Cal88 said:
philly1121 said:
Uneducated. Russian toy u are.
NATO lost the war eh? Love the cheerleading for Russia.
It's not about cheerleading, it's about getting through the wartime propaganda and gaslighting, which your last several posts are loaded with, so much so that I almost don't know where to start...
Let's be perfectly clear about this war, Russia is winning big, Ukraine is getting decimated, already losing about 2 million soldiers KIA or wounded. Ukraine is having to round up men on the street with press gangs, while Russia hasn't had to mobilize since the Fall of '22, because their losses have been a small fraction of Ukraine's, more than covered with volunteers signing up.
The stuff about Russia having lost 11,000 armored vehicles posted by Diablo above comes from sources like Oryx and the Ukrainian government, in other words, pure propaganda. People gobble up every bit of creative NATO propaganda, like the piece about North Korean soldiers being killed in Kursk and Russians having to burn off the faces of dead Norks to hide their presence, this is Ghost of Kiev-level war yarn. If that were true, why wouldn't Russians simply evacuate dead Koreans instead...
NATO and Ukraine are out of air defense assets, whatever NATO has left they have been sending to Israel so that they can conduct their genocide unmolested. Russia is going to take the remaining strongholds pf Pokrovsk in the Donbas this winter. After that the lone remaining highly defended hubs are Slovyansk-Kramatorsk which will probably fall later next year.
Sooner or later this reality is going to sink in. The fact is, Ukraine never had a chance to defeat Russia militarily to start wit, but its NATO backers couldn't give a crap about that country and used it as a pawn against Russia, a pure great power geopolitical play while grandstanding as defenders of human rights and "rules based world order".
No, it IS cheerleading. Let's be very clear about that. You're not open to any logical discussion about Ukraine and the history between them and Russia. You're also quite off on your estimations of Russia's success in the war and the sustainability of Russia's campaign in Ukraine. In short, Russia has neither the capability in terms of manpower or the manufacturing structure to continue building weapons at a necessary rate.
Russia's economy is soon to be at an impasse. As they continue to grow their defense budget, their central bank inreased interest rates to 21% to fight inflation. They are reducing investment into their railway industry. This does not bode well for trade with China, upon which they rely on railroads to move goods.
They added over 500,000 workers to the defense industry and 180k to their armed forces. But no matter how many men they add to the military, they are no longer able to produce enough weapons at a rate needed to replace those lost on the battlefield. Half of all artillery shells Russians use are now coming from North Korea. Estimates are that at some point during the later half of 2025, they fill face severe shortages.
Russia has a severe production problem with its inability to replace large-caliber cannons. Military analysts are saying that Russia has been losing more than 100 tanks and roughly 220 artillery pieces per month on average. As far as producing tank and artillery barrels - this requires massive pieces of equipment that weigh 20 to 30 tons eachthat can each produce only about 10 barrels a month. Russia only has two. The only place that Russia could get new forges is Australia. And North Korea and China don't have significant stockpiles of barrels to assist Russia producing new artillery or tank barrels.
The other consideration is that, with unemployment so low in Russia (because most are now employed in the defense industry sector), it is difficult to find and attract employees. These defense companies are now offering bonuses and incentives to get people to work. However, they are now competing with the armed forces, who need at least 30,000 per month to replace casualties. Armed forces are now also offering incentives to enlist and paying more money. Of course, this has led to inflation. Inflation in Russia was at 8.6% in October. Its 9.5% the first 20 days into this month. Civilian sectors of the economy are the sectors most hurt by inflation and interest rates.
But this is the paradox for Russia: large military expenditures, which are unsustainable in the long term, are artificially boosting employment and growth. Since growth is in the defense industry sector alone, they add nothing else to other sectors of the civilian economy.
So, if my read of literature from Economist, Foreign Policy, National Defense Magazine is correct, they all estimate that Russia will be unable to produce enough armaments to be able to conduct the war effectively by mid to late 2025. From Foreign Policy:
Concluding a peace agreement, however, poses a different set of problems, as the Kremlin needs to choose between three unpalatable options. If it draws down the armed forces and defense industries, it will spark a recession that could threaten the regime. If Russian policymakers instead maintain high levels of defense spending and a bloated peacetime military, it will asphyxiate the Russian economy, crowding out civilian industry, and stifle growth. And here we are, history repeating all over again - an oversized defense budget and wartime economy that is unsustainable finally culminating in either an economic collapse or entire regime change. Regardless, Russia's economy as it stands now is not sustainable and certainly won't be to the extent that they will have the capability to fight beyond 2025.
