The total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 05.06.25
-
wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Todays numbers June 5th 2025.
The official numbers on Russian losses released by the Ukrainian military general staff.
Source: t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/25142 -
Todays numbers June 5th 2025.
The official numbers on Russian losses released by the Ukrainian military general staff.
Source: t.me/GeneralStaffZSU/25142Some interesting points lately.
The third year of the war Russian losses have doubled, due to ill equipped Russian meat attacks.
But lately the numbers are dropping, and Russia has a harder time getting people to sign up, despite heavily increased bonus of up to 2.5 million rubles! -
Some interesting points lately.
The third year of the war Russian losses have doubled, due to ill equipped Russian meat attacks.
But lately the numbers are dropping, and Russia has a harder time getting people to sign up, despite heavily increased bonus of up to 2.5 million rubles!wrote on last edited by [email protected]"meat grinder attacks" is literally what these tactics are commonly referred to, mods need to get a fucking grip.
-
"meat grinder attacks" is literally what these tactics are commonly referred to, mods need to get a fucking grip.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Yeah, except the term wasn't even quoted and it was just "meat attacks". They just dropped it in there, no distancing whatsoever from a term that comes directly from on-the-ground soldiers who dehumanize the opposing side as a matter of their jobs.
-
"meat grinder attacks" is literally what these tactics are commonly referred to, mods need to get a fucking grip.
Agreed (with the substance, if not the tone).
Using "meat attack" to refer to Russian military doctrine (as described by Russian deserters - the Russian government would of course deny that) is not more dehumanizing than using "slavery" to identify the condition of people being owned as property: ie. the practice is certainly dehumanizing, but calling it with its proper name (or whatever derogatory name) is not.
Mods please review your decision.
-
Yeah, except the term wasn't even quoted and it was just "meat attacks". They just dropped it in there, no distancing whatsoever from a term that comes directly from on-the-ground soldiers who dehumanize the opposing side as a matter of their jobs.
Couldn't buffalox just get a warning, instead of an ban
-
Couldn't buffalox just get a warning, instead of an ban
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's only a 3-day ban. Besides, there was other behavior in DMs. They seem rather angry, and I am not particularly mad if they stay away for good.
-
It's only a 3-day ban. Besides, there was other behavior in DMs. They seem rather angry, and I am not particularly mad if they stay away for good.
I still don't think it's good moderation, nor is sharing their behaviour in direct messaging to the community since that has nothing to do with the community or moderating it. Ironically, that's behaviiur I'd be warning a user for, while taking no action on using extremely common terminology.
They could be the worst person on earth, but that's not applicable here.
-
I still don't think it's good moderation, nor is sharing their behaviour in direct messaging to the community since that has nothing to do with the community or moderating it. Ironically, that's behaviiur I'd be warning a user for, while taking no action on using extremely common terminology.
They could be the worst person on earth, but that's not applicable here.
Right, I shortened the description of the things within DMs, that went over a line to some degree. The rest of your complaints is noted.
