapons and tactics comparisons and evaluations. I hate so much to even think this. But look at the the brutal fact of the onslaught of war crimes against the millions of Ukrainian women, children and elderly in their homes and schools - trying to freeze them to death in darkness across the entire country. What must Russia do in order tor the Allies to once and for all provide the long range weapons for Ukraine to be able to respond proportionally, as in the laws of war that the Allies honor? How high is that bar? Do we really see Russia backing down because of the weapons, training and sanctions already given - however generous those have been. Do the Allies *really* believe that if Ukraine knocks out electricity in neighboring Russian cities that Russia will send its unstoppable armies flooding into Poland, and roll across Europe to the Channel? 

Is there *anything* at all that will cause the USA for example, to declare ”Enough!”?

[FancyCat]

35 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

What *does* seem to be a problem is for the USA and Europe to decide whether they are in this for Ukraine to *win*, or just to bleed and freeze while tying down much of Russia’s military and gathering weapons and tactics comparisons and evaluations. I hate so much to even think this. But look at the the brutal fact of the onslaught of war crimes against the millions of Ukrainian women, children and elderly in their homes and schools - trying to freeze them to death in darkness across the entire country. What must Russia do in order tor the Allies to once and for all provide the long range weapons for Ukraine to be able to respond proportionally, as in the laws of war that the Allies honor? How high is that bar? Do we really see Russia backing down because of the weapons, training and sanctions already given - however generous those have been. Do the Allies *really* believe that if Ukraine knocks out electricity in neighboring Russian cities that Russia will send its unstoppable armies flooding into Poland, and roll across Europe to the Channel? 

Is there *anything* at all that will cause the USA for example, to declare ”Enough!”?

Long term large scale training of the Ukrainian military in Europe is anything *but* letting Ukraine bleed out and the conflict to freeze. 

The U.S and Europe need to ensure Russia does not panic and reach for the big red Nuclear button, bluffing or not, precisely once we reach that point, it will become very hard to keep escalating tensions supporting Ukraine vs sacrificing Ukraine for peace. We reach that point, we will already have lost, and Russia will likely get its frozen conflict simply cause I doubt any western leader wants to risk nuclear war over Ukraine or risk bluffing with Russia. Anything that keeps Russia from hitting the panic button, while allowing Ukraine to prep and gradually destroy Russia and retake all of its territory is undoubtedly good. 

A example, Russia was faulted by many, including most of this thread very early in the war for refusing to mobilize when its first phrase of the war ended in failure, Putin did not break and order mobilization until it was grossly late, costing Russia vital time and unrecoverable losses, precisely due to Putin feeling like he could pull thru without mobilization and force the West, force Ukraine to sue for peace.

I think the same principle, of letting Putin boil slowly to death in his own mistake is the set course for the West, instead of full scale support that may cause him to panic.

Also, it's very important to understand, once Ukraine is provided the long-range weapons, it is unlikely that Ukraine can choose to obey western wishes regarding targets, precisely due to the pain being inflicted on Ukraine. And certainly, no one can fault Ukraine for hitting eye for a eye, meaning the long term weaponry can not be provided, not yet else we risk galvanizing the Russian population for war. 

The best thing to do is set the stage for Ukraine to liberate its occupied regions, so that when the day finally comes Putin panics, the West cannot actually stop Ukraine. 

 

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, Fenris said:

Couple of pretty brutal clips illustrating accurate artillery flushing infantry out of their hiding places (can do without the music)

Is it just me, or do people feel the videos show more Russians in one place at one time than in previous points in the war?  Seems like we're routinely seeing platoon sized units being hit, but prior to this it was more like squad sized units.  Totally unscientific gut feeling, of course.

As for the videos, several of the incoming rounds can be seen apparently entering at a flat angle from several different locations off to the left.  But those explosions look too big to be from tank fire.  I was thinking maybe direct 105mm fire, but the multiple angles seems unlikely.  Thoughts?

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Some evidence that Russia's 3rd Guards Spetsnaz has suffered proportionally huge casualties in this war, including 9 in the retreat from Lyman alone.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/10/05/elite-russian-intelligence-unit-suffers-major-losses-in-ukraine-bbc-a78980

Steve

[danfrodo]

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

If you keep reading the blog, you understand why, and also believe that this is not a fake, unless it's an amazingly elaborate one. He's what an old buddy used to call 'a war whore'.

