socaltownie said:

---

Curious as to what talking points Moscow has been sending over as this spring has definitely favored Ukraine. Now I am enough of a student of the Eastern Front to know that this is the mud season and we may see reversals in the summer but I was struck today as to

1) All the OT posters that essentially argued that Ukrainian collapse was going to happen ANY day now
2) How silent they have been
3) Why reading broadly the Foreign Policy and National Security literature was informative about the extent to which current technology strongly favors defensive operations and there were pretty clear indications that Russia was finding it a challenging situation.

---

Is this what "this spring definitely favored Ukraine" looks like?

Russia fires at least 800 drones in a massive daytime barrage on about 20 regions of Ukraine, killing at least six people and wounding dozens, including children, in one of the longest attacks by Moscow in the 4-year-old war, President Zelenskyy says. https://t.co/fC71FoHMrw

— NBC News (@NBCNews) May 14, 2026

socaltownie said:

---

Curious as to what talking points Moscow has been sending over as this spring has definitely favored Ukraine. Now I am enough of a student of the Eastern Front to know that this is the mud season and we may see reversals in the summer but I was struck today as to
.. 2) How silent they have been ..

---

one can only imagine our bothers had their blood money payments reduced
# < sad clown face goes here >

socaltownie said:

---

Again - read more broadly. It is that this year (so far) Ukraine has net gained more territory and that Putin had to ask for a cease fire so he could hold his scaled down Victory Parade.

That sound like winning to me ;-)

---

You can try to convince yourself all you like that there's a winning military endgame for Ukraine here, but you're just lying to yourself

socaltownie said:

---

Again - read more broadly. It is that this year (so far) Ukraine has net gained more territory and that Putin had to ask for a cease fire so he could hold his scaled down Victory Parade.

That sound like winning to me ;-)

---

Germany surrendered in WW1 in 1918 while still occupying Allied land. In a war of attrition between two large countries, what really counts is the parties relative ability to absorb losses.

Ukraine throughout the war has been mostly chasing PR wins, often at the expense of fundamentals, see their invasion of Kursk, which cost them around 70k lives.

None of your sources will tell you that Ukraine has had over 1.5 million KIAs, vs 200k for the Russians.

As far as the coverage of this war, it has been somewhat overshadowed by the wars in the Middle East, that is the main reason we don't hear much of the war in Ukraine, along with the fact that the borders have been relatively stable.


These are results for how much territory has ukraine gained this year

AI Overview

As of mid-May 2026, the territorial situation remains fluid with both sides experiencing minor gains and losses, though Russia has maintained a net, albeit slow, advance this year. While some reports suggested Ukrainian counter-advances, data through early May 2026 indicates a net, albeit slow, increase in Russian-controlled territory. [url=https://www.russiamatters.org/news/russia-ukraine-war-report-card/russia-ukraine-war-report-card-may-13-2026][/url]

Russia Matters +2

• Recent Gains/Losses: Between April 14 and May 12, 2026, Russia saw a net loss of approximately 45 square miles (116 km^2) of territory, as reported by Russia Matters based on Institute for the Study of War data.
• Overall Trend 2026: Despite these local reversals, Russia has continued to make small, steady gains along the eastern front, particularly in the Donetsk region, with a total net gain of 1,669 square miles (roughly the size of Rhode Island) from May 13, 2025, to May 12, 2026, as noted in the Russia Matters report.
• Northern/Eastern Fronts: In the first four months of 2026, Russia's rate of advance significantly decreased compared to 2025, averaging only about one square mile a day, as reported in the Business Insider article, with Ukraine managing to hold key positions in the "fortress belt" of the Donetsk region.

bearister said:

---

58,000 Americans killed in Vietnam over 20 years (but 40,000 of those souls were killed in 1967 through 1969).

---

that may be, but some of us lucky fools had an entirely safe and comfortable stay
signed, none the worse after two years thereabouts
# miraculously accepted into Cal EECS, tuition mostly paid for by a most generous GI Bill

socaltownie said:

---

The 1.5 million number is so ludicrous did you laugh out loud while typing russian prop points

---

Let's just say that one of us is a brainwashed fool for believing that over 1.5 million Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in this war - or for thinking that this is a totally preposterous proposition.

We'll find out down the road which one of us is right about this.


Meanwhile,

AI Overview
As of February 2026, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in action during the war with Russia. This figure covers the full-scale invasion, with Zelenskyy noting that a large number of personnel are also considered missing. [1, 2]
Key details regarding Ukrainian military losses include:

• Official Statement: President Zelenskyy provided the 55,000 deaths figure in an interview on February 5, 2026.
• Western Estimates: In early 2026, some Western estimates (such as from the Center for Strategic and International Studies - CSIS) have suggested total Ukrainian military casualtiesincluding wounded and missingcould be higher, with some reports estimating up to 140,000 deaths.
• Context: Neither side provides frequent, transparent updates on military losses, and figures are difficult to verify independently.
• Previous Figures: In December 2024, Zelenskyy had previously stated that 43,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed at that time. [1, 2, 3, 4]

I think the way things will go in the future is that one nations robotics and drones will fight each other and deaths will be minimized.

