The Kremlin is burning?

[JWB]

How disruptive was this attack really?

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htecm/articles/202409140854.aspx#gsc.tab=0

[Roman Alymov]

30 minutes ago, JWB said:

How disruptive was this attack really?

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htecm/articles/202409140854.aspx#gsc.tab=0

It is the first time i hear about this attack, so probably not too disruptive (if at all). Actually, recent efforts by Rus Gov to "slow down YouTube" are far more disruptive (i have even installed VPN on my smartphone for the first time). 

[Mighty_Zuk]

There's too much chatter on western disapproval of long range strikes in Russia with their weapons. Usually such topics are given short attention and are forgotten. If the west does approve, we'll see it before we hear about it.

[Josh]

2 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

There's too much chatter on western disapproval of long range strikes in Russia with their weapons. Usually such topics are given short attention and are forgotten. If the west does approve, we'll see it before we hear about it.

Agree on all points. I consider incredibly unlikely from the U.S., especially pre election. Post election…perhaps, but I doubt. It is a very useful escalation rung for the U.S. to hang over Russia.

[JWB]

Old habits die hard:

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 and a half years too late. All they are going to get out of doing this now is some Dacha's and superyachts impounded in Western ports.

[urbanoid]

for rent

Edited September 16, 2024 by urbanoid

[JWB]

Drugs in the Russian army? I'm shocked!

 

[Stefan Kotsch]

If the Russians arrest capable commanders, then that is certainly positive.

[mkenny]

The Telegraph.  

 

Edited September 22, 2024 by mkenny

[glenn239]

3 hours ago, mkenny said:

The Telegraph.  

 

Curious.  I'd seen reports that Russian losses had dropped off in 2024, probably due to lack of Ukrainian munitions.

[Roman Alymov]

11 hours ago, mkenny said:

The Telegraph.  

 

What a strange article....

     The title say "pensioners" but they start with example of the man who is not only not in pension age (62, while pension age is 65), but is also actively working (2 jobs). 

      Survived "just three monrh"  - but three month is quite good for modern big war when people are sometimes killed even before reaching the frontline.

     Most of KIA are from small towns - what a surprise! Out of ~140mln of population of RF, only ~50mln are from places pop. K100+, so it is quite logical that most of losses would be from smaller towns. By the way the example man was from Ufa - it is not small town but regional capital with populationm of 1 163 000 (for comparison, entire NATO member Estonia is ~1 373 000 ).

   "Ukrainian estimates put the Russian death toll as high as 200 000" - outright lie, current official figure by pro-Ukrainians is 643750 (as by today morning), seems like this figure was obviously too high for The Telegraph so they decided to cut it to make article more convincing for Western readers.

     Then they rant about "costly wave attacks", but by "small infantry units" (how attack could be "wave"but by "small unit"?) By the way, from fresh Arestovich, we know that "small unit" is now often one man with radio, personally commanded by battalion commander who is overwatching him and situation around by drone following overhead.

   And so on.....

[Stuart Galbraith]

7 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

What a strange article....

     The title say "pensioners" but they start with example of the man who is not only not in pension age (62, while pension age is 65), but is also actively working (2 jobs). 

      Survived "just three monrh"  - but three month is quite good for modern big war when people are sometimes killed even before reaching the frontline.

     Most of KIA are from small towns - what a surprise! Out of ~140mln of population of RF, only ~50mln are from places pop. K100+, so it is quite logical that most of losses would be from smaller towns. By the way the example man was from Ufa - it is not small town but regional capital with populationm of 1 163 000 (for comparison, entire NATO member Estonia is ~1 373 000 ).

   "Ukrainian estimates put the Russian death toll as high as 200 000" - outright lie, current official figure by pro-Ukrainians is 643750 (as by today morning), seems like this figure was obviously too high for The Telegraph so they decided to cut it to make article more convincing for Western readers.