There's a couple guys in their 80s I drink with in Manila who could still punch me in the throat pretty hard if they had to: LRRP and SAS. Still randy too.

...UV is an outlier for 76 (especially with the smoking and drinking) in that he can still keep up with the younger grunts (more or less), has practical skilz and wisdom that keeps them alive, and is ok dying with his boots on.

A Tennessee mountain man.

1762 pages and someone finally references The Exalted One, The Magnificent and Peerless, Greatest of All Gods, Tom Waits

Edited December 1, 2022 by danfrodo
typo

[kevinkin]

58 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

direct 105mm fire,

If the UA can pull that off with relative safety, this would have a monstrous moral effect: very negative for those on the receiving end and very positive for the UA troops. Almost a dream job if war was not freaking Hell. In just about every wargame I played, direct artillery fire is way cool. I wonder if a modern form of canister is available? Sub-munitions? Certainly, the flat terrain would lend itself to such a ball busting tactic. 

[Kinophile]

https://ukrainevolunteer297689472.wordpress.com/2022/11/18/we-will-be-needing-5000-6000-calories-to-keep-warm/

Quote

"Supply by drone has proven to be a bit problematic'[...]Obviously in active combat situations deliveries would be less problematic, and this is being done.

This war, man, this war. Spanish Civil War vibes are strong. Makes me dread what the large scale war slouching towards Bethlehem will be like. 

I'll bet the Animatrix will be horribly prescient...

[NamEndedAllen]

2 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Long term large scale training of the Ukrainian military in Europe is anything *but* letting Ukraine bleed out and the conflict to freeze. 

The U.S and Europe need to ensure Russia does not panic and reach for the big red Nuclear button, bluffing or not, precisely once we reach that point, it will become very hard to keep escalating tensions supporting Ukraine vs sacrificing Ukraine for peace. We reach that point, we will already have lost, and Russia will likely get its frozen conflict simply cause I doubt any western leader wants to risk nuclear war over Ukraine or risk bluffing with Russia. Anything that keeps Russia from hitting the panic button, while allowing Ukraine to prep and gradually destroy Russia and retake all of its territory is undoubtedly good. 

A example, Russia was faulted by many, including most of this thread very early in the war for refusing to mobilize when its first phrase of the war ended in failure, Putin did not break and order mobilization until it was grossly late, costing Russia vital time and unrecoverable losses, precisely due to Putin feeling like he could pull thru without mobilization and force the West, force Ukraine to sue for peace.

I think the same principle, of letting Putin boil slowly to death in his own mistake is the set course for the West, instead of full scale support that may cause him to panic.

Also, it's very important to understand, once Ukraine is provided the long-range weapons, it is unlikely that Ukraine can choose to obey western wishes regarding targets, precisely due to the pain being inflicted on Ukraine. And certainly, no one can fault Ukraine for hitting eye for a eye, meaning the long term weaponry can not be provided, not yet else we risk galvanizing the Russian population for war. 

The best thing to do is set the stage for Ukraine to liberate its occupied regions, so that when the day finally comes Putin panics, the West cannot actually stop Ukraine. 

 

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I do understand those justifications, mostly from long before Russia sorta kinda gave up on winning militarily any time soon and resorted to massive destruction of civilian infrastructure for the winter. The likelihood of Ukraine liberating the fake Republics now Russia says are theirs is at best a very long meatgrinder. During which the civilians continue to suffer and die, as do a lot of the nation’s urban areas. Which is my point. Is there a line Russia could cross in Ukraine atrocities that would decide the Allies to permit Ukraine to knock out power and water in neighboring Russian cities, just as Russia is doing to them. I think your answer is, “No, there is not.” And if so, there is no limit to what Russia will do in the months to come - absent them pulling out in defeat. And with some sort of NON nuclear near equalizer, whether weapon based or NATO guaranteed. Without that, Russia is unlikely to stop pounding Ukraine’s cities into rubble. Even if they were ground down enough to pull back in some or all of the fake republics. 

