General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBoy! That a "huge" number?
Estimated 40000 Russian troops have either been killed, injured or captured?
This doesnt including the ones who have abandoned their post and ran!
Yep! Trump says Putin is strong and smart! Well, these numbers say otherwise!

Eliot Rosewater
(34,282 posts)Unfortunately this information will be all the more reason for Putin to do something drastic.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)By that time (1968), our country was coming apart at the seams.
MineralMan
(149,949 posts)We lost roughly 50,000 people during the entire Vietnam war. That lasted 10 years.
What it indicates is that the Russians were poorly prepared and equipped for their invasion. Their intelligence about the Ukrainian military and its citizens was very, very faulty. What they thought would take a few days is mired in the mud now. It's not going to get better for the Russians, either. They're going to have a very tough time supplying their military in Ukraine, to boot.
Big mistake!
dpibel
(3,686 posts)US fatalities in Vietnam circa 58K.
Casualties much higher.
MineralMan
(149,949 posts)However, estimates for Russian fatalities are 7,000-17,000. Still very, very high, for such a short time.
I did not go and look at actual numbers, but relied on my memory. "around 50,000" was reasonably accurate, since the actual number was about 58,000.
Now, how long have the Russians been in Ukraine? A month? Very high numbers for such a short time.
Tomconroy
(7,611 posts)would know for sure, if they are even capable of keeping track of their casualties.
Claustrum
(5,052 posts)I am not going to believe the Russian side or any other side. But regardless, Russia is not taking Ukraine as easy as they wanted or made it seem at first.
Wounded Bear
(63,189 posts)One problem is that in modern war, many times a human body is just obliterated.
Torchlight
(5,883 posts)The numbers seem consistent with other, large-scale conflicts of the late 20th-early 21st century conflict.
If we take casualties as a percentage of overall theater strength, other, far more lopsided casualty rates have been documented.
For example, Iran-Iraq, First Arab-Israeli War, The Congo War, etc. The numbers of casualties reported to date in the Russo-Ukraine war stay well within the limits of these other conflicts.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)He has a column on why the Russian army may not be all that and a bag of chips.
Russias army doesnt have anything like that. There are officers, and then there are one-year conscripts. There is no institutional knowledge that can guide the new guys and make sure that orders are carried out efficiently. If you wonder why Russia can f--- up an ambush to the point where it costs them massive loss of life, its because they dont have sergeants to drill scenarios like turning into an ambush, and their one-year service is certainly not enough to learn those lessons during their training. Only 1% of conscripts reenlist. Russia has contract soldiersthose who reenlistbut Russia does not want well-rounded enlisted leaders, they want narrowly-focused, technically competent, professional, enlisted soldiers. Due to this very different system, Russian contract servicemen are probably more accurately described as enlisted professionals than noncommissioned officers. In other words, these are the guys manning complex weapons systems like anti-aircraft missiles. They're not in leadership roles.
Instead, As soon as a new lieutenant graduates from an academy and takes command of their platoon, they are expected to immediately begin training and maintaining discipline [filling] the leadership, planning, training, and disciplinary roles of both a U.S. platoon leader and platoon sergeant. But of course, instead of being trained by a soldier with 15 years of experience, youre being trained by the guy fresh out of an academy where his training is likely theoretical and not practical. The end result is nonsense like this. Compare to this U.S. Army training led by NCOs.
And that suits Russians fine! They dont want battlefield initiative and independence. They want soldiers who follow orders, no matter how ridiculous or stupid they may seem Thats why they kept dropping paratroopers behind enemy lines on those first few days of the war: Someone had orders to take airfields that moment, and so they kept doing the thing that didnt work over and over again. Hundreds died? Russian leaders dont care.
But this does mean that instead of sitting in those tents and the command center making the big tactical decisions, Russian officers have to drag themselves to the front lines to make sure their orders are being carried out. Because as weve seen, Russias army is one big clusterf---. And thats why you see so many generals and colonels die. According to one European diplomat, They're struggling on the front line to get their orders through. They're having to go to the front line to make things happen, which is putting them at much greater risk than you would normally see."