A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Yes, that's what happens when you have forced conscription.
Large doesn't mean effective.
Just an FYI, both sides including conscripted soldiers. Russia is 18 - 30, Ukraine is now 25 - 60.
Okay? Ukraine also has a fraction of Russia's population. Why would that give it a larger army?
Your argument before made it seem as though conscription was one sided. I'm not arguing with a stranger on the Internet... that'd be silly
Forced conscription makes a large military in a country with a huge population much larger. Ukraine isn't even relevant to the equation.
My armchair General theory is that conscription works better for defensive armies than offensive. Taking a random 18 year old and forcing them to go fight in a different country only leads to questions of why they are there. Convincing that same 18 year old that they should sign up to go fight in a different country out of misplaced patriotism works a lot better. Ironically, that means giving people the choice tends to support imperialism more than forcing the issue.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Exactly what the headline is missing. Russia has a larger army and is still ineffective.
This isn't at all surprising, in fact a lot of people were trying to point out at the outset that the longer the war dragged on, the larger and more sustained Russia's military would grow.
Ukraine simply doesn't have the population to keep up indefinitely.
Also have to consider loss of experience, equipment and morale/exhaustion, along with economic costs on the civilian population.
May be larger, but are they professional forces that are well trained and equipped (for russia) or warm bodies and second tier equipment? What about the losses of experienced non-coms and officers?
At what point does a military cease being fatigued and start being 'battle hardened'?
I think the most the West expected was to drain Russia of their military capabilities, but they've overshot that goal and now Russia has doubled-down on their military production. Absent NATO getting more directly involved, I don't see how this trend is good news for Ukraine.
When improved performance exceeded losses due to fatigue. Also have to consider if support structures are delivering what the front line needs.
I would argue Russia military capabilities are being drained in every way except manpower.
That's how they always do it though and it didn't stop them in the past (to be fair, from invasion though which is a lot different)
Define army. Do kids without training or equipment count?
To Putin? Absolutely.
This has been their MO since before the soviets. When they failed the lightning raid on Kyiv, they went back to their old tactics- relying on attrition and simply assuming tbhat any losses can be replaced - which is far from true if Ukraine.
The IDF seems to think so.
Judging by their actions the IDF's definition of enemy combatant seems to extend all the way down to fetuses still in their mother's womb, so their actions are not really a reasonable metric for comparison with normal soldiers in a normal war.
Wars driven mainly by massive racism and with a background of in the aggressor country for over half a century the target etnicity having been relentlessly protrayed as less than human ("human animals" as Israeli members of government openly said) are conducted outside any and all rationality, much less humanity, whilst wars driven mainly by greed still have some rationality, if only because even any last minute attempts in such wars by the leaders of the aggressor nation to turn their soldiers into monsters towards The Enemy to try and win, are nowhere as effective at creating monsters as conscripting as soldiers young adults who have grown up in an environment swamped with extremelly racist views of the etnicity of The Enemy.
For all the evil the Russians have done in Ukraine, their actions seem to be mainly driven by greed and a general disregard for human life, whilst Israeli soldiers' actions seem to be mainly driven by extreme racist hate.
The US needs to get a lethal aid package passed. It has been stalled in the House for half a year. We aren't pulling our own weight. Luckily, Europe is pulling much of our slack. Poland and the Baltic states in particular have really stepped up to the plate.
It has been stalled
More like that it's been purposely blocked back by the Republicans.
Are they so selfish that this is self serving and too stupid to realise they are playing into Russia's arms or do they do this willingly and only pretend to not realise.
Either one is horrible and regrettable but I am genuinely curious if they are opportunist idiots or trecherous idiots.
Neither, they are actively working towards Russia's goal just like they were paid to do, and they don't seem to be pretending at all.
I'm not even sure these GOP reps are getting a dime from Russia.
More likely: they're not getting anything from Russia, but their god-emperor Donny sure is, and he's also got a vendetta against Ukraine after the whole Biden investigation debacle, so he's using his inexplicable political clout within the party to pressure them into doing his bidding, with the penalty for falling to do so being that he says bad things about them, costing them an election.
It's almost certainly a combination of the two.
What happened to those weapons for israel that were blocked by Republicans? Somehow those managed to end up in israel.
"Based on my experience in 37-plus years in the U.S. military, if one side can shoot and the other side can't shoot back, the side that can't shoot back loses," he continued.
This guy generals.
This is good news, as it will accelerate russia’s demographic collapse.
Frankly I dislike this comment. We all agree that Putin and the kleptochratic Russian regime needs to go away, but can we please not cheer on hundreds of thousands of young men going to be killed?
Not only are they human beings too (and given Russian conscription methods quite literally stuck between a rock and a hard place), but also mean Ukranian soldiers being further traumatised, both physically and mentally.
No u
Obviously more US aid is crucial, and it's recent absence is clearly having negative consequences in Ukraine.
If there is a silver lining, it's that all of Europe is finally getting it's military shit sorted out.
Russia is settling into it's war economy and the rest of Europe has decades of dust to shake off it's military capabilities.
Obviously NATO and individual European counties aren't fully engaged in war like Ukraine is, but the resources consumed by war is proving just how under prepared Europe is for a long campaign.
Putin will need to keep his new big military busy or they might turn on him, and he knows it.
Yes if you include all the mercanarys and the new recruits and those civilians being drafted also the region in Ukraine is known for guerilla warfare so a long term un welcome occupation won't last long
Well, Putin did increase his army by 1.....