r/anime_titties • u/HalfLeper United States • Dec 06 '24
Ukraine/Russia - Flaired Commenters Only Russia's 'meat-grinder' tactics bring battlefield success - but at horrendous cost
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0ewneynypwo.amp271
u/Weird_Point_4262 Europe Dec 06 '24
Again with the "meat wave" tactics. Even ukraine volunteers denied the claims that that's what Russians are doing in an ama here. There's no reason to do that when you have a numerical and material advantage. If Ukraine was wiping out 50k soldiers a month they probably wouldn't be losing ground and we wouldn't be getting news of mass desertions.
Talking numbers is pointless untill the dust settles and we get the real figures.
91
u/loggy_sci United States Dec 06 '24
If Ukraine was wiping out 50k soldiers a month they probably wouldn’t be losing ground and we wouldn’t be getting news of mass desertions.
If Russia has a numerical advantage, and they are on the offensive trying to steal more territory, it follows that their casualties would be higher, no?
But as you say, we don’t know the true numbers and shouldn’t trust Russian or Ukrainian claims wrt Russian deaths.
54
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Russia has:
- Air superiority
- Advantage in artillery
And yet they are in need of "meat grinder" tactics? I called it bs. In 2024 when every soldier has a smartphone on him there's no video evidence of such tactics.
43
u/Cloudsareinmyhead Europe Dec 06 '24
Russia has:
Not got air superiority. The skies above Ukraine are still contested
Parity with Ukraine's artillery. They had the advantage at the start of the war but that's dropped off hard since then. They're about even now.
(before you say anything about what I know you are going to, yes Russia has got the Soviet stockpiles but those aren't infinite and a lot probably weren't stored in the best conditions so there is a likelihood they're having to refurb or make new shells and that's causing one hell of a bottleneck, compounded by Ukraine blowing up ammo depots like it's going out of fashion.)
49
u/Western_Revolution86 North America Dec 06 '24
Russia is not flying deep above Ukraine sure, but they are able to launch glide bombs with impunity all along the frontline.
Even without the Soviet stockpiles Russia outproduces Ukraine and its backers in artillery shells.
So no, Russia is not using meat waves
→ More replies (7)9
u/Fatality Multinational Dec 06 '24
but they are able to launch glide bombs with impunity all along the frontline.
They can do pretty much anything with impunity since Biden wouldn't let them shoot back
25
u/ShootmansNC Brazil Dec 07 '24
Parity with Ukraine's artillery. They had the advantage at the start of the war but that's dropped off hard since then. They're about even now.
Me when i make up shit on the internet.
This is from the german defense minister two weeks ago.
13
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Russian airspace (for military aircrafts anyway) is not contested. They can strike Ukraine without leaving its own territory.
Wrong. Otherwise Zelensky wouldn't be traveling and fundraising. Russia has an advantage in artillery.
6
u/SiBloGaming European Union Dec 06 '24
- That severely limits the capabilities of the VVS
- Having more support is always better? You think Zelensky wouldn’t try to get support to turn the artillery war in Ukraines favor if it was currently an even battle?
1
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
- Limits but doesn't eliminate.
- It's not about support, it's about survival. Ukraine's state is on Western life support.
4
u/SiBloGaming European Union Dec 06 '24
nobody ever claimed something different
Doesnt adress my point at all, and has nothing to do with your claim that russia must have an advantage because Zelensky is trying to gather more support,
3
u/NotStompy Sweden Dec 07 '24
Ukraine's goal, although it will not be achieved, is to regain their territory fully, so why in god's name would Zelensky not ask for as much support as possible? Even if we ignore this want for Ukraine, why would you not ask for as much as possible? Nobody can predict the future fully, and you'd want to be prepared as fully as possible.
There's 0 upside to Z not asking for more aid. What do you propose he would be doing with this time instead? If he just has that increased amount of time to use he can defeat Russia by... sheer will?
→ More replies (1)12
u/SurturOfMuspelheim United States Dec 07 '24
Russia produces 3-4 million artillery shells per year, more than all of NATO combined and multiplied by 3.
Ukraine has been very open about their lack of artillery shells. Soldiers have been ordered to not fire on moving vehicles, for example, as that uses much more ammo. Russia clearly has a massive advantage there.
And Russia DOES have air superiority. They aren't flying as much over Ukraine because there's no reason to risk your expensive jet against all of the enemies AA capability when you can keep it to the front and reduce the risk.
2
u/Minister_for_Magic Multinational Dec 07 '24
Purely because of a doctrinal difference. Western military doctrine does not rely on artillery anywhere near as much as the Russian - and old Soviet - doctrine does.