Star Trek did an episode on this.

AI Slop, unedited

Quote:

---

You're probably thinking of the Star Trek episode "A Taste of Armageddon," where two planets fought a long-running "computerized war." Instead of physically destroying cities, computers simulated attacks, and the people deemed "killed" had to voluntarily report to disintegration chambers. The point of the episode was that sanitizing war made it easier for societies to continue it indefinitely because they no longer felt the true horror of destruction.

Your idea overlaps with a real modern trend, though. Militaries are already moving toward:

* autonomous drones,
* robotic vehicles,
* cyberwarfare,
* AI-assisted targeting,
* long-range precision weapons,
* and remote operators far from the battlefield.

In some ways, this could reduce human deaths:

* fewer soldiers directly exposed,
* more precision,
* less indiscriminate bombing,
* more interception and defense systems.

But there are competing dynamics that worry strategists:

1. Wars may become easier to start
If leaders believe their own troops are less at risk, the political cost of conflict drops. Democracies especially are sensitive to casualties.
2. Civilian infrastructure becomes the battlefield
Cyberattacks on power grids, satellites, finance systems, water systems, and communications could replace some conventional combat.
3. Cheap drones favor mass warfare
The war in Ukraine has shown that relatively inexpensive drones can destroy tanks and ships. But it also showed that drone warfare can become relentless and attritional rather than bloodless.
4. AI escalation risks
If autonomous systems react faster than humans can intervene, there's concern about accidental escalation.
5. Human beings still tend to be targeted eventually
Historically, every time warfare becomes "more humane," nations often find ways to scale it up again. Machine guns, airpower, and precision weapons were all once imagined as shortening wars.

There's also an economic angle: robotics may turn military competition into partly an industrial and software race whichever nation can manufacture autonomous systems, chips, batteries, satellites, and AI faster and cheaper may have a major advantage.

Science fiction has explored this a lot:

* The Terminator autonomous military AI turning against humans.
* WarGames automation and nuclear escalation.
* Black Mirror episodes about autonomous drones and AI targeting.
* Star Trek often explored whether removing emotional cost from conflict makes conflict morally dangerous.

One paradox is that a future war between robots might feel less horrific to distant populations while still causing immense indirect suffering through infrastructure collapse, famine, displacement, or economic breakdown.

---

I think Gene Roddenberry was onto something!!!

The thing is, Putin needs to feel the severe pain Kirk speaks of!
So does Trump.

See what happens when you elect a leaders like Hitler who are willing to go down with the ship they direct toward HELL?!?!

socaltownie said:

---

I just want to point out the sheer illogic of the 200K Russians vs. 1.5 Ukrainians KIA (and I will assume that might be a typo and what actually the poster/Russian Agitprop meant was Casualties (which include wounded, Captured, and MIAs).

Operation Barbarossa - perhaps the greatest single modern warfare advance in history that saw entire Soviet Army groups cut off and decimated had a Casualty ratio of between 5 to 1 to 9 to 1 (low end estimate). You are asking us to believe that In a battlespace now defined by static lines and grinding attritional warfare Russia has been able to inflict a Casualty ratio right at the midpoint of those estimates but yet failed to advance at the near rapidity of speed. It boggles the mind you could believe such a thing if you have read even modestly about the history of modern warfare.

Rather, it seems facially obvious that the attacker in a period of defensive dominance is sustaining higher casualty ratios then the defender. The unresolved question remains, as it has for 4 years, who has the greater staying power - the deeply flawed petro state in Moscow or the patriotically emergent smaller state with Western backing. I know where my bet is. But you get a check from Moscow so I guess you have to take the other side.

---

Yes, Ukraine has suffered few casualties, which is why they kidnap grandpas off the streets to join in their patriotic emergent army.

The great Scott Horton blows up the many myths about U.S. imperialism on the Joe Rogan Show.

Ukraine content starts at 29:14

socaltownie said:

---

I just want to point out the sheer illogic of the 200K Russians vs. 1.5 Ukrainians KIA (and I will assume that might be a typo and what actually the poster/Russian Agitprop meant was Casualties (which include wounded, Captured, and MIAs).

