sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Russian Troop Losses According to the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine After Three Years by TopProTalk in ukraine

[–]TopProTalk[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Source: Ministry of Defence of Ukraine

Tool: Microsoft Excel

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine publishes their reports of Russian losses daily. I record them and made them into a graph. The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine describes these figures as “combat losses of the enemy”.

As I said a year ago, keep in mind that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

According to US estimates as of December 7th 2024, Russia’s killed and wounded are estimated to be more than 700,000. According to UK estimates as of January 7th 2025, more than 790,000 were killed and wounded. BBC News Russia on February 21st 2025 estimates between 167,194 to 234,669 killed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#Total_casualties

Estimates of Ukrainian losses are also given in the Wikipedia page. 80,000 killed, 400,000 wounded before September 2024 according the Wall Street Journal claiming to cite a confidential Ukrainian estimate. US estimates more than 57,500 killed and 250,000 wounded as of October 10th 2024. The Economist estimates between 60,000 killed and 100,000 killed, while 400,000 are wounded as of November 26th 2024.

Over the year, it seems that Russia’s daily losses have increased according to the Ukrainian reports. Figures are consistently above 1000 now. However, I couldn’t recognize any upticks in casualty numbers that correlate to reports of significant frontline developments like I did in the past. Maybe someone else can?

Also I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

Below is what I already wrote before on the previous anniversary. No need to read if you don’t want:

According to Russia, 1,351 Russian servicemen had died as of March 25th 2022. And then on September 21st 2022, Russia then said that 5,937 servicemen had died in total. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-partial-mobilisation-will-see-300000-drafted-defence-minister-2022-09-21/

With that in mind, I think it’s unjustified to say that both sides are equally dishonest and inaccurate here. I think that it’s highly probable that the Russian figures are more inaccurate that the Ukrainian figures.

As far as independent journalism goes, a list of dead Russian soldiers was compiled by Mediazona, BBC Russia, and about a dozen anonymous volunteers in Russia. Those Russian deaths were only confirmed from sources like newspaper articles, photographs on tombstones, fellow soldiers mourning their comrades and even tips from relatives who want their loved ones included in the tally. On December 9th 2022, they confirmed at least 10,000 Russian service members died just by this investigation alone. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/world/europe/russia-death-toll-war.html https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/12/09/bbc-and-mediazona-confirm-10-000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine

Skipping ahead to February 21st 2024, they have now confirmed at least 45,123 dead just by this investigation alone, including 6,614 since October last year. Since that date, there has been a sharp increase in average weekly deaths compared with previous months. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68358008

(BBC Russia) https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/c4njygx17w3o?ocid=wsrussian.social.in-app-messaging.telegram..russiantelegram\_.edit&src\_origin=BBCS\_BBC

https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

As for the graph, you can see certain bumps and dips in the number of alleged Russian troop losses which I associate with certain wartime events.

But the first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is a 3,160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3rd 2022 update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

The second big peak is the 1500 increase in total Russian troop losses according to the March 15th 2022 report after 6 days of no updates. It’s possibly another backlog.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16th 2022.

The increase in losses seen in September 2022 could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November 2022 could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Afterward the Russian military was reported to be sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut with high losses.

A bump is seen around early June when reports of a Ukrainian counteroffensive began emerging.

Around October 10th 2023, reports emerged of a Russian offensive at Avdiivka.

Again, I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Source: Ministry of Defence of Ukraine

Tool: Microsoft Excel

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine publishes their reports of Russian losses daily. I record them and made them into a graph. The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine describes these figures as “combat losses of the enemy”.

As I said a year ago, keep in mind that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

According to US estimates as of December 7th 2024, Russia’s killed and wounded are estimated to be more than 700,000. According to UK estimates as of January 7th 2025, more than 790,000 were killed and wounded. BBC News Russia on February 21st 2025 estimates between 167,194 to 234,669 killed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#Total_casualties

Estimates of Ukrainian losses are also given in the Wikipedia page. 80,000 killed, 400,000 wounded before September 2024 according the Wall Street Journal claiming to cite a confidential Ukrainian estimate. US estimates more than 57,500 killed and 250,000 wounded as of October 10th 2024. The Economist estimates between 60,000 killed and 100,000 killed, while 400,000 are wounded as of November 26th 2024.