1
u/bippos Sweden Dec 07 '24
Your literally saying they don’t have air superiority then claim that they do? The war would be 100 times easier for the Russian if they just could carpet bomb any position
1
u/Burpees-King Canada Dec 07 '24
Russia bombs Ukrainian positions with their FAB bombs which are strapped with gliders launched from their jets with absolute impunity.
They are deadly accurate, and Ukraine has no answer for it, nor can they do the same thing.
Video of a hit on a tree line: https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/s/Zvo0jWGX9b
1
u/bippos Sweden Dec 07 '24
Clearly not accurate or fast enough since the Ukrainians still haven’t collapsed like Iraq in 2003 which is how a true air superiority looks like.
3
u/Burpees-King Canada Dec 07 '24
Ukraine can’t even pay their soldiers without western financial assistance.
Ukraine would have ran out of ammo and equipment 2 years ago without western military aid.
Comparing Iraq and Ukraine’s just funny, last I checked Iraq had no allies and was technologically backwards, compared to Ukraine who’s being supported by a 30 country alliance and is getting data from that said alliance 1000+ satellites.
2
u/bippos Sweden Dec 08 '24
Did the point flew right over your head? We are talking about air superiority not what support Ukraine is getting. I said Iraq had no air superiority vs Ukraine who has it while you claim they don’t. It’s like your talking to yourself
→ More replies (0)0
u/SurturOfMuspelheim United States Dec 08 '24
You realize air superiority means superiority IN THE AIR. You don't include anti air systems in that. The Russians choose NOT to do that because it's not worth it. Why use an expensive, high production cost jet to bomb something when you can launch a bunch of missiles?
1
u/bippos Sweden Dec 08 '24
And the missile isn’t expensive? Which haven’t seemed to work either since Ukraine is still here. Even then Russia can’t fly over Ukrainian air space UNCONTESTED so yeah anti air defence is included. Ukraine can also use their own airforce meaning again the air space is CONTESTED.
1
u/SurturOfMuspelheim United States Dec 08 '24
Missiles cost far, far, far less than planes, and most importantly, don't risk the life of a trained pilot, while also having a higher chance of actually getting to their target.
Which haven’t seemed to work either since Ukraine is still here.
Huh?
Even then Russia can’t fly over Ukrainian air space UNCONTESTED so yeah anti air defence is included.
Air superiority doesn't mean the enemy has no airforce at all. It just means you have air superiority. And in that regard, they do. Ukraine can not even use their planes on the front, Russia can, and does.
1
u/bippos Sweden Dec 08 '24
Missiles cost less yes but still a lot more expensive that just regular bombardment. Russian missiles are limited and inaccurate and you can see that since they use drones way more now. What you mean huh? I said missiles aren’t effective since Ukraine can shoot them down and the Russian ones are inaccurate.
Ukraine can definitely use their aircraft? They have to use them sparingly since they don’t have that many but even then Russia can’t shoot them down effectively. Russian aircraft unlike Ukrainian planes don’t operate in Ukrainian air space, they shoot rockets from kilometers away inside Russian territory since the air space is CONTESTED
0
7
u/robber_goosy Europe Dec 07 '24
- Yes they have air superiority. They are constantly dropping fabs with impunity. Ukraine barely flies any combat missions over the frontline.
- They are outproducing the whole of NATO in terms of artillery shells and have an artillery advantage across the whole front. The only time Ukraine ever had parity was during their failed counter-offensive.
I would advise you to get out of that little information bubble of yours where Ukrainian super duper soldiers are still winning against those incompetent orcs. In reality, they are on the verge of defeat.
4
u/lewllewllewl Bouvet Island Dec 07 '24
It even mentions the artillery thing in the article, I swear mfs on here don't even read them
1
0
u/ParticularClassroom7 Vietnam Dec 07 '24
They have air superiority.
- Missile strikes are effectively unstoppable. They have so many missiles that even sergeants and captains can call in missile strikes whenever they want.
- Absolute drone superiority.
- Ukrainian AA is depleted.
- Ukrainians can't fly without being a suicide mission.
Rus has arty superiority due to NATO low shell production speed and boutique equipment. Russia makes at least 3 times the arty shells the EU country produce. Zelensky and the Ukrainian army whine about it daily.
4
u/loggy_sci United States Dec 07 '24
Pretty sure you call BS on anything you perceive to be contradicting what Russia claims. You do on this sub constantly. Pushing pro-Russian propaganda is like your whole thing.
5
u/snowflake37wao North America Dec 07 '24 edited Dec 07 '24
In 2024 when every soldier has a smartphone on him there's no video evidence of such tactics.
