... I repeat--Russian MoD gives numbers of VSU losses based on objective control. That is physically identifying bodies of VSU KIAs and wounded primarily at the line of combat contact. Russian MoD does not give estimates of KIAs and wounded in the tactical, let alone operational rear of VSU because it cannot reliably count them. E.g. couple of days ago VKS dropped two 1,500 kg KABs on top of Kraken Nazi battalion. The only thing which was known is that there have been 300 of them--nobody survives two KABs, so MoD stated with a degree of reliability that UP TO 300 of Nazis have been wiped out. But, as I repeat ad nauseam--the real number of VSU KIAs is much-much higher than total number of losses Russian MoD estimated at 444,000.
And here is the professional who says the same, and he is from NATO.
And here is the part which matters:
“They are missing over 10 million people. I estimate that
the losses should be counted in the millions, not hundreds of thousands.
There are no resources in this country, there is no one to fight.”
The point I make non-stop. Considering forces involved, fire density, stand off weaponry, duration and length of front it is clear that KIAs alone are above one million. How much above--I don't know, but the same way that "Stalin" couldn't have killed or imprisoned "tens of millions" people in the USSR, because it defies basic statistical methods and math and empirical evidence of 150 million living Russians, the same is true for the numbers by Russian MoD which are issued strictly on confirmed data with any, even highly justified, assessments removed due to insufficient probability. Numbers will change and will grow dramatically, the more Russian Army moves to the West.
Meanwhile RUSI's US Army's Lt.Colonel Vershinin has a DUH! moment--LOL))
"In attritional wars, military operations are shaped
by a state's ability to replace losses and generate new formations, not
tactical and operational manoeuvres," retired US Army lieutenant colonel
Alex Vershinin explained in a Royal United Services Institute
commentary, "The Attritional Art of War: Lessons from the Russian War on
Ukraine," published Monday. Unlike maneuver warfare, which is aimed at
quickly and violently defeating an enemy, the attritional fight takes
time, maybe years. "The side that accepts the
attritional nature of war and focuses on destroying enemy forces rather
than gaining terrain is most likely to win. The West is not prepared for
this kind of war," he said. Vershinin noted that Western militaries have long seen attritional
conflicts as exceptions to be avoided at all costs in favor of the
shorter, maneuver-focused clashes. Rather than a "decisive battle"
through maneuver warfare, "attritional warfare focuses on destroying
enemy forces and their ability to regenerate combat power, while
preserving one's own," he wrote, noting that a successful attritional
strategy "accepts that the war will last at least two years."
I have news for Vershinin, in conventional war with Russia there will be NO NATO maneuvers--there will be wiping out of C2 in operational and strategic rear and after that, after mighty F-35s will be shot down, any large enough formations will be detected and then annihilated by stand off weapons. Thus for the US Army alone 3,600 casualties a day--well, good luck sustaining this for more than two weeks. I repeat: Gulf War was anomaly sold to unsophisticated public through media as some kind of future warfare which it was not. One cannot learn real war from that turkey shoot. And they didn't.
P.S. An immensely important statement by Putin today:
Putin: Russia remembers crimes of Vlasovites and will not forgive new traitors.
Somewhere Solzhenitsyn choked in hell.
No comments:
Post a Comment