As I hope I made clear, the assistance and training is indeed generous. Vital. And has been going on for these long 9 months -  is it that long now? My point is that the actual weapons that would provide proportional responses by Ukraine are denied. The war-winning weaponry is denied. We already debated the nuke issue into a black hole of infinite regression here. If Ukraine tries to take Crimea for instance. But my question remains, whether or not there IS anything that will move the USA and Europe to let Russia know unmistakably that Ukraine can and will respond IN KIND, short of bombing Moscow.  We talk a lot about the morality and ethics required of Ukraine while defending their country against an enemy with none. In my opinion we are nearing or at a major question about our own morality and ethics. 

Also, the corollary at least to your answer, “No”, is do you really think Russia is going to attack NATO? With whatever troops remain in their increasingly bare cupboard? Pretty sure THAT would be over mighty quick. Start throwing nukes around, knowing that is The End? Personally, I think Russian rule by Putin collapses long before either of those would ever begin to see the light of day. Other opinions clearly vary.

Edited December 1, 2022 by NamEndedAllen

[FancyCat]

RUSI report is so good…

Interesting, not only does this report result from the authors entering Ukraine and spending time with military and government officials, but includes high ranking military officials as authors. The report also notes it is careful not to discuss the offensive operations that began in July, suggesting the authors, certainly from RUSI, got to get glimpses at least of Ukrainian offensives, stuff we won’t know for a bit. 

Tho I do wonder how much Ukrainian deception is ongoing, that would color and influence this report still. Surely, the Russians will be reading it. 

 

[sburke]

Explosive Leak of ‘Presidential Lockdown Order’ Roils Kremlin (msn.com)

[kraze]

12 hours ago, Huba said:

AFAIK Ukrainians report the number of killed, not overall casualties, though it is not very believable. The 100K number seems to come from gen. Milley, who said that "Russians suffered 100K casualties, and Ukrainians probably a similar number", or something like that. We'll know after the war I guess.

If it wasn't very believable and casualty numbers for russians included wounded, not just dead - russians wouldn't be running total mobilization, considering their whole standing army pre-mobilization is 800k. Losing 100k dead and wounded would've meant nothing and they wouldn't need to conscript anyone else for the past 4 months. However with 100k KIA and 300-400k WIA - total mobilization is mandatory.

Likewise if Ukraine suffered 1:1 casualties of russians (e.g. 100k exactly KIA "officers") - russians would've been somewhere near Ternopil at this point, not losing huge chunks of ground monthly instead.

They have a bottomless pit of zero life value serfs, we don't.

[FancyCat]

7 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Is there a line Russia could cross in Ukraine atrocities that would decide the Allies to permit Ukraine to knock out power and water in neighboring Russian cities, just as Russia is doing to them. I think your answer is, “No, there is not.” And if so, there is no limit to what Russia will do in the months to come - absent them pulling out in defeat. And with some sort of NON nuclear near equalizer, whether weapon based or NATO guaranteed. Without that, Russia is unlikely to stop pounding Ukraine’s cities into rubble. Even if they were ground down enough to pull back in some or all of the fake republics. 

As I hope I made clear, the assistance and training is indeed generous. Vital. And has been going on for these long 9 months -  is it that long now? My point is that the actual weapons that would provide proportional responses by Ukraine are denied. The war-winning weaponry is denied. We already debated the nuke issue into a black hole of infinite regression here. If Ukraine tries to take Crimea for instance. But my question remains, whether or not there IS anything that will move the USA and Europe to let Russia know unmistakably that Ukraine can and will respond IN KIND, short of bombing Moscow.  We talk a lot about the morality and ethics required of Ukraine while defending their country against an enemy with none. In my opinion we are nearing or at a major question about our own morality and ethics. 

Also, the corollary at least to your answer, “No”, is do you really think Russia is going to attack NATO? With whatever troops remain in their increasingly bare cupboard? Pretty sure THAT would be over mighty quick. Start throwing nukes around, knowing that is The End? Personally, I think Russian rule by Putin collapses long before either of those would ever begin to see the light of day. Other opinions clearly vary.

As we see with Russian bombardment of Ukraine, it is generally counterproductive in morale terms on the affected population (tho I think the material effects are very serious) but I’m going to say that Putin is probably almost desperate to get Ukraine in very hot water with the Russian civilian population. As it stands, Russia is basically slumbering and ignoring the Ukrainian conflict, and no amount of Russian tv about Ukrainian “terrorism” (they classify tons of Ukrainian actions as terrorism) is changing the fact that many, many Russians have fled the country. Certainly not the actions of a population united in defense of their country. 