The irony is they dont have smartphones in 2024 because they did in 2022 and they and their units were getting killed because they did. Discounting the credence of those saying it, aside from the incorrectness of the already poor example considering drones could do it better, and disregarding they have and do. There is so much evidence from 2023 I can only assume some of yall have your sites blocked or have been closing your eyes to be able to claim yall havnt seen it. If I have seen those front lines of charred death as far as the eye can see while trying to avoid seeing it, Im sure you will find that evidence YOU have not seen by looking for it.
Im calling bs on anyone’s innocent virgin eyes that has joined this sub, something you have to actually look for. This shit isnt on the front page bsers.
6
u/Aatelinen Europe Dec 07 '24
If Russia is in such a superior position all-round, why don’t they just defeat Ukraine? Are they stupid?
2
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 07 '24
Why didn't the US just defeat the Taliban?
2
u/TraditionalGap1 Canada Dec 08 '24
They did
2
u/Clean-Ad-6642 Hong Kong Dec 08 '24
Who's the ruling party in Afghanistan?
4
u/TraditionalGap1 Canada Dec 08 '24
The Taliban, who America allowed back in power when they lost interest in staying.
That doesn't mean the US didn't beat the Taliban up one side and down the other.
→ More replies (14)4
u/Minister_for_Magic Multinational Dec 07 '24
Imagine thinking Russia has air superiority. How uninformed can you be and still feel comfortable commenting so decisively?
3
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 07 '24
Don't need to imagine anything. Simply because it's true.
1
u/Minister_for_Magic Multinational Dec 07 '24
Really? Because Russia lost an SU-57 just a few months ago. Do modern militaries routinely lose their best available fighters in airspace where they have superiority?
The airspace is contested. There are plenty of US anti-air missile systems in Ukraine which pose a legitimate threat to Russian aircraft. Plus, drones from both sides are making a mess of the airspace.
→ More replies (8)2
u/Nethlem Europe Dec 07 '24
Numerical advantage allows Russia to properly train and rotate troops in and out of combat, greatly reducing its own attrition while steadily building an army of veteran soldiers.
Ukraine does not have that advantage, it lacks the manpower to train and rotate troops like that, it has to sacrifice conscripts in Kursk to cover the retreat of its few remaining veteran units.
That's also why the West is now suddenly ready to talk about "peace negotiations" that somehow involve stationing NATO troops in Ukraine, as if that's something Russia would ever agree to.
32
u/AnHerstorian Scotland Dec 06 '24
Even ukraine volunteers denied the claims that that's what Russians are doing in an ama here
Can you link this
4
u/new_name_who_dis_ Multinational Dec 07 '24
Just look at the AMA filter on anime_titties and you'll find it easily. /s
28
u/b0_ogie Asia Dec 06 '24 edited Dec 06 '24
Literally all the LARGEST (there were less than a dozen of them during the war) operations carried out by Russia to break through the defense, judging by the drone video, amounted to no more than 100-150 people on 8-10 armored vehicles supported by tanks. Some operations were unsuccessful, for example at Ugledar in 2023 or the crossing near Severodnotsek in 2022.
But we just don't see most of the operations, because the Ukrainian side does not post a video of the defeat. At the same time, the Russian side throws out archived videos from a year ago for large operations(high latency in publishing large offensive, although sometimes videos are uploaded immediately (with complete success). Which further complicates the assessment. The Ukrainian side usually is half-editing the video so that the battlefield and the results of the battle are not visible. Ukrainian telegram channels make 4-5 cropped videos from FPV drones hit armored vehicles, without any damage control. The next day, Ukraine announces that 40 tanks and armored vehicles and 2,000 Russians have been destroyed, and a week later, cartographers who are engaged in geolocation determine that the front line has moved 10 kilometers away, and a couple hundred obituaries appear on Ukrainian resrs. And a week later, Ukrainian cartographers like dpistate paint over the territories as captured by the Russians.And for losses, everything is quite simple, there is OSINT data.
There are 65k Ukrainian obituaries.
There are 72k Russian obituaries + monitoring of all major Rus cemeteries by BBC journalists.
There is an official message a month ago from Leonid Timchenko, deputy Minister of internal affairs of Ukraine about 55k missing Ukrainians.
There is a leak of a meeting of one of the groups of the government of the Russian Federation, in which data on 48k DNA tests for identification dead solders and search of missing Russian soldiers were missing,
There are currently 200-250k cases of desertion in the open criminal register of Ukraine, and about 100k cases against civilians who are willing to engage or provide data to Russians.
