I think there are many reports hoping Russia loses. More are speculation and propaganda justifying funding.
Both sides Ukraine in particular are withstanding heavy causality rates.
The fact is Russia has gained integrating territory Ukraine has shed. How is Russia losing and losing what exactly? Troops, it's war. Less than Ukraine. Look at map.
Ukraine however are a bottomless pit relying on Russian loss.
There is no factual media until conclusion. One sided. State approved. Agenda. Both sides are using lies.
Factually what concludes this conflict?
There are other facts. This war is agenda driven. A battle of attrition seeking to draw drag and wear down the other side invested heavily. It isn't fought in the traditional methods. Risk of greater fallout, larger conflict. But it importantly plies agenda.
Traditionally Kiev would be dust. Baghdad effectively was, military and command structure. Instead of domination it captures territory. The rest of Ukraine hasn't been occupied, the border is active. It wilfully drags out because any objective isn't defined by the traditional sense. There is little air superiority. Anti aircraft, enemy flights still active while any military structures keep increasing numbers and resupplying.
It has wider objectives and they are a battle of attrition often in heavily urbanised environments and settings, as it captures territory, instead of wiping out command structures and military supply lines, and defenses. The country is also huge, the largest in Europe, excluding Russia. What was Ukraine troop count prior to this conflict? Millions? 2 million reserves? Not necessarily active. Until currently conscription is at what rate?
Independent perspective. This conflict stinks. It funds a proxy throwing its numbers into a grinder. As the other side captures territory. Until there is only wasteland. It has no logical conclusion until the other loses interest and claims defeat. It can last years. Look at that shithole Bakhmut.
Erratic claims. Completely paper thin. Biden and the many others funding need to justify the billions and billions being signed off on. They need to claim some kind of numbers to keep funding.
Truthfully there is no truth. It's very hard to independently gain information. Propaganda driven by agenda, by the other side losing, and it has wider geopolitical goals. But the other side restricted from providing any information. Until there is only morale boosts and propaganda driving strategy and agenda.
War against Russia, or war against a Nato proxy. Ukraine is in the middle.
Any Ukrainian causality numbers are logically absurd. Look at its conscription rate, tell me this age of conscripted male, female, teenager. Its population migration, of millions leaving due to war. Combined into a third of its nation, lost, or in heavy combat, while the rest withstands daily bombardment. What's that rate? Think of all that investment. The best it can do is hole up in Bakhmut? Tell me that tactic? Where it now is contained to what a couple km sq. Russia by the same structure hasn't even gone into full warmode.
Obviously there are Russian causalities. I'd imagine they are high, but nowhere near to Ukrainian above, simple probability. Let's suggest, there is an agenda of attrition. Does it particularly care. Because by the same tactics. It is dragging an opponent in and wearing down its reserves in order to claim victory.
What happens in any Counter Offensives, could decide how long any course lasts and what terms are bartered. Currently there is no immediate conclusion.
A very messy war. Russia has always been messy on that field, historically, losses. Ukraine look at that, probably worse.
No.
I think there are many reports hoping Russia loses. More are speculation and propaganda justifying funding.
Both sides Ukraine in particular are withstanding heavy causality rates.
The fact is Russia has gained integrating territory Ukraine has shed. How is Russia losing and losing what exactly? Troops, it's war. Less than Ukraine. Look at map.
Ukraine however are a bottomless pit relying on Russian loss.
There is no factual media until conclusion. One sided. State approved. Agenda. Both sides are using lies.
Factually what concludes this conflict?
There are other facts. This war is agenda driven. A battle of attrition seeking to draw drag and wear down the other side invested heavily. It isn't fought in the traditional methods. Risk of greater fallout, larger conflict. But it importantly plies agenda.
Traditionally Kiev would be dust. Baghdad effectively was, military and command structure. Instead of domination it captures territory. The rest of Ukraine hasn't been occupied, the border is active. It wilfully drags out because any objective isn't defined by the traditional sense. There is little air superiority. Anti aircraft, enemy flights still active while any military structures keep increasing numbers and resupplying.
It has wider objectives and they are a battle of attrition often in heavily urbanised environments and settings, as it captures territory, instead of wiping out command structures and military supply lines, and defenses. The country is also huge, the largest in Europe, excluding Russia. What was Ukraine troop count prior to this conflict? Millions? 2 million reserves? Not necessarily active. Until currently conscription is at what rate?
Independent perspective. This conflict stinks. It funds a proxy throwing its numbers into a grinder. As the other side captures territory. Until there is only wasteland. It has no logical conclusion until the other loses interest and claims defeat. It can last years. Look at that shithole Bakhmut.
Erratic claims. Completely paper thin. Biden and the many others funding need to justify the billions and billions being signed off on. They need to claim some kind of numbers to keep funding.
Truthfully there is no truth. It's very hard to independently gain information. Propaganda driven by agenda, by the other side losing, and it has wider geopolitical goals. But the other side restricted from providing any information. Until there is only morale boosts and propaganda driving strategy and agenda.
War against Russia, or war against a Nato proxy. Ukraine is in the middle.
Any Ukrainian causality numbers are logically absurd. Look at its conscription rate, tell me this age of conscripted male, female, teenager. Its population migration, of millions leaving due to war. Combined into a third of its nation, lost, or in heavy combat, while the rest withstands daily bombardment. What's that rate? Think of all that investment. The best it can do is hole up in Bakhmut? Tell me that tactic? Where it now is contained to what a couple km sq. Russia by the same structure hasn't even gone into full warmode.
Obviously there are Russian causalities. I'd imagine they are high, but nowhere near to Ukrainian above, simple probability. Let's suggest, there is an agenda of attrition. Does it particularly care. Because by the same tactics. It is dragging an opponent in and wearing down its reserves in order to claim victory.
What happens in any Counter Offensives, could decide how long any course lasts and what terms are bartered. Currently there is no immediate conclusion.
A very messy war. Russia has always been messy on that field, historically, losses. Ukraine look at that, probably worse.