Ukraine of course has been very careful to wage conflict, both to protect their international image, and keep the Russian population away from being unified, but end of the day, it is my opinion that caution is best regarding long range weaponry.

It’s exceedingly unlikely from my view, that Ukrainian responses on Russian civilian infrastructure even with NATO weaponry would do anything to stop Russian attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure and not simply generate very much needed boosts in patriotism in Russia. Instead of missiles, let’s think aircraft, the degradation of the Iraqi military vis the Gulf War air campaign took…2,780 aircraft, 60 percent of which are combat aircraft. The Russian Air Force cannot gain air superiority, but the Ukrainian Air Force is no where close to doing that either. Unless NATO entered the conflict, that means, what aid we provide to Ukraine must take into consideration the limit of logistics, manpower, time. 

There is no war winning weaponry, and I’m doubtful there is weaponry to stop missile attacks that wouldn’t be counterproductive.

And of course, if NATO enters the conflict, that would be the death knell for Russia, but again, there is no appetite for war with Russia, certainly not with nuclear armed Russia.

Gepards, NASAMS, MLRS, HIMARS, hell the HARMS missiles rigged for a MiG, that stuff continues to flow to Ukraine, and I would argue are certainly vital weapons shoring up Ukraine. The money, is vital, the training is essential, the safe harbor. The supplies of anti-ship missiles, led to the retreat of the Russian Navy, the opening of the grain deal, but sorta fell off the radar. The statement by Defense Secretary Austin rings true, there is no one war ending weapon, but when you look back at the course of this war, western aid is helping to bring about change in Ukraine’s fortunes.

Is it slow, dear god, I want a freaking Leopard 1 with a Ukrainian trident yesterday, but from my view, the way Russia is being slow walked to its doom, I’m seeing a extremely effective policy, with plenty of off-ramps for Putin, but is slowly strangling him as he foolishly clings to his hope the west and Ukraine folds. 

The idiot kept Russian gas and oil flowing to Europe during the summer, as Europe was trying to fill the reserves precisely to ignore Russian pressure, Putin was happily selling it in the delusion that Ukraine would fold on the battlefield, that Europe would betray Ukraine, and by the time he realized he needed to “ freeze” Europe, the freaking depots were brimming with LNG.

[Kinophile]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Is it just me, or do people feel the videos show more Russians in one place at one time than in previous points in the war?  Seems like we're routinely seeing platoon sized units being hit, but prior to this it was more like squad sized units.  Totally unscientific gut feeling, of course.

As for the videos, several of the incoming rounds can be seen apparently entering at a flat angle from several different locations off to the left.  But those explosions look too big to be from tank fire.  I was thinking maybe direct 105mm fire, but the multiple angles seems unlikely.  Thoughts?

Steve

I saw that flat trajectory. Tank? Hitting something 'splodey? 

 

 

[hcrof]

4 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

I saw that flat trajectory. Tank? Hitting something 'splodey? 

 

 

As per the RUSI report the Ukrainians prefer extreme long range engagement with tanks using artillery fire control so seems plausible. 

[Bulletpoint]

7 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

 

They expand on these numbers in the report.

• Despite the prominence of anti-tank guided weapons in the public narrative, Ukraine blunted Russia’s attempt to seize Kyiv using massed fires from two artillery brigades. The difference in numbers between Russian and Ukrainian artillery was not as significant at the beginning of the conflict, with just over a 2:1 advantage: 2,433 barrel artillery systems against 1,176; and 3,547 multiple-launch rocket systems against 1,680. Ukraine maintained artillery parity for the first month and a half and then began to run low on munitions so that, by June, the AFRF had a 10:1 advantage in volume of fire. Evidently, no country in NATO, other than the US, has sufficient initial weapons stocks for warfighting or the industrial capacity to sustain large scale operations.

As I understood those numbers, they were the total amount of artillery on both sides, whereas I was asking how many guns were in those two artillery brigades that they used to keep the Russians out of Kyiv.

If they really held back the Russians using 50-80 guns, then that is pretty impressive for a moment in the war where the Russians had a 12:1 advantage in that area.