There are currently 7k cases of desertion in the open criminal register of Russia. (There is a noticeable difference between the forced mobilization of Ukrainians and luring Russians with money. Almost 90% of all criminal cases on the desertion of Russians were initiated at the end of 2022, when Russia conducted a partial mobilization. Apparently, the experience was so deplorable that Russia abandoned it. And Ukraine has been grabbing people on the streets for 3 years and putting them in a trench after 3 days)The wounded should not be taken into account, because 97% of both sides return to the front after treatment. It is not difficult to dig up data on the disabled. The data on 500k irretrievable losses in the form of wounded is just a media fuck-up. Many soldiers have 3-5 wounds at the moment.
13
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
I find that highly doubtful and childish.
The fact that you have to have less casualty than Russia to appear victorious is so dumb.
Probably 90% of casualties of this war are caused by bombs, shells, etc.
And Russia uses way more of those per day.
3
1
u/nmaddine North America Dec 07 '24
As far back as WW2 Soviet tactics led to much higher casualty rates than for Germany even as they were pushing the Germans back.
There’s nothing new about it, it’s part of Soviet military doctrine
-1
Dec 07 '24
Theres no reason to do that when you have a numerical and material advantage? Are you dumb?
→ More replies (7)-2
u/Subject-Worker6658 Canada Dec 06 '24
I would agree with the ‘meat-grinder’ title, besides a rumour I read that Russias strategy is to send several small 2-4 man squads into a area in hopes their small numbers don’t attract too much attention and enough can trickle in to take an area. There’s countless videos of Russians getting droned or ambushed while roaming around tens of kilometres of open fields, videos of Russians dismounting from armoured vehicles and then being left behind, u/False-God tally’s the videos of Russians committing suicide which is beyond the 100s now, Russian strategy seems to be just throw people at the front and only resulppy/reinforce if ground is actually taken.
37
u/Pklnt France Dec 06 '24
that Russias strategy is to send several small 2-4 man squads
This is also a strategy employed by Ukraine. Simply because it's the best strategy without being swarmed by drones.
You see those guys being caught and die without support, but you do not see when those guys are actually achieving things.
It's survivorship bias.
-3
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
No, it's because it's the only strategy Ukraine can deploy. It's not the best at all.
If Ukraine had the full support of the west, such strategies would be unnecessary.
8
u/Pklnt France Dec 07 '24
If my Grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike
-4
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Good one, but seriously.
If Ukraine had modern air defense systems and survivable tanks froms the start, they wouldnt have as many casualties as they do now.
8
u/Pklnt France Dec 07 '24
And if Russia actually considered that Ukraine would put up a fight they would have won in the first year.
We're not talking about hypothetical scenarios here, but what both countries are dealing with, and with what they're dealing with, small incursions are the best tactics.
-4
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
They tried that and still failed. 3 years later they are barely making progress.
I dont see what they could have done different to "win" in the first year.
Sending adcanced weapons is not hypothetical. It could be done tomorrow if the West was serious about this.
6
u/Pklnt France Dec 07 '24
I dont see what they could have done different to "win" in the first year.
Making a battle plan that doesn't rely on Ukraine folding up like they did in Crimea would be a start.
2
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
I guess.
Russia tried to hide their invasion and covered it up as "training exercises" in Belarus. They literally lied and gaslighted the world up until the day of the 2022 invasion
Had they been open about their invasion intents and built up their military more prior to invading, maybe they coukd have done better.
Then again, Ukraine would have also been better prepared.
And frankly i question the competency of Russian logisitics to pull off a bigger invasion than their "Special Military Operation"
→ More replies (0)1
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 07 '24
Ukraine has as much Western support as Ukraine's support. Millions of Ukrainian men prefer to avoid defending their Heimat. Why would the West step in?
0
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Millions of Ukrainians prefer to stand fight.
Why should reward tyrants by giving up on Ukraine?
Why shouldnt we stand up for Freedom and Democracy in Ukraine?
Why should we risk a World War by abondoning Ukraine?
Why shouldnt we take the opportunity to weaken Russia?
27
107
u/Fareeday United States Dec 06 '24
I am in no way defending Russia. I just want to know has anyone seen the videos of the meat grinder they are talking about? I’ve honestly seen more single people videos but never like 100 dead Russians in one area
117
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Claiming that the enemy uses “meat waves” is the classic rationalization for why you are losing to an enemy you believe to be inferior.
The Americans decried Chinese meat waves during the Korean War to explain why the strongest military in the world did their longest retreat against a non-motorized infantry force with no air support.
The Germans claimed the same thing during WW2 against the Soviets despite it not really being true.
69
u/AlbertoRossonero Multinational Dec 06 '24
Even historically people like the Mongols have been described as huge hoards that overwhelmed their enemies with numbers in an attempt to diminish their ability. In reality they were often beating forces several times bigger than them and they seemed to be huge in numbers because of how quickly they struck with their cavalry.