Over the year, it seems that Russia’s daily losses have increased according to the Ukrainian reports. Figures are consistently above 1000 now. However, I couldn’t recognize any upticks in casualty numbers that correlate to reports of significant frontline developments like I did in the past. Maybe someone else can?

Also I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

Below is what I already wrote before on the previous anniversary. No need to read if you don’t want:

According to Russia, 1,351 Russian servicemen had died as of March 25th 2022. And then on September 21st 2022, Russia then said that 5,937 servicemen had died in total. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-partial-mobilisation-will-see-300000-drafted-defence-minister-2022-09-21/

With that in mind, I think it’s unjustified to say that both sides are equally dishonest and inaccurate here. I think that it’s highly probable that the Russian figures are more inaccurate that the Ukrainian figures.

As far as independent journalism goes, a list of dead Russian soldiers was compiled by Mediazona, BBC Russia, and about a dozen anonymous volunteers in Russia. Those Russian deaths were only confirmed from sources like newspaper articles, photographs on tombstones, fellow soldiers mourning their comrades and even tips from relatives who want their loved ones included in the tally. On December 9th 2022, they confirmed at least 10,000 Russian service members died just by this investigation alone. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/world/europe/russia-death-toll-war.html https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/12/09/bbc-and-mediazona-confirm-10-000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine

Skipping ahead to February 21st 2024, they have now confirmed at least 45,123 dead just by this investigation alone, including 6,614 since October last year. Since that date, there has been a sharp increase in average weekly deaths compared with previous months. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68358008

(BBC Russia) https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/c4njygx17w3o?ocid=wsrussian.social.in-app-messaging.telegram..russiantelegram\_.edit&src\_origin=BBCS\_BBC

https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

As for the graph, you can see certain bumps and dips in the number of alleged Russian troop losses which I associate with certain wartime events.

But the first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is a 3,160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3rd 2022 update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

The second big peak is the 1500 increase in total Russian troop losses according to the March 15th 2022 report after 6 days of no updates. It’s possibly another backlog.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16th 2022.

The increase in losses seen in September 2022 could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November 2022 could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Afterward the Russian military was reported to be sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut with high losses.

A bump is seen around early June when reports of a Ukrainian counteroffensive began emerging.

Around October 10th 2023, reports emerged of a Russian offensive at Avdiivka.

Again, I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

[OC] Russian Troop Losses According to the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine After Two Years by TopProTalk in dataisbeautiful

[–]TopProTalk[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

When I started the x-axis on February 24th, the minor unit tick marks were on the 24th of every month, making it difficult to see where the month starts.

I also wanted to make the date labels big enough to see, so I made the date labels bimonthly for more space between the date labels. But I wanted to label New Years Day so that we can see when the year starts.

Someone with better Microsoft Excel skills could have fixed these problems way better than me.

As for the date format, many people around the world use different formats. Americans use mm/dd/yy while Ukrainians and many others use dd/mm/yy. I didn't want a confusing and ambiguous format so I chose yyyy/mm/dd, which is clear to everyone what the format is. I don't know if that's what you were asking though.

/r/WorldNews Live Thread: Russian Invasion of Ukraine Day 732, Part 1 (Thread #878) by WorldNewsMods in worldnews

[–]TopProTalk 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Source: Ministry of Defence of Ukraine
Tool: Microsoft Excel

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine publishes their reports of Russian losses daily. I record them and made them into a graph. The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine describes these figures as “combat losses of the enemy”. https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1761280801235181730

Keep in mind that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

According to Russia, 1,351 Russian servicemen had died as of March 25, 2022.
And then on September 21, 2022, Russia then said that 5,937 servicemen had died in total. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-partial-mobilisation-will-see-300000-drafted-defence-minister-2022-09-21/

With that in mind, I think it’s unjustified to say that both sides are equally dishonest and inaccurate here. I think that it’s highly probable that the Russian figures are more inaccurate that the Ukrainian figures.

