Russia preparing for confrontation with Europe, EU's von der Leyen says
-
Don't mind me I'm just in the comments to check out the armchair generals.
-
Ukrainian MOD is hardly reliable. Russia doesn’t even have 10K tanks.
MediaZona and Oryx meanwhile require actual evidence for their numbers.
Russian material losses are very well documented so I don’t see them being significantly higher. Oryx states that Russia has lost around 3K tanks. This is far more realistic.
MediaZona’s estimate for Russian losses is 150K including unconfirmed losses using excess male deaths. But these are mostly irregulars.
Thanks for your reply - - i wish for Europe to rearm and for the coalition to push russia back. For this to happen, there has to be hope. While it is possible your sources could be better verified, there is no absolute proof of real numbers during war. Let's keep hope and try to be true.
-
Thanks for your reply - - i wish for Europe to rearm and for the coalition to push russia back. For this to happen, there has to be hope. While it is possible your sources could be better verified, there is no absolute proof of real numbers during war. Let's keep hope and try to be true.
While it is possible your sources could be better verified, there is no absolute proof of real numbers during war.
This is true. During WW2 for example, Stalin stated that in four months of war, Germany lost four and a half million men. This was in reality, nonsense.
After the war, Soviet and Axis casualties are given by Krivosheev as this:
Krivosheev
Total Axis losses on the Eastern Front: 8,649,500
Soviet losses on the Eastern Front: 11,444,100
But the numbers given by David Glantz was:
David Glantz
Total Axis losses on the Eastern Front: 12,483,000
Soviet losses on the Eastern Front: 14,700,000
Why the millions added? Simple, it is because David Glantz adds estimates for the forgotten battles.
Meaning even after the war, the real numbers can not be given only estimated.
-
It is not just military personnel. Read the links.
It seems like a Russian psyop (not that you are part of one) everytime someone underestimates Russia. It just seems like people want to make Russia seems weak so Europe does not rearm. Underestimating Russia only benefits Russia. Also see my new comment.
My favorite sources are random, unsourced internet comments, lol.
-
See? This is what I mean. You are underestimating Russia which only benefits Russia. Nuclear weapons are maintained and tested regularly. Russia's nuclear forces are constantly doing military exercises to ensure readiness.
Like why do people keep underestimating the Russian military? Do they want the EU to not rearm? That only benefits Russia.
Western airpower will not do anything. Even if they don't follow the Princess Diana accords, they will struggle to penetrate Russian air defences. The main reason why the Russian Air Force has not been able to achieve air superiority is because Ukraine has more S-300s than the amount of AA batteries western Europe has combined.
Russia tests nuclear weapons regularly? Got some more reddit links to prove that?
-
Russia tests nuclear weapons regularly? Got some more reddit links to prove that?
“Russia's development of new warhead designs and overall stockpile management efforts have been enhanced by its approach to nuclear testing. The United States believes that Russia probably is not adhering to its nuclear testing moratorium in a manner consistent with the "zero-yield" standard.”
- Lt. Gen. Robert P. Ashley, Jr., Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
-
Than you know your comment is nonesense. Ukraine has a stronger military than Germany, France, Italy, and the UK combined. This was the case even at the start of the war. Most of the Russian Armed Forces are not even deployed to Ukraine.
Do you have a source for that ?
Wasn't it mostly a large army but with obsolete equipment ? Let alone the whole nuke that France and UK do have -
Kinda weird anyone's worried I've seen sims of eurofighters vs Su-57 felons and the eurofighters beat Russias newest stealth fighter with even numbers.
Russias a pure non threat right now militarily all they can really do is threaten Nukes and if they did it's over for them.
I'd say Both Russia and the US are in major decline right now and we should just give Ukraine enough support to keep embarrassing them. Not sure Im for invading Russia directly unless they attack a Nato member.
Kinda weird anyone's worried I've seen sims of eurofighters vs Su-57 felons and the eurofighters beat Russias newest stealth fighter with even numbers.
Can you elaborate one what kind of simulation you've seen ? I wouldn't count on streamer playing DCS as an accurate intelligence source. And I wouldn't assume that when Russia send patrol close to the border of NATO (or NATO does-it close to Russia) they don't use 100% of their plane abilities, as soon as you turned on that top-secret radar jammer or have used your vectorial thrust in their full extent you can expect other nation to build counter-measures.
-
Do you have a source for that ?
Wasn't it mostly a large army but with obsolete equipment ? Let alone the whole nuke that France and UK do have -
My favorite sources are random, unsourced internet comments, lol.
A bit lazy rn, will probably give sources later.
As a stopgap here is my reddit comment from 9 months ago that has sources
It is 9 months old, misses some things, etc.
-
Kinda weird anyone's worried I've seen sims of eurofighters vs Su-57 felons and the eurofighters beat Russias newest stealth fighter with even numbers.
Can you elaborate one what kind of simulation you've seen ? I wouldn't count on streamer playing DCS as an accurate intelligence source. And I wouldn't assume that when Russia send patrol close to the border of NATO (or NATO does-it close to Russia) they don't use 100% of their plane abilities, as soon as you turned on that top-secret radar jammer or have used your vectorial thrust in their full extent you can expect other nation to build counter-measures.
You can probably find on of them on YouTube I think it was by grim reapers but yeah they set everything up as accurately as they can and set the ais to the same high level.
Then just watch how it plays out. The meteor missiles on the eurofighter are just much better in truth longer range, faster and they can spam more of the.
-
While it is possible your sources could be better verified, there is no absolute proof of real numbers during war.
This is true. During WW2 for example, Stalin stated that in four months of war, Germany lost four and a half million men. This was in reality, nonsense.
After the war, Soviet and Axis casualties are given by Krivosheev as this:
Krivosheev
Total Axis losses on the Eastern Front: 8,649,500
Soviet losses on the Eastern Front: 11,444,100
But the numbers given by David Glantz was:
David Glantz
Total Axis losses on the Eastern Front: 12,483,000
Soviet losses on the Eastern Front: 14,700,000
Why the millions added? Simple, it is because David Glantz adds estimates for the forgotten battles.
Meaning even after the war, the real numbers can not be given only estimated.
MediaZona and Oryx ...
These are the sources you gave in this thread ... i can't find anything wrong about those now ... but since you've been banned from this community, maybe someone else will discuss it eventually.