[JonS]

13 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

they really held back the Russians using 50-80 guns,

Yeah, it's a bit hard to make sense of that comment in the article.

Given that Ukraine has a LOT more than 80 guns in total, I interpret it as them being able to conduct single-target concentrations with up to that many guns at a time. 80x 122mm guns unloading 5 rounds each on a target ... mmm ... maybe 400m x 400m? Something like that. Everytime they managed to do that, another Russian company was having a very bad day.

So:-

Not: only two arty bdes at Kyiv.

Instead: of however many arty bdes Ukraine had at Kyiv they were, at times, able to concentrate the fire of two of them onto the same target.

 

Edit: Of course, on 24/25/26 Feb there may literally have been just two bdes in the area.

Edited December 1, 2022 by JonS

[Kinophile]

Lololol

 

[Degsy]

Another short Channel 4 report, this time focussing on artillery and front line medical support.          On the frontline of Ukraine's artillery war.

[Huba]

3 hours ago, FancyCat said:

As we see with Russian bombardment of Ukraine, it is generally counterproductive in morale terms on the affected population (tho I think the material effects are very serious) but I’m going to say that Putin is probably almost desperate to get Ukraine in very hot water with the Russian civilian population. As it stands, Russia is basically slumbering and ignoring the Ukrainian conflict, and no amount of Russian tv about Ukrainian “terrorism” (they classify tons of Ukrainian actions as terrorism) is changing the fact that many, many Russians have fled the country. Certainly not the actions of a population united in defense of their country. 

Ukraine of course has been very careful to wage conflict, both to protect their international image, and keep the Russian population away from being unified, but end of the day, it is my opinion that caution is best regarding long range weaponry.

It’s exceedingly unlikely from my view, that Ukrainian responses on Russian civilian infrastructure even with NATO weaponry would do anything to stop Russian attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure and not simply generate very much needed boosts in patriotism in Russia. Instead of missiles, let’s think aircraft, the degradation of the Iraqi military vis the Gulf War air campaign took…2,780 aircraft, 60 percent of which are combat aircraft. The Russian Air Force cannot gain air superiority, but the Ukrainian Air Force is no where close to doing that either. Unless NATO entered the conflict, that means, what aid we provide to Ukraine must take into consideration the limit of logistics, manpower, time. 

There is no war winning weaponry, and I’m doubtful there is weaponry to stop missile attacks that wouldn’t be counterproductive.

And of course, if NATO enters the conflict, that would be the death knell for Russia, but again, there is no appetite for war with Russia, certainly not with nuclear armed Russia.

Gepards, NASAMS, MLRS, HIMARS, hell the HARMS missiles rigged for a MiG, that stuff continues to flow to Ukraine, and I would argue are certainly vital weapons shoring up Ukraine. The money, is vital, the training is essential, the safe harbor. The supplies of anti-ship missiles, led to the retreat of the Russian Navy, the opening of the grain deal, but sorta fell off the radar. The statement by Defense Secretary Austin rings true, there is no one war ending weapon, but when you look back at the course of this war, western aid is helping to bring about change in Ukraine’s fortunes.

Is it slow, dear god, I want a freaking Leopard 1 with a Ukrainian trident yesterday, but from my view, the way Russia is being slow walked to its doom, I’m seeing a extremely effective policy, with plenty of off-ramps for Putin, but is slowly strangling him as he foolishly clings to his hope the west and Ukraine folds. 

The idiot kept Russian gas and oil flowing to Europe during the summer, as Europe was trying to fill the reserves precisely to ignore Russian pressure, Putin was happily selling it in the delusion that Ukraine would fold on the battlefield, that Europe would betray Ukraine, and by the time he realized he needed to “ freeze” Europe, the freaking depots were brimming with LNG.

That is a great analysis. Not knowing what the overall  strategy of the West is and having to guess is really frustrating ( much more so for the Ukrainian public I guess), and even though we more or less expect it to be in line of what you've described here, it's really easy to lose that from one's sight and submit to gloom and pessimism. 

Speaking of the missile attacks,  the next wave didn't materialize yet, did it? If the quoted estimates of RU missiles arsenal are correct, that might very well turn into another example of Putin playing himself for a fool. Russia has almost depleted it's missile stockpile, and won't be able to undertake any kind of systematic strikes campaign in the upcoming future. It achieved nothing except destruction that can be relatively quickly repaired, with already more than $1B fund dedicated for it. It rallied UA public against RU even more. It also damaged Russia's reputation even more, with multiple countries officially calling RU a terrorist state/ sponsor of terrorism and generally galvanizing the support for UA.