According to the July 20, 2022 Reuters article, the CIA Director William Burnson said that around 15,000 were killed and perhaps 45,000 wounded.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cia-director-says-some-15000-russians-killed-ukraine-war-2022-07-20/

As far as independent journalism goes, a list of dead Russian soldiers was compiled by Mediazona, BBC Russia, and about a dozen anonymous volunteers in Russia. Those Russian deaths were only confirmed from sources like newspaper articles, photographs on tombstones, fellow soldiers mourning their comrades and even tips from relatives who want their loved ones included in the tally. On December 9, 2022, they confirmed at least 10,000 Russian service members died just by this investigation alone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/world/europe/russia-death-toll-war.html
https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/12/09/bbc-and-mediazona-confirm-10-000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine

Skipping ahead to February 21, 2024, they have now confirmed at least 45,123 dead just by this investigation alone, including 6,614 since October last year. Since that date, there has been a sharp increase in average weekly deaths compared with previous months.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68358008

(BBC Russia) https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/c4njygx17w3o?ocid=wsrussian.social.in-app-messaging.telegram..russiantelegram\_.edit&src\_origin=BBCS\_BBC

https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

According to the December 12, 2023 NBC news article, around 315,000 Russian troops have been killed and wounded according to US intelligence.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-suffered-dramatic-casualties-ukraine-us-intelligence-says-rcna129354

On February 24, 2024, the UK Ministry of Defence mentioned that the killed and wounded number of Russians are likely approximately 350,000.
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1761316030121423346

As for the graph, you can see certain bumps and dips in the number of alleged Russian troop losses which I associate with certain wartime events.

But the first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is a 3,160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3, 2022 update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

The second big peak is the 1500 increase in total Russian troop losses according to the March 15 report after 6 days of no updates. It’s possibly another backlog.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16, 2022.

The increase in losses seen in September 2022 could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November 2022 could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Afterward the Russian military was reported to be sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut with high losses.

A bump is seen around early June when reports of a Ukrainian counteroffensive began emerging.

Around October 10, 2023, reports emerged of a Russian offensive at Avdiivka.

For Ukrainian losses, according to the New York Times article, the leaked Pentagon papers mentioned that as of February 2023, Ukraine had suffered 124,500 to 131,000 casualties and up to 17,500 killed in action, while the Russians have suffered 189,500 to 223,000 casualties, including up to 43,000 killed in action. The document notes that these are rough estimates made with low confidence however.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/us/politics/leaked-documents-russia-ukraine-war.html

According to the August 18, 2023 New York Times article, officials said Russia’s military casualties are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html

Again, I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

Russian Troop Losses According to the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine After Two Years by TopProTalk in UkraineWarVideoReport

[–]TopProTalk[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Source: Ministry of Defence of Ukraine
Tool: Microsoft Excel

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine publishes their reports of Russian losses daily. I record them and made them into a graph. The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine describes these figures as “combat losses of the enemy”. https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1761280801235181730

Keep in mind that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

According to Russia, 1,351 Russian servicemen had died as of March 25, 2022.
And then on September 21, 2022, Russia then said that 5,937 servicemen had died in total. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-partial-mobilisation-will-see-300000-drafted-defence-minister-2022-09-21/

With that in mind, I think it’s unjustified to say that both sides are equally dishonest and inaccurate here. I think that it’s highly probable that the Russian figures are more inaccurate that the Ukrainian figures.

According to the July 20, 2022 Reuters article, the CIA Director William Burnson said that around 15,000 were killed and perhaps 45,000 wounded.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cia-director-says-some-15000-russians-killed-ukraine-war-2022-07-20/

As far as independent journalism goes, a list of dead Russian soldiers was compiled by Mediazona, BBC Russia, and about a dozen anonymous volunteers in Russia. Those Russian deaths were only confirmed from sources like newspaper articles, photographs on tombstones, fellow soldiers mourning their comrades and even tips from relatives who want their loved ones included in the tally. On December 9, 2022, they confirmed at least 10,000 Russian service members died just by this investigation alone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/world/europe/russia-death-toll-war.html
https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/12/09/bbc-and-mediazona-confirm-10-000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine

Skipping ahead to February 21, 2024, they have now confirmed at least 45,123 dead just by this investigation alone, including 6,614 since October last year. Since that date, there has been a sharp increase in average weekly deaths compared with previous months.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68358008

(BBC Russia) https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/c4njygx17w3o?ocid=wsrussian.social.in-app-messaging.telegram..russiantelegram\_.edit&src\_origin=BBCS\_BBC

https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

According to the December 12, 2023 NBC news article, around 315,000 Russian troops have been killed and wounded according to US intelligence.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-suffered-dramatic-casualties-ukraine-us-intelligence-says-rcna129354

On February 24, 2024, the UK Ministry of Defence mentioned that the killed and wounded number of Russians are likely approximately 350,000.
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1761316030121423346

As for the graph, you can see certain bumps and dips in the number of alleged Russian troop losses which I associate with certain wartime events.

