"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (2 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

GrauGeist said:
I hope we're sending more tractors to supply the 3rd Ukraine Farm Tractor battalion - that should offset anything that Russia does to boost their AFV numbers...
Click to expand...

BREAKING NEWS: Putin has reached out to Biden in an attempt to reduce hostilities. He's actually proposing realistic, achievable reductions in strategic weapons that threaten Russia's hegemony. The proposed treaty, known as START, stands for Strategic Attempt to Reduce Tractors.

Sorry...couldn't resist.
 
According to open source intelligence efforts, there are 76 Russian Battalion Tactical Groups operating in the Donbas area and another 15 north of Crimea. For 91 BTGs actively engaged in combat as of the last week (roughly).

At least 130 different Russian BTGs have been positively identified as active in combat since the start of the war. That's a minimum figure.

BTGs are tip of the spear combat units. Typical strength is 600 to 800 troops, with 8-12 tanks, 40 to 50 APCs/IFVs, 6 to 12 mobile artillery pieces and some SHORAD assets.

For each BTG in combat you can figure that there is at least one other solider in theatre, acting as support or logistics. BTGs don't act in isolation and they don't include things like heavy artillery, aviation assets, long range air defence, or logistics elements.

130 BTGs would be 78,000 to 104,000 troops. Double that and you're looking at 155,000 to 200,000 Russian troops who have been engaged in fighting or directly supporting the war in Ukraine.

That's a MINIMUM figure. Roll in special forces, air and navy assets and that number climbs substantially higher.
 
Jagdflieger said:
Common knowledge within NATO, or feel free to check the internet in timeline since 2014 for hopefully reliable information
Click to expand...

Despite your disclaimer in the last paragraph above, you seem to be claiming access to privileged information you're not authorized to dislose, hence can't supply links for us to independently verify.
"Don't ask me how I know, can't disclose my sources, for their safety, but trust me, I KNOW!"
Sounds like James Bond to me.
And you expect to be taken seriously?
 
Hey Jagdflieger,

re "So after 65 day's of fighting, only the RUSSIAN Armed forces lost all this? whilst having supposedly involved 200,000 men?"

What are you trying to say with the above questions? Is there some reason you think the KIA rate is too excessively high to apply to Russian troops?

Modern warfare, when fought with modern front line combat equipment can be exceedingly deadly.

Although the tactical and grand tactical situation was significantly different, during Operation Desert Storm/Gulf War 1 the Iraqi armed forces suffered ~10,000 dead during the ~3 days the ground war lasted. This number was derived from post-war intelligence debriefs of Iraqi POWs, official post-war releases concerning war dead by the Iraq government, and from the international aid community. Most of the fighting occurred in relatively open environments. (Another ~12,000 were killed during the 39 day air campaign leading up to the ground war.)

In comparison, if the intel estimates from NATO of ~15,000 minimum Russian soldiers KIA are correct, the kill rate has been only ~1/15th of the kill rate during Operation Desert Storm. Most of the fighting (not counting the drone war?) has been occurring in urban environments.
 
Last edited:
I think it is healthy to take a different view. You do and that is a good thing. However Russia is not the soviet union, even if a guy thinks he still can fill Uncle Joe shoes. That much is very clear.
The weapons fielded are not enough, planning is even shorter then that of Adolf. Supplies are long away and costly to get to the front. And that if ! available.
Cant take a big city, yes murder or rape some to terrorize as they did in well, every where to went too. ( they are not the only ones with this strategy i know )
Can take a bit of dirt but shaky on keeping it.

The other side did get get some heavy stuff after all and a lot of very mobile manpads and (i presume, i agree) a very nice dose of info on where and how many enemy agents are where in real time. And are getting better suited weapons although not the latest in ever more faster pase. This war isnt about how many one can produce to overwhelm the other. There is no time to do that. It isnt ww2 Ost front. Its a fight at best for Russia a stalemate, a powerplay that went over the intended goal. Should have been a blitzkrieg covering a piece of real estate, put your guys in control over the rest and Bob is your Uncle. Did it before ( forgetting Afghanistan as everybody should)
Why didt Putin play Risk? Cant hold the whole of the continent not even for 7 tokens.

That does not take away the force Russia can field, it just shows how it can do in an offensive war AND keeping its hinterland.

It cant.

Again it is not the soviet union nor does it has for a few years unlimited forces

So i hope you do better next time in claiming stuff. I do mean i like a different view but in a hot war, you state sources if you state some thing as the truth.
Not some article written almost nobody knows.
 
Sort of sounds like one of those "authorities" on Geo-engineering/Chemtrails, who got their inside information from a (former)Government official who has to remain anonymous in order to protect self/family...
 

He could tell you, but then he would have to kill you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Similar threads

A
The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy?
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Sisu
S
M
All V-22's Grounded
Replies
2
Views
1K
GTX
M
All This For The Low, Low Price of .....
Replies
19
Views
2K
MIflyer
M
M
The Wrath of KAAN?
Replies
3
Views
835
Snautzer01
M
The USAF V-22 Mishap of 2023
Replies
2
Views
491
Thumpalumpacus
Menu
Log in
Register