" said that no Russian missiles would be shot down without NATO’s consent."
Depending on the Russian missile, no Russian missile can be shot down by anything NATO has in Poland and Romania. I doubt those Aegis Ashore installations are actually effective against most Russian missiles and certainly aren't effective against Zircons and Kinzhals.
Not to mention that if they do become effective against normal Russian missiles, a couple Zircons or Kinzhals will remove those Aegis Ashore installations - which is what the whole SMO is actually about. If they get destroyed in the course of the conflict, Putin might even decide not to take over all of Ukraine, which right now is a necessity to counter those installations.
There's something of the night about Stoltenberg. Gives me the creeps. Russia isnt currently a threat he says? Sounds like another preemptive war against Russia with all the Hitlerite undertones Nato is engaged in. As for Poland and the Baltics. Would you really risk facing down a Russian army on your border?. The days of the old Polish Lithuania Commonwealth aren't coming back- so why risk it. Don't completely agree with the German politician about war casualties. As a guide 90 percent of your armed forces provide logistical support to the 10 percent who actually do the fighting. I said before of the 10 percent who fight only 10 percent actually shoot to kill. Most human beings dont want to kill. The German army in ww2 overcame this by dehumanizing their enemies, thereby making it easier to kill. The IDF has reached this stage. Anyway, in Ukraine because the Ukrainians haven't been rotating their best soldiers have been killed which impacts upon combat effectiveness. The reason the German army lasted so long in the ww2 is that the German army because of its greater willingness to kill ratio and overall training had a decisive combat efficiency ratio over allied troops. A study showed the German landser (standard soldier) was the equivalent of a British paratrooper. The overall ratio was 1/ 1.1 German to US; 1/ 1.45 German to British etc. You see this in the Ukrainian where fewer Russians are advancing against a greater army which in part is due to the Russians being better soldiers. The Russians also have 10 to 1 in artillery and most war studies show that 75 percent casualties are caused by artillery. The Drones have limited statistical impact due to small payload regardless of whether Nato has come up with a super AI drone system which im sceptical about.
I studied the Sociology of War a long time ago and remember an article by Shills and Janowitz called 'Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht during WW2'. According to this, the NAZI non-commissioned officers were responsible in part for the Cohesion so late in the war while the eventual disintegration was a result a failure to supply the troops with food as well as ammunition etc. Another article I read - can't remember the name - showed the reluctance of troops to even fire their rifles in combat - yet alone shoot to kill. This was based on research during the Korean war, I think. Interesting stuff thanks.
Thanks for the update Rob. I think that Paul Fussell in his book Wartime mentions this study and uses those figures. I just checked and the study was done by S.L.A. Marshall and appeared in his book "Men Against Fire" in 1947. Marshall was with the US army and conducted interviews with combatants in the very early "after action reviews" during WW2 and these interviews became the basis of the study.
The thing I remember of Fussell who fought in the Battle of the Bulge was him saying that "as you move out to engage with the enemy remember that every item of your equipment has been made by the lowest bidder." The current problem with American equipment has been around for quite some time.
Great update Rob and Interesting stuff presented by M Boyd to, which I 100% agree with.
The best units of the UA are long gone now and as you say the effectiveness of UA units on the frontline when data is extrapolated-probably amount to 4-5000 troops, spread about. doing the fighting.
God knows what sort of an offensive the UA is planning in the next few months because it will be worse than a slaughter. Could it be a bargaining card?
At least civil disobedience is growing as that could be a contributory factor that helps finally end this.
I’m new to your sub stack and find it excellent for information and detail.
I have one question. Where do you get the c 2000 a day Ukrainian casualties number? I quoted it to an ex army friend (admittedly ultra pro-NATO) and he was super sceptical.
I would love to be able to go back to him with a crushing riposte - my own researches have come up short so far.