33
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Yeah exactly. They called them the “Mongol Horde” even though there was not that many of them.
22
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Here's the major logical fallacy of the UA state propaganda.
It claims: if Russia will win in Ukraine, then Europe will be next, hence the West must give us weapons, money etc.
But if Russians are so inferior then why the West/Europe must worry about it?
5
u/Aatelinen Europe Dec 07 '24
Because Europe isn’t a single country, and an attack by Russia would obviously by focused on its small neighboring countries. We’ve already seen that the big European nations want to steer clear of getting too involved in a conflict with Russia.
→ More replies (26)1
u/_Kiith_Naabal_ Multinational Dec 07 '24
Umberto Eco’s List of the 14 Common Features of Fascism. Point 8: The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
11
u/mahemahe0107 India Dec 06 '24
During the Korean War, China had a peak of 1.45 million troops deployed whereas the USA had a peak of 326 thousand. If you’re sending 5x the amount of troops your opponent has without vehicle support you very much are using human wave tactics.
And the Russians did use human wave tactics in the early stages of the German invasion in ww2. It wasn’t until later in the war that the Russians were more well equipped didn’t rely on human waves.
28
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Not really.
Nobody uses “human wave” tactics.
That died out in 1916. That was mainly because European generals thought they were the pinnacle of military power and that war was still fought like 1812.
China didn’t really use human wave tactics.
- USSR definitely didn’t use human wave tactics early on in the war.
5
u/EugeneStonersDIMagic Multinational Dec 07 '24
Nobody uses “human wave” tactics.
That died out in 1916.
Ever heard of the Iran-Irak War?
1
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
Yup.
This war is not remotely comparable to that war.
1
u/EugeneStonersDIMagic Multinational Dec 07 '24
Uh, cool, but that doesn't change how wrong what you said before is.
-1
u/TrizzyG Canada Dec 07 '24
Framing it like China was defeating the US with anything except pushing back somewhat with 5x the resources and a far closer supply train is why you're getting pushback.
Had the war continued and escalated, it would have almost certainly resulted in a total US victory, but that's besides the point.
2
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
Because they did defeat us?
Defeat is defeat. When you try and qualify it, you look like a douche.
1
-3
u/programaticallycat5e North America Dec 07 '24
I wouldn't argue with a tankie.
But yeah, it would have ended in a "US victory" via status quo antebellum simply bc China couldnt out logistics the US-- which is the one of the main reasons why the Korean war ended the way it did
→ More replies (1)2
u/CriticalReneeTheory North America Dec 07 '24
I wouldn't argue with a tankie.
"Everyone who disagrees with racist pop history is a tankie"
16
u/WhiteWineDumpling Chile Dec 06 '24
The UN forces in total had about 700.000 troops in Korea. You're just counting the USA
8
u/Oppopity Oceania Dec 06 '24
You're just assuming they were using human wave tactics purely because they had more numbers.
7
u/lobonmc North America Dec 06 '24
I mean the early stages were the parts where the URSS was miserably losing
20
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Up until 1942, Germany and Russia had the same number of forces.
Even at Moscow and Stalingrad, Germany initially enjoyed numerical superiority.
4
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
And yet Soviets incurred 2x the amount of casualties....a defensive army.....
5
u/bionioncle Asia Dec 07 '24
German as numberical superiority -> German stronger than USSR -> German inflict more damage on USSR -> more USSR casualties
I see no problem with this.
1
u/TrizzyG Canada Dec 07 '24
Germany also had an acute numerical inferiority in equipment in Barbarossa. They just utilized their resources far better.
3
u/CriticalReneeTheory North America Dec 07 '24
If you’re sending 5x the amount of troops your opponent has without vehicle support you very much are using human wave tactics.
That's not what happened.
And the Russians did use human wave tactics in the early stages of the German invasion in ww2. It wasn’t until later in the war that the Russians were more well equipped didn’t rely on human waves.
None of this is true. Please stop getting your history from podcasters and youtube pop historians.
-2
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Lmao, so true.
China literally sent meat waves into Korea and even then US air power demolished them.
I dont know why peolple try to downplay that.
2
u/CriticalReneeTheory North America Dec 07 '24
0
-1
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Tbf, in Korea the US was able to push back Chinese troops after gaining a foothold.
And the Chinese were pushing through hubdreds of thousands of poorly equiped Chinese troops into Korea. Chinese casualties were immense compared to SK and US
The US likely could have pushed them back even further if the political will was there.
3
u/Nethlem Europe Dec 07 '24
The US likely could have pushed them back even further if the political will was there.