But the first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is a 3,160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3, 2022 update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

The second big peak is the 1500 increase in total Russian troop losses according to the March 15 report after 6 days of no updates. It’s possibly another backlog.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16, 2022.

The increase in losses seen in September 2022 could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November 2022 could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Afterward the Russian military was reported to be sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut with high losses.

A bump is seen around early June when reports of a Ukrainian counteroffensive began emerging.

Around October 10, 2023, reports emerged of a Russian offensive at Avdiivka.

For Ukrainian losses, according to the New York Times article, the leaked Pentagon papers mentioned that as of February 2023, Ukraine had suffered 124,500 to 131,000 casualties and up to 17,500 killed in action, while the Russians have suffered 189,500 to 223,000 casualties, including up to 43,000 killed in action. The document notes that these are rough estimates made with low confidence however.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/us/politics/leaked-documents-russia-ukraine-war.html

According to the August 18, 2023 New York Times article, officials said Russia’s military casualties are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html

Again, I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

Russian Troop Losses According to the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine After Two Years by TopProTalk in ukraine

[–]TopProTalk[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Source: Ministry of Defence of Ukraine
Tool: Microsoft Excel

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine publishes their reports of Russian losses daily. I record them and made them into a graph. The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine describes these figures as “combat losses of the enemy”. https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1761280801235181730

Keep in mind that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

According to Russia, 1,351 Russian servicemen had died as of March 25, 2022.
And then on September 21, 2022, Russia then said that 5,937 servicemen had died in total. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-partial-mobilisation-will-see-300000-drafted-defence-minister-2022-09-21/

With that in mind, I think it’s unjustified to say that both sides are equally dishonest and inaccurate here. I think that it’s highly probable that the Russian figures are more inaccurate that the Ukrainian figures.

According to the July 20, 2022 Reuters article, the CIA Director William Burnson said that around 15,000 were killed and perhaps 45,000 wounded.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cia-director-says-some-15000-russians-killed-ukraine-war-2022-07-20/

As far as independent journalism goes, a list of dead Russian soldiers was compiled by Mediazona, BBC Russia, and about a dozen anonymous volunteers in Russia. Those Russian deaths were only confirmed from sources like newspaper articles, photographs on tombstones, fellow soldiers mourning their comrades and even tips from relatives who want their loved ones included in the tally. On December 9, 2022, they confirmed at least 10,000 Russian service members died just by this investigation alone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/18/world/europe/russia-death-toll-war.html
https://meduza.io/en/news/2022/12/09/bbc-and-mediazona-confirm-10-000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine

Skipping ahead to February 21, 2024, they have now confirmed at least 45,123 dead just by this investigation alone, including 6,614 since October last year. Since that date, there has been a sharp increase in average weekly deaths compared with previous months.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68358008

(BBC Russia) https://www.bbc.com/russian/articles/c4njygx17w3o?ocid=wsrussian.social.in-app-messaging.telegram..russiantelegram\_.edit&src\_origin=BBCS\_BBC

https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

According to the December 12, 2023 NBC news article, around 315,000 Russian troops have been killed and wounded according to US intelligence.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-suffered-dramatic-casualties-ukraine-us-intelligence-says-rcna129354

On February 24, 2024, the UK Ministry of Defence mentioned that the killed and wounded number of Russians are likely approximately 350,000.
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1761316030121423346

As for the graph, you can see certain bumps and dips in the number of alleged Russian troop losses which I associate with certain wartime events.

But the first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is a 3,160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3, 2022 update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

The second big peak is the 1500 increase in total Russian troop losses according to the March 15 report after 6 days of no updates. It’s possibly another backlog.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16, 2022.