I obtain my figures from the Russian MoD which is the only source I know of that provides daily and weekly estimates for Ukrainian casualties. No one I know of does the same for Russian casualties though the Russians provide figures now and again. Most of the 'experts' I follow accept these figures but no one really knows how accurate they are - and they are only estimates. Some believe that the MoD estimates are far too low because they do not include casualties behind the front lines. I have seen estimates over a longer period by some researchers based on obituaries, funerals and graves and these are much higher than the MoD's figures. If the Russian MoD was in the business of massaging the figures upwards one would have thought that their figures would exceed these - but they do not. I am sorry that I don't have a 'magic bullet' for you to shoot at your friend but this is a war, after all. When I come across estimates based on funerals etc., I will post them on my Update as I have in the past. I am not surprised that your friend finds these figures hard to believe because they really are unbelievable. They are far in excess of casualty figures in any conflict since WW2. This is part of the Tragedy of Ukraine. But casualties have not always been this high. In the first week of January, casualties were reported by the MoD at 4690 but they have climbed to 14,000 this week. Even though I can't guarantee the accuracy of these figures I think it is worth including them if only for the sake of making comparisons.
Remember Von Der Leyen let it slip in December 2022 that 120,000 Ukrainians had been killed in 10 months. Given the ratio 3 to 1 wounded to killed you would have nearly 500,000 casualties or roughly 48,000 per month. That would be actual including rear echelon so the Dr's source material is pretty accurate less rear echelon casualties. The figures also demonstrate the desperate need for fresh cannon fodder in the Ukrainian army. Interesting piece today showing Western Ukrainians are the most likely to avoid being recruited. Typical, they are the most anti Russian most gung ho and the least willing to die for their cause and the war they started.
Im trying to source figures myself. Colonel Douglas McGregor stated his sources were telling him the IDF had sustained 5,000 dead and 70,000 seriously wounded since October 7. He didn't specify in Gaza so i presume against Hezbollah and others also. Anyway, does anyone know where he got this data from and whether its accurate. He tends to be matter of fact and non committal if he doesn't have factual information so i think he is credible and reliable
" said that no Russian missiles would be shot down without NATO’s consent."
Depending on the Russian missile, no Russian missile can be shot down by anything NATO has in Poland and Romania. I doubt those Aegis Ashore installations are actually effective against most Russian missiles and certainly aren't effective against Zircons and Kinzhals.
Not to mention that if they do become effective against normal Russian missiles, a couple Zircons or Kinzhals will remove those Aegis Ashore installations - which is what the whole SMO is actually about. If they get destroyed in the course of the conflict, Putin might even decide not to take over all of Ukraine, which right now is a necessity to counter those installations.
There's something of the night about Stoltenberg. Gives me the creeps. Russia isnt currently a threat he says? Sounds like another preemptive war against Russia with all the Hitlerite undertones Nato is engaged in. As for Poland and the Baltics. Would you really risk facing down a Russian army on your border?. The days of the old Polish Lithuania Commonwealth aren't coming back- so why risk it. Don't completely agree with the German politician about war casualties. As a guide 90 percent of your armed forces provide logistical support to the 10 percent who actually do the fighting. I said before of the 10 percent who fight only 10 percent actually shoot to kill. Most human beings dont want to kill. The German army in ww2 overcame this by dehumanizing their enemies, thereby making it easier to kill. The IDF has reached this stage. Anyway, in Ukraine because the Ukrainians haven't been rotating their best soldiers have been killed which impacts upon combat effectiveness. The reason the German army lasted so long in the ww2 is that the German army because of its greater willingness to kill ratio and overall training had a decisive combat efficiency ratio over allied troops. A study showed the German landser (standard soldier) was the equivalent of a British paratrooper. The overall ratio was 1/ 1.1 German to US; 1/ 1.45 German to British etc. You see this in the Ukrainian where fewer Russians are advancing against a greater army which in part is due to the Russians being better soldiers. The Russians also have 10 to 1 in artillery and most war studies show that 75 percent casualties are caused by artillery. The Drones have limited statistical impact due to small payload regardless of whether Nato has come up with a super AI drone system which im sceptical about.