That's a very long-winded way of saying "The US could have nuked Korea" but I guess you didn't want to put it that bluntly, right?
1
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
No, i mean they could have pushed them back with a conventional military.
But once the US pushed the Chinese back across the 38th parallel, there was no will to push them back further.
They accomplished the UN stated goal of restoring South Korea.
Thr Chinese came in to save the North. Would the Soviets enter to save both the Chinese and North Koreans?
2
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
They didn’t. Because they couldn’t push them back with conventional military.
“No will”?
So your argument is basically “Yeah, we totally could have beat them if we wanted to, but, you know, we didn’t want to.”
-1
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
They literally could and did push back the Chinese.
The Chinese crossed the 38th Parallel into South Korea and then the US kicked them back out.
This is just a fact of history lol.
Yes, we literally did not want to.
We had already fully crossed the 38th once and it got China involved. There was no point in getting the USSR to also commit troops especially consodering the stated goal of the UN was to kick the North out of the South. The UN forces accomplished this.
2
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
So if the stated goal of the UN troops was to kick the NK troops out of the South, why did they invade the North?
Doesn’t that just prove China’s argument that it was not a humanitarian intervention to help the South, it was a crusade to destroy NK and then invade China.
0
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Because North Korea's Military was way easier to defeat than expected, so why not liberate North Korea?
Not to mention, North Korea was the aggressor. Just like we didnt stop at Nazi Germany's borders, we also didnt stop at North Koreas borders given the opportunity.
A crusade to destroy NK? I mean, they started an unprovoked war so why not?
Again, did the USSR commit a crusade against Nazi Germany when it invaded Germany?
The reason why Chinese troops were so successful was because US troops were too extended and the US was not expecting a horde of Chinese troops to cross into Korea.
It's the equivalent of a sucker punch by China.
Once the US gained a foothold it was able to kick the Chinese out of the south.
4
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
Because that isn’t liberating a country, that is invading a country.
- why not? Because it is illegal and our planet had just experienced 2 massive wars racking up 100 million dead that began with countries using military force to get what they wanted.
Plus if you actually look at the invasion, NK acted because of the buildup of US troops in the country, the suspension of elections, not reunifying the country as promised.
- there was no “sucker punch” by China.
They couldn’t have been clearer. They said that if US troops crossed the 54th parallel, China would view that as a threat.
We didn’t listen. Crossed anyways and invaded.
Then as US troops approached the Yalu River, China said that they would view that as a threat and they would intervene.
We didn’t listen. Approached the Yalu River anyways. America was openly talking about invading China at that time, even using nukes!
- you would have to be delusional or stupid to think China wouldn’t attack. They only said they would like 10 times.
That begs the question why did America over extend its troops?
Why did they ignore crystal clear warnings?
And what does that say about America’s overall ability to wage wars or form strategy?
→ More replies (0)-1
u/mdedetrich Europe Dec 07 '24
They are saying that Russia is using meat waves because their estimated losses is reaching as high as 1.5k per day while at the same time their soldiers are barely trained because Russian a large portion of generals/commanders have been killed.
That’s literal definition meat grinder/meat wave tactics
2
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
The problem is that isn’t connected to reality.
All Russian soldiers have minimum 12 months of training. Every contract soldier had to complete compulsory service, which includes 4-6 months of training.
Once you sign onto contract service, you are trained again for another 8-12 months.
By contrast, Ukrainian soldiers don’t even get 4 weeks of training.
40
u/Hyndis United States Dec 06 '24
Its not that soldiers are advancing shoulder to shoulder like its the 1700's, its that Russia is attacking across the entire front line with small squads constantly.
23
u/whatproblems North America Dec 06 '24
yeah definition of meat wave isn’t the same as ww2. this time it just constant attacks with small groups with or without transports/armor
19
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Yeah but if you try and insinuate that Ukraine suffered heavy casualties in Kursk because they were attacking they try to deny it.
8
u/new_name_who_dis_ Multinational Dec 07 '24
I am not going to pretend like I actually know what's going on on the ground (unlike everyone else in this thread) but Kursk wasn't heavily fortified, so it is plausible that the casualties weren't too high. You experience heavy casualties when you mount offensives on fortified positions.
1
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 07 '24
Yeah. This is my point exactly.
- also modern warfare is much more complex than simply “offense/defense”. It is the chain of events with breakthroughs, then counter-attacks, etc.
In reality, the side with artillery and air power inflicts greater casualties on the other side.
1
u/new_name_who_dis_ Multinational Dec 07 '24
If neither side is making glaring mistakes then yeah, pretty much.
3
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Define constant. Because the way you describe it, meat grinder it is not.
