4 ms·

None the less, at the heart of the matter it comes down to economics. Russia's GDP vs the colective West's says who's going to win this one - at least, assuming

by zh3 2y ago

None the less, at the heart of the matter it comes down to economics. Russia's GDP vs the colective West's says who's going to win this one - at least, assuming it goes to the long haul and nothing changes (which of course it will, unexpectedly, at some point). Also the Ukrainians are fighting for survival from the top of the country to the bottom (motivation makes a big difference). For the other side, the view at the top is very different from the view of those going into the fight (often unwillingly) at the bottom.

rainworld 2y ago
[flagged]
CapricornNoble 2y ago
Not all GDP's are created equal, though. The US/West has the capital to bury Russia....but isn't mobilizing it the same way it did in WW2. Which of course begs the question of "Why not?", the answer to which is: the US doesn't care as much about the fate of Ukraine as Russia cares about the fate of Ukraine. If we're not in it to win it, then why prolong the death and destruction? Unless the death and destruction was the point all along? >>>Also the Ukrainians are fighting for survival from the top of the country to the bottom (motivation makes a big difference). For the other side, the view at the top is very different from the view of those going into the fight (often unwillingly) at the bottom. Do you think the Ukrainians aren't suffering from serious motivation problems? Regular reports of men drowning in freezing rivers trying to cross into Romania. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men in hiding from the roving bands of "mobilizers". [1][2][3] The Russians, by contrast, are mostly there because they are from impoverished regions of Siberia and the enlistment bonuses are gigantic.[4] Russia is basically depopulating its ethnic minorities from Siberia to fuel its war machine. For a country that has its very survival on the line, Ukraine has a TON of men who aren't picking up rifles. [1] https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpower-shortage-with-young-men-dodging-the-draft/ https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpo... [2] https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/draft-dodgers-are-undermining-ukraines-plea-for-help/ https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/draft-dodgers-are-underm... [3] https://archive.is/IeGf3 https://archive.is/IeGf3 [4] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-doubles-signing-bonuses-volunteers-fight-ukraine-2024-07-31/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-doubles-signing-b...
- anovikov 2y ago
  Even if Ukraine is doomed to lose, we need to still continue supporting them, simply to win time to rearm, and also to kill enough Russians to make further aggression unlikely. In WWII, Soviet Union suffered 7.9M combat dead and dead/incapacitated ratio was way softer back then simply because healthcare was on the lower level - it was 80 years ago. Meaning, for each dead there are more incapacitated today simply because severely wounded people (with heavy concussions, explosive amputaions, multiple fractures and shrapnel, infections), mostly died in WWII and now they survive so don't add to the dead statistics - but are useless for warfare later. Soviet Union had 190M people in 1941 and Russia has 145M, plus in 1940, 6050K kids were born in the USSR and in Russia today, barely 1200K are born each year. So availability of manpower is about 75% of 1941 and rate of replacement is only 1/5 as high. In 1945, Soviet Union was a country of invalids and widows. It utterly lacked any mobilisation capacity - 1946 conscripts served for 5-7 years in peacetime army because there was no one to replace them (my grandfather was conscripted in 1947 and served till 1953 while there was no war going on). Easy to see that approximately 3, or max 4 million combat dead (1/2 to 2/3 the share of population) will bring Russia to the same position, considering lower replacement rate of manpower, and lower share of young population. What is the fraction of those that need to be killed for Putin to see it's going nowhere? My bet is with 1 million. Losing 1 million dead before Ukraine falls means he will not be able to do much else after it does, putting him in a bind. It will be enough for even the most mindless dictator to stop.
  - rainworld 2y ago
    [flagged]

by zh3 2y ago

rainworld 2y ago

[flagged]

CapricornNoble 2y ago

Not all GDP's are created equal, though. The US/West has the capital to bury Russia....but isn't mobilizing it the same way it did in WW2. Which of course begs the question of "Why not?", the answer to which is: the US doesn't care as much about the fate of Ukraine as Russia cares about the fate of Ukraine. If we're not in it to win it, then why prolong the death and destruction? Unless the death and destruction was the point all along? >>>Also the Ukrainians are fighting for survival from the top of the country to the bottom (motivation makes a big difference). For the other side, the view at the top is very different from the view of those going into the fight (often unwillingly) at the bottom. Do you think the Ukrainians aren't suffering from serious motivation problems? Regular reports of men drowning in freezing rivers trying to cross into Romania. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men in hiding from the roving bands of "mobilizers". [1][2][3] The Russians, by contrast, are mostly there because they are from impoverished regions of Siberia and the enlistment bonuses are gigantic.[4] Russia is basically depopulating its ethnic minorities from Siberia to fuel its war machine. For a country that has its very survival on the line, Ukraine has a TON of men who aren't picking up rifles. [1] https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpower-shortage-with-young-men-dodging-the-draft/ https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-faces-an-acute-manpo... [2] https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/draft-dodgers-are-undermining-ukraines-plea-for-help/ https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/draft-dodgers-are-underm... [3] https://archive.is/IeGf3 https://archive.is/IeGf3 [4] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-doubles-signing-bonuses-volunteers-fight-ukraine-2024-07-31/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-doubles-signing-b...

anovikov 2y ago
Even if Ukraine is doomed to lose, we need to still continue supporting them, simply to win time to rearm, and also to kill enough Russians to make further aggression unlikely. In WWII, Soviet Union suffered 7.9M combat dead and dead/incapacitated ratio was way softer back then simply because healthcare was on the lower level - it was 80 years ago. Meaning, for each dead there are more incapacitated today simply because severely wounded people (with heavy concussions, explosive amputaions, multiple fractures and shrapnel, infections), mostly died in WWII and now they survive so don't add to the dead statistics - but are useless for warfare later. Soviet Union had 190M people in 1941 and Russia has 145M, plus in 1940, 6050K kids were born in the USSR and in Russia today, barely 1200K are born each year. So availability of manpower is about 75% of 1941 and rate of replacement is only 1/5 as high. In 1945, Soviet Union was a country of invalids and widows. It utterly lacked any mobilisation capacity - 1946 conscripts served for 5-7 years in peacetime army because there was no one to replace them (my grandfather was conscripted in 1947 and served till 1953 while there was no war going on). Easy to see that approximately 3, or max 4 million combat dead (1/2 to 2/3 the share of population) will bring Russia to the same position, considering lower replacement rate of manpower, and lower share of young population. What is the fraction of those that need to be killed for Putin to see it's going nowhere? My bet is with 1 million. Losing 1 million dead before Ukraine falls means he will not be able to do much else after it does, putting him in a bind. It will be enough for even the most mindless dictator to stop.
- rainworld 2y ago
  [flagged]