     Then they rant about "costly wave attacks", but by "small infantry units" (how attack could be "wave"but by "small unit"?) By the way, from fresh Arestovich, we know that "small unit" is now often one man with radio, personally commanded by battalion commander who is overwatching him and situation around by drone following overhead.

   And so on.....

ROTFLMAO

 

[Roman Alymov]

3 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

ROTFLMAO

Tell it to those Western mercenaries who were killed on Yavorov training centre before even reaching frontline.

[glenn239]

5 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

  Then they rant about "costly wave attacks", but by "small infantry units" (how attack could be "wave"but by "small unit"?) By the way, from fresh Arestovich, we know that "small unit" is now often one man with radio, personally commanded by battalion commander who is overwatching him and situation around by drone following overhead.

The article is dross, but the Russia confirmed KIA casualty chart is interesting.   July 2024 with about 500 KIA for the whole month surely is the lowest total of the war.  I assume that total has risen with the Russian offensives in August and September, but even at 1,000 KIA a month, the war seems perpetually sustainable.

[Roman Alymov]

4 hours ago, glenn239 said:

The article is dross, but the Russia confirmed KIA casualty chart is interesting.   July 2024 with about 500 KIA for the whole month surely is the lowest total of the war.  I assume that total has risen with the Russian offensives in August and September, but even at 1,000 KIA a month, the war seems perpetually sustainable.

I'm affraid this chart is the same degree of uselessness as other parts of the article. For frontline army of about 300K, losses of "1,000 KIA a month" means next to no losses (as it is the number expected to be lost from incidents, traffic etc.) -while pro-Russians on the ground do not report significant drop of losses.

[Stefan Kotsch]

18 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

For frontline army of about 300K, losses of "1,000 KIA a month" means next to no losses

The Kremlin has never cared about human life.  And the Russians don't care at all. 1,000 KIA a month - so what?

[Stuart Galbraith]

11 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

Tell it to those Western mercenaries who were killed on Yavorov training centre before even reaching frontline.

A picture of one of the Elite Russian assault  groups.

[ink]

16 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

A picture of one of the Elite Russian assault  groups.

As much as I like Dad's Army, weren't people on here praising the Ukrainians for recruiting/conscripting older men just a couple of weeks ago?

[Stuart Galbraith]

In a defensive war, it makes sense, to draw as many people as you can for defensive or support roles. In an agressors war, particularly  when you have a large population  base to draw from, it's ridiculous.

You know, some of those 62 year olds may have fought in Afghanistan. Let's put that in perspective, that is the equivalent of calling up WW2 servicemen for the Falklands war, or Vietnam Veterans from LZ xray in 1965 to fight in Afghanistan in 2009.

But they aren't pensioners, because they still have 3 years to go! One way to save money I guess.

 

 

[Roman Alymov]

30 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

In a defensive war, it makes sense, to draw as many people as you can for defensive or support roles. In an agressors war, particularly  when you have a large population  base to draw from, it's ridiculous.

You know, some of those 62 year olds may have fought in Afghanistan. Let's put that in perspective, that is the equivalent of calling up WW2 servicemen for the Falklands war, or Vietnam Veterans from LZ xray in 1965 to fight in Afghanistan in 2009.

But they aren't pensioners, because they still have 3 years to go! One way to save money I guess.

That is the strange logic. First of all, this people are not "called up"  -they are volunteering for service. Second, Afghan war veterans were quite active in 2014 in Militia - they are people of Soviet education (meaning: way better educated then modern generation trained under all this "Western-style" school reforms) and got significant military training. Some of them are still in Army, after 10 years of war. Yes not all of them are in good health - but. again, they are not called up but are signing up individually, taking own health into consideration.

   Below is the interview with tank gunner born in 1969

 

Edited September 23, 2024 by Roman Alymov

[JWB]

Molotov cocktail

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Top.Men.

[Ssnake]

That'll teach him!

[Stefan Kotsch]

I hardly believe that.