The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[rsemmes]

So far the progress per day is between 15-70 meters. Thats slower than progress in the battle at the Somme in WW I and the slowest any military has progressed in a century.

Russia advance slower than battle of the Somme

Petropavlivka is a village with roughly 6000 people before that war. Russia started the offensive to take that village in november. It took 3 months to achieve that.

That extreme slow progress comes at the cost of very high losses both in soldiers and equipment.

That conflict is unique in that regard in history.

This is like a child repeating what his father told him.

That 15-70m per day is meaningless, just statistics. One day you advance 1.000m, next day you don't attack: You advance 500m per day.

I didn't take 3 months, after 3 months is in Russian hands; and maybe in two days is not. When was the first attack against that village, how many after that? How often have those attacks been carried out? Petropavlivka is not an objective in itself, we don't know if the goal is the river line or Kupiansk, but the enemy is there and it is always useful to destroy the enemy; if that village is abandoned or taken is irrelevant.

Do you mean Ukrainian losses? Do you have any Ukrainian list of casualties, any Ukrainian after action report? Another good point would be if Russia wants a faster progress there. Russia may want to keep Ukraine fighting that side of the river. Do you have any Russian orders for that area of operations?

Every conflict is unique. What do you even mean by that? Are you trying to print some headlines?
When you are repeating that article what is you conclusion? Are you comparing the first day or the whole Somme campaign? Petropavlivka or the Russian invasion? The Robotine offensive, maybe? Are you counting days or days when an actual attack took place? I am sure that you are familiar with the "operational pause" concept.

I have to disagree with you providing "something of substance". That article was Published January 27, 2026

Russia’s Grinding War in Ukraine

Despite claims of success in Ukraine, new CSIS data shows that Russia is paying an extraordinary price for minimal gains, with over 1.2 million casualties. Russia is also in decline as a major economic power with slow growth, weak productivity, and declining manufacturing.

www.csis.org

.
and often repeated since then; even if not here.

Edit.
I was wondering if the Iran-Iraq War is the right comparison. A peer to peer long conflict with a very long front line and a sea/air added dimension; and the international support and implications too.

 

[Feanor]

Please explain how more death than birth have no consequences? A country like Russia can not sustain such losses for a prolonged time.

View attachment 54251

The war basicly erases roughly 2 years of male births so far. Ukraine is a buffer state for european security and as cold as it sounds, Ukraine sacrifice helps to buff Security for Europe. They kill their fighting age males in larger numbers than new ones are born.

The cynical reality is, the longer this drags out, the better for Europe. Killed russian soldiers cant be used in future wars against us. Wounded and crippled russian soldiers also cant be used and additional drain their resources.

From a pure machiavellian pov the current situation needs to drag as long as possible to allow Europe massive upscale in defense without have to worry too much about Russia.

Ukraine in that sense works as an ablative heatshield...

You've just moved the goalposts. Your initial argument was that Russia is running out of men. Those born today aren't going to be fighting in this war. Also, you'll note that the article posted above quotes 325k for Russian war dead. I think this is a realistic estimate, though on the high side, 250k seems to be a more mid-point estimate. Russia had ~1.2 mln birth in 2024. If half are male, then this war wiped out ~6 months of Russian male births. How you arrived at the figure of 2 years is unclear to me. Nor does this have much to do with the outcome of the war. Last but not least, Russia has annexed territory with millions of people living in it. In other words this war is a net population gain for Russia. And this does matter to the continuation of the war. LNR and DNR forces integrated into the Russian military have fought, and fought well against Ukraine. Military units out of Crimea have also fought and fought well (often better then Russian units from the mainland). In other words LDNR territories and population as well as Crimea contribute meaningfully to the Russian war effort.

The demographic issues of this war have to do not with the war dead, but with mass migration, people fleeing the fighting. This is the main demographic crisis that Ukraine faces. It's compounded by the poor state of Ukraine's healthcare system, badly strained by the war, leading to increased mortality even outside of combat. Just look into the difficulty of getting relatively routine medical care for Ukrainian civilians. Russia could face something similar, in terms of an outflow of population, albeit on a smaller scale if they tried to do another mobilization wave. Lastly in 2024 we had somewhere between 150k (UA sources) and 300k (RU sources) Ukrainians move to Russian-held areas of the country. I use the term "Ukrainian" to refer to Ukrainian citizens, it's quite likely there were many (maybe mostly?) ethnic Russians among them. Half-way through 2024 Russia imposed entry restrictions on Ukrainian citizens coming into Russia, requiring them to enter through a special checkpoint in Sheremetyevo airport. This may have slowed the flow, but it didn't stop it, and so far we haven't seen numbers for 2025, but I suspect six-figures for the year. In other words it's entirely possible just migration from Ukraine to Russian-held Ukraine outpaces the actual war dead for Russia.

Earlier you posted a single photo of an old looking Russian soldier but no actual data to back it up despite iirc the actual data being posted earlier in this thread. I'll post it here again (1st link), and some materials on the age of Ukrainian service members. If age of service members is an indication of running out of manpower (and it's not clear that it is, Russia does voluntary recruitment while Ukraine exempts under 25s from the mobilization), then it's not Russia that's running out. Also Russia just expanded the list of chronic illnesses that make one ineligible for military service. In other words, Russia is comfortable enough with their recruitment to tighten standards, not loosen them. The side running out of men in the armed forces is Ukraine, but not because of high battlefield losses, rather because of mass desertions, and draft dodging.

The Myth of Endless Manpower: Russian Soldiers’ Average Age Approaches 38 as Trends Persist

A Special Investigation by Frontelligence Insight on Manpower Issues

frontelligence.substack.com

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers fighting Russia is 43-45, while the youngest troops remain exempt from front-line combat | Fortune

The exemption for men aged between 18 and 25 from front-line combat is motivated by a belief that they will be key to rebuilding Ukraine in the future, said lawmaker Serhiy Rakhmanin.

fortune.com

Old men belong here. How Ukrainian Armed Forces have become 40+ age army and whether lowering mobilisation age will affect combat capability

Ukrainska Pravda explains why the Armed Forces of Ukraine have become an army of fighters aged 40+, how this affects their combat capability, and whether the law lowering the mobilisation age to 25, will change the situation.

www.pravda.com.ua

Минобороны расширило список болезней, запрещающих подписание контракта

Подробнее на сайте

www.kommersant.ru