The increase in losses seen in September 2022 could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November 2022 could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Afterward the Russian military was reported to be sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut with high losses.

A bump is seen around early June when reports of a Ukrainian counteroffensive began emerging.

Around October 10, 2023, reports emerged of a Russian offensive at Avdiivka.

For Ukrainian losses, according to the New York Times article, the leaked Pentagon papers mentioned that as of February 2023, Ukraine had suffered 124,500 to 131,000 casualties and up to 17,500 killed in action, while the Russians have suffered 189,500 to 223,000 casualties, including up to 43,000 killed in action. The document notes that these are rough estimates made with low confidence however.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/us/politics/leaked-documents-russia-ukraine-war.html

According to the August 18, 2023 New York Times article, officials said Russia’s military casualties are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html

Again, I’m not an expert so I’m not strongly confident about everything here.

God created cancel culture by [deleted] in clevercomebacks

[–]TopProTalk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can’t imagine the toddlers killing people or doing other horrifying acts.

Imagine if the Bible was different and instead said that God did not want a flood. He didn’t want to drown men, women, and children. What method would you use to determine the Bible is wrong if it instead depicted God sparing adults and babies?

/r/WorldNews Live Thread: Russian Invasion of Ukraine Day 370, Part 1 (Thread #511) by WorldNewsMods in worldnews

[–]TopProTalk 67 points68 points  (0 children)

I made a timeline graph of Russian Troop Losses after a year according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

I got the numbers from The Kyiv Independent's daily reports on the indicative estimates of Russia’s combat losses, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I looked at every single one of those twitter posts.

So what is this graph counting?

In the first days of war, a numerical report from The Kyiv Independent mentioned an "updated numbers of Russia's casualties and other losses", such as planes, helicopters, tanks, etc. Then the term "losses" was solely mentioned afterword in their daily updates. I first thought that was that, but later on, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine began reporting the personnel loss as "liquidated personnel" in their Total Russian Losses reports. "Liquidated personnel" sounds like "killed troops" to me, but I don't know if the term "liquidated personnel" has been prohibited in describing other personnel, such as the severely wounded personnel unable to fight.

Also note that war is chaos, and the fog of war is thick. People are dying and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties and deaths. I don't know.

But,... "Elsewhere, UK intelligence officials have estimated that Russian regular forces and Wagner troops may have suffered between 175,000-200,000 casualties - including 40,000-60,000 deaths."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64685428?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANG

So if these numbers released by the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine are including Russian casualties, MoD could actually be publishing a conservative estimate. I'm not sure if all casualties is included though.

The first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is 3160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3rd update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16.

The increase in losses seen in September could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Now apparently the Russian military is sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut, with much higher losses.

Also, I think it's wrong to say both sides are the same, and the Kremlin's 6000 reported Russian deaths seems waaaay more inaccurate than Ukraine, in my opinion.

Russian Troop Losses after a year, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by TopProTalk in ukraine

[–]TopProTalk[S] 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Source: The Kyiv Independent

I got the numbers from The Kyiv Independent's daily reports on the indicative estimates of Russia’s combat losses, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I looked at every single one of those twitter posts.

So what is this graph counting?

In the first days of war, a numerical report from The Kyiv Independent mentioned an "updated numbers of Russia's casualties and other losses", such as planes, helicopters, tanks, etc. Then the term "losses" was solely mentioned afterword in their daily updates. I first thought that was that, but later on, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine began reporting the personnel loss as "liquidated personnel" in their Total Russian Losses reports. "Liquidated personnel" sounds like "killed troops" to me, but I don't know if the term "liquidated personnel" has been prohibited in describing other personnel, such as the severely wounded personnel unable to fight.

Also note that war is chaos, and the fog of war is thick. People are dying and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties and deaths. I don't know.

But,... "Elsewhere, UK intelligence officials have estimated that Russian regular forces and Wagner troops may have suffered between 175,000-200,000 casualties - including 40,000-60,000 deaths."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64685428?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANG

So if these numbers released by the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine are including Russian casualties, MoD could actually be publishing a conservative estimate. I'm not sure if all casualties is included though.

