> The West has been repeating the mantra of "the Russians are out of [insert Russian weapon here]" for two and a half years now, but objectively judging by what

> The West has been repeating the mantra of "the Russians are out of [insert Russian weapon here]" for two and a half years now, but objectively judging by what happens on the field (which is the main thing that counts during the phase of active war) that is demonstrably false. No, it's objectively true. Modern tanks like T-90 peaked a long time ago in visually confirmed losses. The share of all types of tanks has been diminishing in favor of ancient models like T-62 and even T-55, which Russia did not use at the start of the invasion. Stockpiles of modern tanks have run dry. Refurbishment nor new production can keep up with losses. The effect is seen on the battlefield too. Russian losses - for both tanks and people - are the highest that they've been in the war so far, and are among the highest for anyone in the world since the urban combat at Stalingrad in 1942-43. North Korean slaves have been brought in to plug the holes and keep Ukraine from intruding further into Russia. Is this how success is supposed to sound? Western observers see this as a phenomenal failure, and if they make mistakes in their forecasts, then mainly because they can't believe Russia would keep on burning through Soviet stockpiles at such a high rate and throwing away people in such a wasteful way, more than thousand a day, month after month, with nothing to show for it.