Regarding the weapons supply, only yesterday at the NATO summit Stoltenberg again mentioned that UA is being slowly brought up to NATO standard. I guess we'll see in the upcoming months if there are more visible signs of that, IMO the increased training  of UA troops is the best opportunity to start rearming them with Western AFVs. It more and more looks like this will have to be done at some point, soviet equipment is rapidly running out everywhere in Europe.
Regarding the long range strike capability, I still believe that is will be eventually granted to UA, with the GLSDB being the most logical one at this point I think. While of course weapons don't win wars by themselves, few truly were the game changers in this war, and introducing another like this is the way to eventually ensure the UA victory.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Huba

[Billy Ringo]

7 hours ago, NamEndedAllen said:

What *does* seem to be a problem is for the USA and Europe to decide whether they are in this for Ukraine to *win*, or just to bleed and freeze while tying down much of Russia’s military and gathering weapons and tactics comparisons and evaluations. I hate so much to even think this. But look at the the brutal fact of the onslaught of war crimes against the millions of Ukrainian women, children and elderly in their homes and schools - trying to freeze them to death in darkness across the entire country. What must Russia do in order tor the Allies to once and for all provide the long range weapons for Ukraine to be able to respond proportionally, as in the laws of war that the Allies honor? How high is that bar? Do we really see Russia backing down because of the weapons, training and sanctions already given - however generous those have been. Do the Allies *really* believe that if Ukraine knocks out electricity in neighboring Russian cities that Russia will send its unstoppable armies flooding into Poland, and roll across Europe to the Channel? 

Is there *anything* at all that will cause the USA for example, to declare ”Enough!”?

So, just what is it you think NATO/US/EU should do?  Stop funding?  Fund more?  Provide more/less weapons?  Release the hounds and level Russia?  Start negotiating to end things where they are?

TIA.

[kraze]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

Speaking of the missile attacks,  the next wave didn't materialize yet, did it?

Too soon.

[paxromana]

1 hour ago, Billy Ringo said:

So, just what is it you think NATO/US/EU should do?  Stop funding?  Fund more?  Provide more/less weapons?  Release the hounds and level Russia?  Start negotiating to end things where they are?

TIA.

In a perfect world ... release the hounds and level (significant parts of) Russia.

In the real world?

Declare Russia a State Sponsor of Terrorism or a Terrorist State and gut all her foreign trade and her economy in general ... no namby pamby half measures of limited sanctions. Full Blockade, Land, Sea and Air. Confiscate all Russian assets overseas ... even so called 'private' ones held by Putinist hangers on.

Use the Credential Rules to expel her from the Security Council.

Provide Tanks and Combat Aircraft to Ukraine amongst other things.

You might get the last, but I wouldn't hold my breath unless puce and purple are your favourite colours.

[kevinkin]

Some positive and - well - sobering quotes in this one from the hunting ground around Bakhmut:

“It feels like one constant, non-stop assault,” he says. “The only window to rest is when they run out of people and wait for reinforcements.”

“Their tactic is sending these poor people forward who we need to eliminate,” Petro explains.

“The roads are muddy,” Petro says. “We can’t evacuate the wounded fast enough, and deliver ammunition.”

“Vehicles and ammunition are expandable,” he says. “We try not to count them, and use as much as we need to stop the enemy from advancing. The only thing we cannot recover is human lives.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/30/europe/ukraine-battle-bakhmut-deaths-drones-intl/index.html?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d

This sector is turning into a military black hole. Go mongoose, the king cobra is an endangered species.  Extinction can't be far off.  

[Lethaface]

18 hours ago, Splinty said:

I suspect the ratio of wounded to dead is significantly lower in the RA. Their field medical services are crap, and what few medics they have probably treat senior grade officers and ignore the lower ranks. The UA OTOH have Western level medical care and treat all soldiers AND civilians.

They don't have 'Western level' of casevac though.

[Huba]

Just now, Lethaface said:

They don't have 'Western level' of casevac though.

Does the "Western level" even exist in near-peer conventional war setting?