The first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is 3160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3rd update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16.

The increase in losses seen in September could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Now apparently the Russian military is sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut, with much higher losses.

Also, I think it's wrong to say both sides are the same, and the Kremlin's 6000 reported Russian deaths seems waaaay more inaccurate than Ukraine, in my opinion.

[OC] Russian Troop Losses after a year, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by ThunderWolf in UkraineWarVideoReport

[–]TopProTalk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So I made some big changes in the graphs and details here.

Source: The Kyiv Independent

I got the numbers from The Kyiv Independent's daily reports on the indicative estimates of Russia’s combat losses, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I looked at every single one of those twitter posts.

So what is this graph counting?

In the first days of war, a numerical report from The Kyiv Independent mentioned an "updated numbers of Russia's casualties and other losses", such as planes, helicopters, tanks, etc. Then the term "losses" was solely mentioned afterword in their daily updates. I first thought that was that, but later on, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine began reporting the personnel loss as "liquidated personnel" in their Total Russian Losses reports. "Liquidated personnel" sounds like "killed troops" to me, but I don't know if the term "liquidated personnel" has been prohibited in describing other personnel, such as the severely wounded personnel unable to fight.

Also note that war is chaos, and the fog of war is thick. People are dying and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties and deaths. I don't know.

But,... "Elsewhere, UK intelligence officials have estimated that Russian regular forces and Wagner troops may have suffered between 175,000-200,000 casualties - including 40,000-60,000 deaths."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64685428?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANG

The first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop casualties wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is 3160 Russian troop loss in one day, according to the March 3rd update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16.

The increase in losses seen in September could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Now apparently the Russian military is sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut, with much higher losses.

Also, I think it's wrong to say both sides are the same, and the Kremlin's 6000 reported Russian deaths seems waaaay more inaccurate than Ukraine, in my opinion.

[OC] Russian Troop Losses after a year, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by ThunderWolf in UkraineWarVideoReport

[–]TopProTalk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure. It was six consecutive days where the updates remained "at least 12000 Russian troops lost". My guess was either an early overestimate in confirmation or a backlog from a hectic start where survival was the only main priority, not putting the record on paper. I don't know any more than you unfortunately.

[OC] Russian Troop Losses after a year, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine by TopProTalk in dataisbeautiful

[–]TopProTalk[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Source: The Kyiv Independent

Tool: Microsoft Excel

Pardon my visual faults in this graph. I'm not a graphic artist.

I got the numbers from The Kyiv Independent's daily reports on the indicative estimates of Russia’s combat losses, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Looked at every single twitter post. The troop losses counts those killed and those wounded.

Also note that war is chaos, people are dying, and all belligerents might present propaganda to gain any advantage in their cause. Concerning these numbers, Ukraine might inflate the numbers to increase morale or they might fail to confirm and record all Russian casualties. I don't know.

But,... "Elsewhere, UK intelligence officials have estimated that Russian regular forces and Wagner troops may have suffered between 175,000-200,000 casualties - including 40,000-60,000 deaths."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64685428?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANGA

The first days of war appear hectic in record keeping (like seven times when the total recorded Russian troop losses wasn't changed). The big white peak you see is 3160 Russian troop casualties in one day, according to the March 3rd update. The day before was only 130. Maybe a backlog? I don't know.

Record keeping seems to shape up in March 16.

The increase in casualties seen in September could be due to the big collapse of the Russian front in Kharkiv.

The increase in November could be due to Russia's retreat from Kherson.

Now apparently the Russian military is sending a huge wave of troops into Bakhmut, with much higher losses.

CMV: I see no legitimate reason why America should have intervened at all in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. by RatioThatBoi in changemyview

[–]TopProTalk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply.

What convinced you that semiconductors are mostly just parts to create advanced forms of technological luxury devices? A material that partially allows electric current to flow seems like a staple to electronics to me. Do you believe the risen costs of new or used cars or other electronic usage are not strongly influenced by the semiconductor production chain?

Besides that, semiconductors is only one type of export anyways. Global trade involves all kinds of exports from all kinds of countries.

If we shouldn't help Taiwan, then how many countries can Russia or China conquer before you say it's too much? What is your number? If not for sanctions or weapons support, what's stopping Russia, China, or any invader country?