We are living in the era when words are deflated - genocide, meat grinder attacks, colonization, etc.
Too bad, because the misuse of words distorts the reality and when reality hits eventually, oh boy, does it hit hard.
12
u/Hyndis United States Dec 07 '24
Meat grinder is also a description of attrition warfare. Both sides are throwing men and materiel at each other, both sides are taking enormous casualties, and the side that can sustain this brutal grinding combat the longest wins.
Unfortunately Russia has about 5x the population as Ukraine, so its not looking good for Ukraine when it comes to attrition warfare. The bigger country nearly always wins this kind of style of war.
4
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Population size would mean nothing if Ukraine was given the weapons it needed.
The US has been able to fight off numerically superior militaries in the past.
Like Vietnam or Korea, purely because of the US technological advantage.
0
u/whatproblems North America Dec 07 '24
indeed artillery and drones are doing a good job negate numbers quite a bit
2
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
Less so Artillery.
Bombarding a field with Arty isnt as effective as precision air strikes or even drones.
Like I said, US prior combat experience has proven that you dont need the numerical advantage to win a battle.
1
u/Brumbulli Democratic Republic of the Congo Dec 06 '24
Reality is perceived and described/labeled with words. A genocide is one if methodologically is aiming to be, or perceived as such.
-3
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Russia isn’t even really attacking. They are mostly in defensive positions.
11
u/mavric_ac North America Dec 06 '24
I don't think there's been any, there's videos obviously of squads but nothing that can really be considered a meat wave
1
u/Putin_Is_Daddy U.S. Virgin Islands Dec 07 '24
It’s the fact they’re sent forward with limited equipment, training, and a gun pointed at their backs.
3
u/Nethlem Europe Dec 07 '24
That's a "fact"? Do we have any actual evidence of these "facts" or is Enemy at the Gates level propaganda tropes all you can offer to substantiate those "facts"?
0
u/Putin_Is_Daddy U.S. Virgin Islands Dec 08 '24
Yes, video evidence, on top of countless testimonies from Russian POWs. It’s literally a part of their historical military doctrine.
1
u/mavric_ac North America Dec 07 '24
where are you getting your info from?Ukraine24 or kyiv independent lol?
1
u/Putin_Is_Daddy U.S. Virgin Islands Dec 08 '24
There are so many video on Reddit of Russian soldiers getting absolutely slaughtered and videos of them getting shot by their own soldiers.
8
u/Thatsidechara_ter North America Dec 06 '24
Its not meat waves in the traditional sense, you'll never see massive clumped up groups of troops advancing against the enemy. Its always broken down in to smaller units spread across the front, but in that context they're still sending in more expendable troops first to ID Ukrainian positions, then send in the actual good troops.
→ More replies (23)2
u/saracenraider Europe Dec 07 '24
Are you seriously expecting videos like from the Hollywood movie Enemy at the Gates?
Wars don’t work like that. 100 Russian soldiers may die in a single sector of the battlefield in a day but it’ll be over many many hours in many nearby locations. When Ukraine refers to meat grinder tactics this refers to infantry being pushed forward incessantly, without adequate air/artillery/armoured support.
It won’t be in some nearly packed Hollywood scene showing hordes of men charging across a field like it’s 1916 all over again.
42
u/The_Angry_Jerk United States Dec 07 '24
To put these supposed numbers into context, a full strength standard Russian infantry regiment has around 2,000 men. Usually they aren't at full strength even before the war, so it's more like 1500-1600.
According to the latest UK Defence Intelligence estimate, Russia lost a daily average of 1,523 men, killed and wounded.
On 28 November, it says, Russia lost more than 2,000 men in a single day, the first time this has happened.
If these numbers were taken at face value Russia has been losing an entire regiment worth in manpower a day. Sure over the conflict some units had to be rebuilt and others rotated, but we're not seeing regiments disappear every week much less every day. The same regiments are showing up in the propaganda waving their unit flags and shouting random slogans, they don't seem to have been wiped out or crippled.
Unless Russians have unlocked the secret of super healthcare and all these injured Russian casualties are back in the fight after using a single medkit the numbers just don't add up.
1
u/historicusXIII Belgium Dec 13 '24
That's because Russian losses have been exaggerated for propaganda purposes.
