Thread by @HeliosRunner

1/ IMPORTANT! je vais juste faire un rapide point mais tres tres important sur les pertes Ukrainiennes aujourd'hui (Mini thread on #Ukraine -losses on the field - quite a major revealing here)
Je suis en effet "tombé" sur un article ce matin daté d'hier :
pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/…

2/ some people might say "yes we knew" (of course we knew.. but had no real "clue" about real numbers) when we count the tally of Russian losses & in relation wih the Russian equipment that is destroyed/abandoned & reports from UA officials we have "doubts" and surely we can

3/ certainly substract 15% to the claimed amount of total Ru loss inflicted by Ukrainians.
but we knew little about UA losses until now.
Last time we had official accounts about it.. #Zlelensky said that were more than 3k KIA and about 10k injured troops. 2 months ago.

4/ so with this up to date recent claim we can try to "frame" a picture of what could be the amount of total death by now (minimum) as i updated my excel sheat..
I count 150 dead (total East/south per day) x 60 and for serious wounded i "only" x2 (for several reasons)
see result:

5/ so we would have (very conservative - optimistic counts) a staggering (but quite normal actually considering they are fighting the so call 2nd army of the world) amount of about 50k men (women) "hors de combats" as for now.
why did i count only x2 because i've read & hear

6/ directly from a LOTs of difference sources there, that Ukrainians that have lights "wounds" always wants to go back on the field to fight again, with their "camarades".
(contrary to russians who really gets first opportunity to leave & go back home)

of course we could also claimed that the first account of Zelensky at the end of March was "below" the reality already and we could add 15% to these numbers and that would totally be "in the ball park" IMO.

Still, this amount remains "low" for this kind of "total war" as for now

8/ je repasse en Fra juste pour dire que choisissez ce que vous voulez pour la rhétorique Fra entre anéantissement et attrition, dont on nous rabat les oreilles pr le théatre d'opération #Ukraine -nien. L'attrition est souvent vue comme le marqueur d'une guerre lente, voir d'un /

9/ conflit "gelé" (ce qui ne veut rien dire quand tu continues à te faire pilonner la tronche dans ta tranchée, mais bref..)
En réalité, cela a donc peu de sens et dépend aussi des temps d'actions (espace/temps). A contrario
Une guerre d'anéantissement impliquerait des

10/ destructions massives et rapides, avec des résultats stratégiques... mais cela n'a plus de sens pour les Russes car moyens aériens type CAS quasi inutilisable et force de frappes "méca" rendu rididules par des défenses qui se goinfrent aux "Javelin" à tous les petits dej.

11/ Par contre, concernant les pertes Russes.. autant ils ne "morflent" plus sur l'ensemble plan opératif, mais au plan tactique (actions locales), l'anéantissement est parfois bien possible (et ce n'est pas fini).

donc pour revenir aux Ukr, les pertes sont lourdes certes

12/ but (switch back in english).. even if Ukrainians losses is a true concerns because they are losing now good troops and well trained warriors, they still have "plenty" to do with..
& it could arguably let us that this ratio 15K UA/ 30k UA is close to reality as the defenders

13/ when well prepared and with the right materials and support and morale and good command (etc) can manage to suffer less loses than the ones attacking (like the infamous " #Bilohorivka experience".

last point. this emphasises the need for more help ASAP @SecDef !!!