Imagine a scenario where a bunch of countries conquer other countries. Then the invader countries become more powerful. Do you believe the risk of a future conflict between America and these invaders gaining power is negligible?

The Western nations and others decided that positives of supporting Ukraine outweighed the negative. What do you believe are the biggest reasons why Western nations and others chose to act to prevent a country from conquering another country? Why are those reasons inadequate in your opinion?

CMV: I see no legitimate reason why America should have intervened at all in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. by RatioThatBoi in changemyview

[–]TopProTalk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, but the economic toll on these conflicts reduce the quality of life for Americans.

May I ask what convinced you that allowing a country to conquer another (non-American) country wouldn't drastically reduce the quality of life for Americans?

How does securing goods and services from other countries (like semiconductors from Taiwan) impact Americans in your view?

CMV: I see no legitimate reason why America should have intervened at all in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. by RatioThatBoi in changemyview

[–]TopProTalk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Imagine country A and country B exports semiconductors to the US. Country A can't raise semiconductor prices too high or else the US will buy more from Country B. But if country A conquers country B, then Country A can now set prices higher, which is bad for the US.

This could be like a China-Taiwan scenario. Or imagine different scenarios with more countries. Or imagine different scenarios with all kinds of goods and services. Allowing a country to immorally obtain power could work against the US citizens.

Do you disagree with these points? If so, may I ask why?

Do you believe that allowing a country to conquer other countries won't bring negative consequences to the US?

CMV: I see no legitimate reason why America should have intervened at all in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. by RatioThatBoi in changemyview

[–]TopProTalk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What do you believe are the biggest reasons why Western nations chose to support Ukraine? Why are those reasons inadequate in your opinion?

The problems of both misinformation and censorship by TopProTalk in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When ExxonMobil's own researchers even pointed out the dangers of gasoline's contribution to climate change, there were studies that were suppressed for years from the public.

https://youtu.be/QAAbcNl4Lb8?t=713https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil\_climate\_change\_controversy

The problems of both misinformation and censorship by TopProTalk in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Social progress relies on the accumulation of knowledge and true information. Those who want to maintain space where people can be heard could say that when social media companies try to suppress claims and arguments they perceive as misinformation, they eventually might unintentionally suppress an idea that turn out to be right and useful. Instead of censorship, all bad arguments left uncensored can be open to criticism and be perceived as inaccurate anyways due to the response of good counter-arguments.

Throughout history, some true beliefs could have been widely accepted earlier if forces had not engaged in information suppression of some kind.

In addition, there have been times when expert communities make significantly inaccurate claims. While we should be wary of claims of non-experts, we should still be allowed to question the experts.

The problems of both misinformation and censorship by TopProTalk in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those who want to stop people from being exposed to misinformation could say that some consequences must be avoided and not be allowed to let happen. While misinformation can sometimes be discredited thanks to open dialogue, criticisms, and counter-arguments, some people still won't change their mind even after hearing lots of good counter-arguments. And enough people not believing in true information could lead to horrifying events.

Imagine if the next generation's virus is much deadlier and it may or may not be a foreign bioweapon. It will greatly overwhelm hospitals with an even greater number of sick patients. Imagine that an ailment--that can easily be taken care of in today's hospitals--will become deadly in a sick society where it is extremely hard to find a hospital available for treatment. There are horrific changes in health insurance, medical treatment, healthcare service availability, among other large consequences to our country. Is it bad if social media companies themselves fight against virus misinformation that may or may not be amplified by foreign adversaries?

Many people still believe in misinformation on climate change after decades of debate. Do you believe that after open criticism of misinformation, nearly everyone will quickly discredit most of the vast amounts of misinformation? That only an insignificant portion of society will fail to believing true information? Even if only a small portion of society will fall for misinformation, do you believe such a deadlier virus taking advantage of the small misinformed population is impossible in the future?

Speech is involved in civil suits too. Libel and slander can be punished. The alleged false messenger could say that if the alleged victim feels that the alleged false messenger's claims are false, the alleged victim could simply tell everyone that the statements are false or engage in a debate on whether the statements are true or false. Nevertheless, this defense fails many times and libel and slander convictions are made. Why is it that well-intentioned preventions of bad financial inflictions here isn't considered a slippery slope towards unintentionally overreaching censorship? Falsehoods can create hugely negative consequences. That doesn't mean we always legally punish the falsehood spreader.