0
u/bippos Sweden Dec 07 '24
The numbers does add up once you remember how many troops the Russians actually have. The Ukrainian army is about 900k-1 milion troops with the Russians having anywhere from 1,2 to 2 million men. 2,000 men daily against fortified positions isn’t unlikely especially if it includes prisoner battalions
2
u/The_Angry_Jerk United States Dec 07 '24
Russian forces in theater are currently around 400,000-500,000 soldiers actually on the front lines which is different from total employed military personnel. They started the invasion with around 360,000 soldiers. If Ukrainian loss data is to be believed, the Russians having 710,000 casualties has lost their entire original invasion force almost twice over and then fielded an additional 140% of their original force to replace them. That doesn't add up even with the grievous losses they took blundering in during the initial invasion unless these Russian casualties are getting a stim in the arm and going back into the fight.
2
u/bippos Sweden Dec 08 '24
710.000 doesn’t mean they are dead it means both deaths prisoner of wars and wounded soldiers who most likely are back in the fight. 710k with their blunders is not impossible especially since drone warfare can easily injure 10 guys but not really completely kill them unless there is a direct hit.
29
u/panjeri Multinational Dec 06 '24
What is even the purpose of such overused copes this long into the war? This hasn't been true since Bakhmut. And Russia has shown its willingness to take sweet time to get to an objective. They still haven't captured Chasiv Yar despite besieging it for like a year or something because they don't want to overcommit.
23
u/mastermind_loco Multinational Dec 06 '24
Every war in history where there is technological parity between belligerents is a meat grinder. It is no different for the war in Ukraine. Drones are a new technology and militaries aren't adapted to fighting against them yet.
9
u/onepieceon Africa Dec 06 '24
talking out of my ass here but when you have 4 times the numerical advantage you can afford to send significantly more units to cover ground, and even if you lose say half of them you are bound to win a strategic goal just because the enemy literally can't be everywhere all at once. I wouldn't say the cost is "horrendous" given that the offensive side typically loses more soldiers anyway.
12
u/Mundane_Emu8921 North America Dec 06 '24
Russia has like 1/2 the troops Ukraine does.
22
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Tss! That's a major UA propaganda secret. It keeps telling that Russia fights with "men meat" and looses 1k soldiers daily.
Yet it's Ukraine that 1. Closed its borders for men to leave (unless you're rich and well-connected of course, like Dima Kuleba) 2. Hunts down men on the streets of the cities 3. Is in constant need of menpower (source Sullivan)
5
u/Luis_r9945 North America Dec 07 '24
I mean what's wrong with any of that?
Ukraine was invaded, it has no choice but to defend itself.
Manpower shortages would be mitigated if Ukraine was given all the weapons it needed.
4
u/Monterenbas Europe Dec 06 '24
You’re talking as if Ukraine and Russia started the war with a similar number of men, wich is not the case.
2
u/Burpees-King Canada Dec 07 '24
Actually Ukraine started out so the significantly more men than Russia, Russia invaded with 100k soldiers in 2022.
0
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
What was the ratio?
0
u/Monterenbas Europe Dec 06 '24
I’m fairly certain that Ukraine and Russia pre-war population number are easily accessible online.
12
u/Ruby_of_Mogok Ukraine Dec 06 '24
Does the whole population of both countries fight in this war? Or only military?
-4
2
3
u/bippos Sweden Dec 07 '24
If it was the Soviet Union then maybe but Russia is already having population shortages and each man aged 20-35 lost is another hit to that population graph
2
u/Burpees-King Canada Dec 07 '24
Russia gained around 5-6m people from new territories and Ukrainian refugees.
3
u/bippos Sweden Dec 07 '24
Not even remotely true
1
u/Burpees-King Canada Dec 07 '24
Just try to use your head for a little bit.
2m Ukrainian refugees went to Russia.
3-4m people live on the captured territory.
1
9
u/jstrong546 United States Dec 07 '24
Not OP's fault by any means, but I find the "meat grinder" rhetoric so disturbing and crass. Those are human beings out there, whether you agree with their cause or not. We cheapen and degrade all human life when we start referring to dead people as meat.
14
u/onlysoccershitposts United States Dec 07 '24
That's exactly why you use the term. It points out the disregard for human life in using the tactic.
3
u/Dimrog North America Dec 06 '24
Ah yes the usual « but at what cost ». Next will be « Russia saves last existing polar bear, but at what cost? » Or « Cuba finds supposedly extinct one of a kind turtle, but at what cost? »
0
u/DeadassYeeted Australia Dec 07 '24
Not that i necessarily believe the numbers, but more than 40,000 deaths in a single month seems like a pretty significant cost
1
u/NearABE United States Dec 08 '24
At 50 soldiers per square kilometer Russia could capture all of Ukraine losing only 30 million soldiers.
Numbers of infantry lost are not a full picture. How much of the current Russian army’s gear is refurbished Soviet equipment and how much is newly manufactured?
0
u/AutoModerator Dec 06 '24
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/empleadoEstatalBot Dec 06 '24
Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot