It's not nice having to wish for anyone's death. Goes against the human nature.
But something not feeling nice tells nothing about whether something is okay or not. Sometimes you need to do things that are not nice.
Putin has said so around 2010.
After Napoleon, Russia was occupying Paris for a while. Ergo, Paris is old Russian territory.
Also, Novgorod was founded by vikings, therefore everything vikings ever held is old Russian territory.
In the end times of Byzantine (Eastern Rome), Muscovy bought the right to call itself a successor of Rome. Therefore, Spain and Morocco are old Russian territories. And Israel as well.
Socialism originally spread from the Russia. Therefore, all countries that have been socialist actually belong to the Russia. Yes: Angola, China, Laos, Venezuela. Alaska is old Russian territory, and is one unit together with USA. Therefore, Hawaii and Texas belong to the Russia.
Hm, cannot find that article anywhere. I found two articles that talk about refrigerated trains bringing bodies there, but they don't tell about the actual morgue at all. They are here:
https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/features-61567949
All articles I can find about the larger warehouse near Kyiv are from 2022. There are articles telling about swaps of Russian soldiers who have had influential relatives. In 2022 there has been a swap of 50 such soldiers โ and the same amount of Ukrainians in the other direction.
Starting from summer 2024, there are suddenly several articles telling about swaps of hundreds of bodies at once, so at that point something has changed. Of course, with the Russia losing 1300 soldiers per day, and therefore about 400 of their soldiers dying per day, swaps of 200 to 600 dead bodies a few times per month are not that very many, really. Even if most of the Russian soldiers die in areas unreachable by Ukrainians, that still seems like a very low number. There is some amount of pressure inside the Russia for getting some of the bodies away from Ukraine, but none of the halfways recent articles tell anything about how many Russian bodies are currently in storage somewhere, waiting for repatriation to the Russia. Based on the amounts of a few hundred at a time, I'd say there must be many that the Russia does not accept. But no information on where in Ukraine they are physically located at the moment. Kind of understandable, because the Russian military could bomb the morgue to get rid of evidence, if they found out where it is.
It is weird that apparently no articles have been written on this subject in the last two years or so!
Countries are invisible lines on Earth. Nations are not.
Nations are groups of people that sometimes fill some lines, often leave some parts among the lines unfilled, sometimes cross them.
And nations can exist without any lines on Earth at all. If Ukraine was to somehow get completely occupied by the Russia, Ukrainians as a nation would continue existing. Until the Russia manages to actively purge them.
The Russia's official news agency that will not publish anything that Putin disagrees with, has written the clearest explanation about the genocidal goal. The important part is that in one part it said that all nazis in Ukraine must be exterminated, and in another part it defines Ukrainian nazis as "everybody who supports the regime of Kyiv". And then there's Putin's speech on February 21st, 2022, which was supposed to take place just hours before the missiles start flying, although the attack then had to be postponed by two days. And then there are the three articles published by RIA Novosti precisely at 08:00 Moscow time on February 26th, 2022. And Putin's speech from summer 2021.
I wish I could find the version of the "What Russia should do with Ukraine" article's text that is annotated in English language. I spent some hours looking for it a few days ago, to no avail. It's somewhere out there in the Internet โ I can remember having read it.
Most of them have enlisted out of their own free will. There are plenty of prisoners as well, but โ at least to my understanding โ they amount less than the people who enlisted for the money. Also, many of the enlisted prisoners are in it voluntarily because of money and amnesty. And many are simply forced to sign the "voluntary" contract by torturing them until they do.
What I've been surprised with is that as long as you are alive, you almost always do receive your salary as a Russian soldier. And your relatives will indeed receive their compensation โ assuming there's evidence of you dying. There almost never is, and then you're marked as AWOL, not as dead. And if you're AWOL, your family receives no compensation. Ukraine has huge refrigerated warehouses full of Russian soldiers waiting to be sent home, because when they eventually reach the Russia, that country will either go bankrupt or has to say "we changed our mind. Although you sent your son to our war for money, we're not actually going to pay", which will seriously destabilise the Russia.
This is indeed also why the Russia's economy is such a very important factor here. There's no way they'll be able to fill the required 30 000 new soldiers per month with prisoners alone. They don't have that many hundred thousands of prisoners available for that. Send too many and you will have prison revolts.
I largely agree with you on that.
But, that depends on who is using the numbers. For immediate military use it is not important what happens after the war. For the general who is planning a war strategy, what matters is how much the army is losing manpower. For the society it does matter whether the lost manpower is dead or just missing one arm, but for the war strategy it doesn't.
Albeit, I do somewhat disagree with this myself. I keep arguing that although the total military losses of Ukraine are close to those of the Russia, it makes a huge difference that the number of dead soldiers is smaller even in proportion to Ukraine's population than the number of dead Russian soldiers is in proportion to the Russia's population. It also seems that Ukraine's recruitment capacity (in absolute numbers) is at least on par with that of the Russia and it's unclear if its maximum capacity has even been reached.
Ukrainian soldiers seem to always receive decent prosthetics that enable them to remain in working life and be with their families. In that case it is not a huge loss for the society that a soldier has got seriously wounded. If the risk of death was as high as that of Russians', there would be (even) less motivation to enlist.
But, be it like this or that, the reality is that the common practice in wars is to assume it makes no difference whether the lost soldier is dead or crippled, and because of that, they typically count military losses, not military deaths. Regardless of how retarded that is.
There has been no indication that any new NK soldiers have arrived after the initial 12000. That's ten day's worth losses or one month worth Russian army size decrease if you take the Russia's recruitment capacity into account.
When did the NK soldiers come? Four months ago? If so, they have recruited 100 000 to 140 000 Russian soldiers during that time, and the 13 000 NK soldiers are about 10 % atop that number. As they are muchore skilled than Russian soldiers, you'd assume their number is less than the slightly under 10 % you'd otherwise assume.
So, let's guess about 5 % of the current number are NK losses. Possibly less.
The total number is not what you should be looking at. The interesting thing is the number of losses in proportion to the Russian recruitment capacity. They have recruitment infrastructure that enables them to recruit a maximum of 35 000 (or, according to some sources, just 25 000) soldiers per month. They are not able to restructure their recruitment procedures in wartime, as that would first decrease the recruitment capacity for a few years.
The Russia must get their losses under that number, because as long as they don't, they won't be able to train their soldiers โ they are needed too acutely at the front for that. If they can train their soldiers, their daily losses will decrease a lot.
Neither side is going to run out of population to send to the front in the next 50 years. But they can lose them faster than they are able to recruit new ones.
Yup. They do have that feature.
As do Ukrainians. Which causes it to be a detrimental feature for both sides. If only one side had that, then it would be of advantage.
Many do. But, in military purposes, it is not really relevant whether your army loses a soldier through death or through a severe permanent wound. He is still a soldier that you cannot use at the front.
It's a standard practice to count the dead and permanently wounded in the same number, because that's what is militarily relevant.
Not me. Probably nobody? ๐คท
๐๐ค