I studied the Sociology of War a long time ago and remember an article by Shills and Janowitz called 'Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht during WW2'. According to this, the NAZI non-commissioned officers were responsible in part for the Cohesion so late in the war while the eventual disintegration was a result a failure to supply the troops with food as well as ammunition etc. Another article I read - can't remember the name - showed the reluctance of troops to even fire their rifles in combat - yet alone shoot to kill. This was based on research during the Korean war, I think. Interesting stuff thanks.
Thanks for the update Rob. I think that Paul Fussell in his book Wartime mentions this study and uses those figures. I just checked and the study was done by S.L.A. Marshall and appeared in his book "Men Against Fire" in 1947. Marshall was with the US army and conducted interviews with combatants in the very early "after action reviews" during WW2 and these interviews became the basis of the study.
The thing I remember of Fussell who fought in the Battle of the Bulge was him saying that "as you move out to engage with the enemy remember that every item of your equipment has been made by the lowest bidder." The current problem with American equipment has been around for quite some time.
Cheers
Great update Rob and Interesting stuff presented by M Boyd to, which I 100% agree with.
The best units of the UA are long gone now and as you say the effectiveness of UA units on the frontline when data is extrapolated-probably amount to 4-5000 troops, spread about. doing the fighting.
God knows what sort of an offensive the UA is planning in the next few months because it will be worse than a slaughter. Could it be a bargaining card?
At least civil disobedience is growing as that could be a contributory factor that helps finally end this.
Dr Campbell
I’m new to your sub stack and find it excellent for information and detail.
I have one question. Where do you get the c 2000 a day Ukrainian casualties number? I quoted it to an ex army friend (admittedly ultra pro-NATO) and he was super sceptical.
I would love to be able to go back to him with a crushing riposte - my own researches have come up short so far.
I forgot to say that Richard Steven Hack has done some research on the Russian MoD underestimates of casualties if you want to check out his substack.
I obtain my figures from the Russian MoD which is the only source I know of that provides daily and weekly estimates for Ukrainian casualties. No one I know of does the same for Russian casualties though the Russians provide figures now and again. Most of the 'experts' I follow accept these figures but no one really knows how accurate they are - and they are only estimates. Some believe that the MoD estimates are far too low because they do not include casualties behind the front lines. I have seen estimates over a longer period by some researchers based on obituaries, funerals and graves and these are much higher than the MoD's figures. If the Russian MoD was in the business of massaging the figures upwards one would have thought that their figures would exceed these - but they do not. I am sorry that I don't have a 'magic bullet' for you to shoot at your friend but this is a war, after all. When I come across estimates based on funerals etc., I will post them on my Update as I have in the past. I am not surprised that your friend finds these figures hard to believe because they really are unbelievable. They are far in excess of casualty figures in any conflict since WW2. This is part of the Tragedy of Ukraine. But casualties have not always been this high. In the first week of January, casualties were reported by the MoD at 4690 but they have climbed to 14,000 this week. Even though I can't guarantee the accuracy of these figures I think it is worth including them if only for the sake of making comparisons.
Thanks!
I can guess what his response will be.
I frequently have to shoot down his favourite sources…
Remember Von Der Leyen let it slip in December 2022 that 120,000 Ukrainians had been killed in 10 months. Given the ratio 3 to 1 wounded to killed you would have nearly 500,000 casualties or roughly 48,000 per month. That would be actual including rear echelon so the Dr's source material is pretty accurate less rear echelon casualties. The figures also demonstrate the desperate need for fresh cannon fodder in the Ukrainian army. Interesting piece today showing Western Ukrainians are the most likely to avoid being recruited. Typical, they are the most anti Russian most gung ho and the least willing to die for their cause and the war they started.
Im trying to source figures myself. Colonel Douglas McGregor stated his sources were telling him the IDF had sustained 5,000 dead and 70,000 seriously wounded since October 7. He didn't specify in Gaza so i presume against Hezbollah and others also. Anyway, does anyone know where he got this data from and whether its accurate. He tends to be matter of fact and non committal if he doesn't have factual information so i think he is credible and reliable
Well done summary.
This is my first time wandering over here. I see your reminder on MOA.
I will be back.
Welcome aboard