Operation Barbarossa - perhaps the greatest single modern warfare advance in history that saw entire Soviet Army groups cut off and decimated had a Casualty ratio of between 5 to 1 to 9 to 1 (low end estimate). You are asking us to believe that In a battlespace now defined by static lines and grinding attritional warfare Russia has been able to inflict a Casualty ratio right at the midpoint of those estimates but yet failed to advance at the near rapidity of speed. It boggles the mind you could believe such a thing if you have read even modestly about the history of modern warfare.

Rather, it seems facially obvious that the attacker in a period of defensive dominance is sustaining higher casualty ratios then the defender. The unresolved question remains, as it has for 4 years, who has the greater staying power - the deeply flawed petro state in Moscow or the patriotically emergent smaller state with Western backing. I know where my bet is. But you get a check from Moscow so I guess you have to take the other side.

---

Main reason for the huge discrepancy in the KIA ratios in favor of the Russians is that the Russians have deliberately favored tactics that have minimized their casualties - a more static trench warfare where they can press their huge (10+ to 1) advantage in artillery volume and a whole range of standoff weapons (air superiority/FAB glide bombs, Lancet and Shahed drones, cruise and ballistic missiles).

The Ukrainians have had a very limited supply of standoff weapons (cruise missiles, HIMARS) as well the Russians have been able to jam and intercept a large fraction of these, they have been the best in the world in the field of anti-air ground/A2AD since the 1970s as a long-running main tenant of their military defense doctrine.

What do you think the KIA ratio is going to look like in an artillery duel where one side has a 10 to 1 advantage in cannon and shell volume?

The very uneven ratio differential is reflected in the POW and bodies exchanges that have taken place the last few years:

The Russia-Ukrap KIA ratio update. #Ukraine 🇺🇦🐷🇺🇦🐷>> 🥓🇺🇦🥓🇺🇦 #ZelenskyWarCriminal https://t.co/wh5sPtqioN

— Soror Inimicorum 🇷🇺🇺🇸☦️ (@SororInimicorum) May 15, 2026

Quote:

---

According to the published body-exchange data, Ukraine received 17,824 bodies of fallen soldiers, while Russia received 557.

2026:
15 May: To Ukraine - 526, to Russia - 41.
9 Apr.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 41.
26 Feb.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 30.
29 Jan.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 38.

2025:
20 Nov.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 30.
18 Sept.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 24.
19 Aug.: To Ukraine - 1000, to Russia - 19.
17 July: To Ukraine - 1000, To Russia - 17.
16 June: To Ukraine - 1245. To Russia - 78.
15 June: To Ukraine - 1200. ?
14 June: To Ukraine - 1200. ?
13 June: To Ukraine - 1200. ?
11 June: To Ukraine - 1212. To Russia - 27.
16 May: To Ukraine - 909. To Russia - 34.
18 April: To Ukraine - 909. To Russia - 41.
28 March: To Ukraine - 909. To Russia - 43.
14 Feb.: To Ukraine - 757. To Russia - 45.
24 Jan.: To Ukraine - 757. To Russia - 49.

---

The Russians have not needed to press gang men off the streets like the Ukrainians have been running for many years now, because their losses have been a lot smaller.

Furthermore, Ukrainian tactics have been mostly driven by PR goals and most often very bloody affairs, like the Kursk invasion and the disastrous Summer offensive of 23 where they lost nearly 100,000 men in a disastrous attempt to break up the land bridge to Crimea, where they kept throwing human waves into well-guarded defensive positions without any air cover.

Quote:

---

It boggles the mind you could believe such a thing if you have read even modestly about the history of modern warfare.

---

I am fairly knowledgeable on this topic and have closely followed this war, from many different sources.

My assessment of this war is the same as that of Mearsheimer, Macgregor or European military experts like Jacques Baud. Their analyses however don't make it through most mainstream media outlets.

First 8 minutes of this video are worth listening to from an Afghanistan war vet and why he opposes all of the United States' military escapades.

Joe Rogan, the most popular podcaster in the world, has just released an episode with Scott Horton, the most knowledgeable antiwar advocate in America.

Minutes after walking out of Rogan's studio, @scotthortonshow jumped into ours.@DanMcKnight30 speaks with Scott—a longtime… pic.twitter.com/jlA7ycZSLp

— Bring Our Troops Home (@TroopsHomeUS) May 15, 2026

Aunburdened said:

---

The great Scott Horton blows up the many myths about U.S. imperialism on the Joe Rogan Show.

Ukraine content starts at 29:14

---

Ok, @scotthortonshow and @joeroganhq , you not only just figuratively killed me but almost literally killed me.

Saturday is bench day for me and I was mid-set and I hear, “Remember that time Dick Cheney shot his friend in the face and the friend apologized?” lol

Thank goodness…

— Tom Mullen (@ThomasMullen) May 16, 2026