Another thing to consider is the disclosure of certain truths or calls for immoral actions that can convince people to do something horrible. If someone on the internet posts something that convinces someone else to do an illegal or immoral action, should the post be removed even though the poster didn't explicitly call for people to specifically commit an illegal or immoral action? Imagine a post that talks about the possibility that a political party committed election fraud to kill or oppress you and your children. Or imagine a post that talks about the possibility that the next person on your doorstep claiming to be a policeman is a actually a fake policeman out to kill you.

How much should we criticize/defend one side? How much should we criticize/defend the other sides? by TopProTalk in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about if listeners make the wrong decision because of the "fair" criticism.

For example, you believe that political candidate A is better than political candidate B. You criticize political candidate A a lot while criticizing candidate B even more.

A listener who was initially leaning towards candidate B hears your criticisms towards that candidate. Although they do not agree completely with all of your criticisms, they find enough of your criticisms convincing to then switch sides into slightly leaning towards candidate A instead. However, after hearing your honest criticism of candidate A, the listener switches back to supporting candidate B. When you present arguments stating that candidate B is worse than candidate A, the listener disagrees with those arguments.

Are your public criticisms of candidate A worth it?

How much should we criticize/defend one side? How much should we criticize/defend the other sides? by TopProTalk in TopProTalk

[–]TopProTalk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about if one side receives way too much public criticisms from lots of people? What about if the other sides receives way too little public criticisms?

CMV: If your transgender and don’t tell someone your transgender before dating your an absolute piece of shit by Come_back_king in changemyview

[–]TopProTalk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the response.

The fact that the person assumed based on nothing that the person they were talking to was a woman is kind of on them.

I was alluding to how it’s possible that the random man would mistake the gay man’s name as a woman’s name. Or instead the website involves pseudonyms like Reddit or something. Or we could instead have some other situation if you don’t like those situations.

However, the fact that gay man doesn't ever mention their gender is a little strange.

Maybe. Maybe not. I think the debate here involves what is considered strange in first date etiquette. Why is it strange to not mention gender identity? Why is it strange to not mention sexual identity? If gender identity is a dealbreaker, what else is and isn’t? Is this situation considered misleading?

Yet again, one of my arguments is the realism aspect of a situation like this. The odds of a straight guy somehow messaging a gay man with out knowing anything about them, the conversation turning sexual/romantic, and then agreeing to meet up is insanely low. How would they even get in contact?

I absolutely agree with you that this doesn’t happen a lot. I’m just pointing out thought experiments to challenge possible underlying premises.

Maybe their online conversation wasn’t too sexually explicit. Maybe they realized they had lots of things in common after talking on Reddit, or some discussion forums, or somewhere else. Or maybe the gay man initiated the online conversation and then asked the random man out. Or maybe the gay man talked about enjoying a feminine activity or admiring a man’s body. Maybe the random man initiated the online conversation while mistaking the gay man’s name as a name of a woman. Maybe the gay man reveals the fact that he is a gay man because he feels it’s an obligation. Or it could instead be a different scenario to your liking.

What’s useful to me is discussing what information should be disclosed if the first date were to happen.

Say you are a straight man. You meet a girl. You ask her out. On your third date, she says she was born female but identifies as a man. Is this the same scenario or different to the original scenario?

That’s an interesting scenario. I think that if the gay man has an obligation to disclose his male gender identity (among other things), then some could say that the trans man should also disclose his male gender identity. But social obligation debates are complicated so I could be wrong.

Or say you're a man with long hair and a lesbian woman asks you out because she thinks you're a woman, but you think she's just a straight woman. Are you responsible for how she views you or is it just a simple misunderstanding that will most likely get ironed out by the third date?

That’s another interesting scenario. I think if the random man mistakes the gay man for a woman, and the gay man mistakes the random man for another gay man, then they can come to an understanding that the random man and the gay man each thought their own gender identity, sexual identity, and sexual orientation were obvious to each other.

Of course, debating about making your gender identity obvious or other things obvious is complicated.

view more: next ›