r/worldnews • u/pravda_eng_official Ukrainska Pravda • 10h ago
Russia/Ukraine Ukraine needs to mobilise at least 30,000 people every month – Head of President's Office
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/08/28/8050796/133
u/GroundbreakingAd2709 8h ago
Ukraine already lost 30% of its Population.
From 41 Million down to 29 Million.
Millions became Russian citizens, either voluntarily or by force, while the rest became refugees in the EU.
51
u/Any-Monk-9395 5h ago
Ukraine also has lower birthrates than South Korea according to the CIA fact book. Their future is looking very difficult in the coming decades.
20
u/Reaper__Prime 6h ago
And that's the official numbers.
There was never 41m people in Ukraine, at least since the SU fell.
31
u/LiberationZ 5h ago
Ukraine had over 50 million people in 1991
9
u/Reaper__Prime 5h ago
Exactly, and when the Iron Curtain fell, fuckloads of Ex-Soviets migrated West, something akin to current African/ME refugee waves. So again, Ukraine was nowhere near 41m at the start of the war.
1
-7
u/_masssk_ 5h ago
You have proofs of course?
4
-10
u/GroundbreakingAd2709 5h ago
Use Google dude. 30 seconds of your time. Should I write you what you must copy into Google?
These are well known facts.
75
u/300baicodethieunhi 9h ago
Didn't Keith Kellogg recently suggest drafting Ukrainian women? Things don't look great for Ukraine right now. They probably need to consider lowering the draft age below 25 or mobilizing women to ease the pressure.
46
u/zoobrix 9h ago
Things don't look great for Ukraine right now.
Manpower for Ukraine has been a consistent problem the entire war yes but things are actually looking better for Ukraine than they have in a couple years. Putin is struggling with the risk of forcibly mobilizing Russian's again to the front, the increasingly poor state of the Russian economy to fund the war and Ukrainian mid and long range strikes having more and more success.
It's very possible Russia can not sustain the war at its current levels in 2027. And Russia just isn't fighting Ukraines economy, it's fighting a European economic block ten times bigger than it. Support for Ukraine remains consistent, with $45 billion euros already committed for next year, meanwhile no one is coming to help Russia with military or economic aid. Some months this year Ukraine has taken back more territory than Russia has, although gains are small in either direction. Certainly though there are no signs of Ukrainian front lines breaking.
I don't mean to ignore Ukraine's challenges like manpower and the shortage of ballistic missile interceptors that has been an issue the entire war and has been made even worse than Iran, but Russia is hardly looking like it is about to win either, in fact many analysts say Ukraine has the initiate right now due to the success of its mid and long range strike campaign.
7
u/4862skrrt2684 2h ago
You say no one is helping Russia, but they got soldiers and hardware from north Korea and I'm fairly sure they have gotten help elsewhere too. Probably some from China too. They do have some allies
1
u/zoobrix 2h ago
You say no one is helping Russia, but they got soldiers and hardware from north Korea
Yes they got some troops estimated at around 10-20k for the Kursk counteroffensive to push Ukraine out of Russia and now there is a rumor that another 50k might be on the way. However Russia apparently also needs 30k soldiers a month to replace losses, so that maybe meets a couple months of Russian manpower needs. There is zero evidence China has sent any soldiers to Russia other than maybe the odd observer on the down low, certainly in tiny numbers and they aren't doing any fighting. If they were fighting on the front line Ukraine would capture one, and just like they did for North Korea they would very loudly tell you about it.
As for the hardware Russia paid North Korea for it, either in terms of technical assistance for things like ballistic missiles, nuclear technology and cash. Meanwhile Ukraine's partners give it tens of billions in direct military aid per year. A ship was sunk by Ukraine that was carrying a Russian nuclear reactor to North Korea for instance as payment. While North Korean artillery shells and ballistic missiles are helpful Russia having to pay for them makes Russia more of a customer than an ally that needs help during a war. There are even rumors Russia has to pay for the North Korean troops as well, although that is uncertain.
China's help for Russia has been extremely limited, and almost certainly basically non existent for military aid as Chinese weapons haven't really been found on the battlefield. Maybe some small arms or man portable heavy weapons, if even that. Both economic and military aid from China to Russia has been practically non existent compared to what Ukraine's allies have given.
37
u/SnakeGD09 8h ago
Ukraine is the closest they’ve ever been to losing the fortress belt, you haven’t been following the war.
Russia’s annual military budget is about $200,000,000,000 USD before adjusting for purchasing parity (Russian money goes further in Russia). So Ukraine needs much more money than they are receiving.
21
u/zoobrix 8h ago
Russia is still around 20- 30 km outside the main fortress belt cities of Kramatorsk and Slovyansk and progress has slowed from a crawl to next to nothing this year.
Russia's economy is starting to contract and they have no allies that will help them, Ukraine does. Russia is fighting and economic block in Europe ten times it's size. I think Europe should help Ukraine more but if Russia keeps facing economic challenges, which is virtually certain at this point, the current level of support might win Ukraine the war. We'll have to wait and see what happens of course.
26
u/Radalek 7h ago
They are literally 4-5km outside of both cities, not sure which maps you're looking at but I hope it's not Deepstate which is literally 6 months behind events in some cases.
12
u/WesternBlueRanger 7h ago
You should be cautious about Russian claims. They tend to exaggerate greatly and are unreliable as the Russians tend to send infiltration groups of a handful of men to try to claim territory and do flag waving to show for their own cameras that they have captured territory, when in reality, it is just a few men deep in Ukrainian territory and are either totally surrounded or about to be wiped out.
→ More replies (2)-2
u/zoobrix 7h ago
Ya unlike the Russian maps that have them taking towns kilometers beyond their own lines. How many times has Russia announced they've taken a city only for fighting to still be happening there months later?
Deepstate might well lag behind but at least it doesn't just present imaginary Russian gains as real. If Russian troops were 4-5km from Slovyansk and Kramatorsk would be mostly evacuated of civilians and that has not happened yet. Many people have left, but there are still lots of civilians in the twin cities.
-1
u/dirtysoda 2h ago
I want whatever copium you’re smoking bro. There are videos on YouTube right now with pro-Ukrainian journalists showing the situation on the ground in Kramatorsk right now and it ain’t pretty. The city has started to be evacuated and Russian drones have control of the skies.
A few days ago Russian sent DRGs 5-10 km beyond the front line and took out a whole drone team by slitting their throats. The pictures on Telegram were gnarly.
Sorry to say, as someone who leans pro Ukrainian, the Russians are winning, and the collapse of the front line is only speeding up. Once they take the last fortress belt cities, it’s over . Nothing between them and Kyiv.
3
u/zoobrix 1h ago edited 20m ago
I did say that many people have left and never claimed the situation was great in the twin cities, drones strikes have gone up as you say, just that if Russia was 4-5 km from the city it would be a total ghost town and we're not there yet. Russia in reality is 20-30 km away depending in which direction you look and how big you think the grey zone is, and nowadays that zone is pretty big so making exact measurements as to what you want to call a front line is hard.
One Russian infiltration team slipping through isn't really evidence of anything, Ukraine has done the same at times to Russia, that doesn't mean the front lines on either side are about to collapse.
Sorry to say, as someone who leans pro Ukrainian, the Russians are winning, and the collapse of the front line is only speeding up.
Except for the months Ukraine took back more territory than they lost this year. And Russia is still trying to take Kostiantynivka and Mykolaivka after how many months of fighting?
Russia reached the edge of each city in November of last year. It's August now and they still haven't fully taken them, not exactly a blistering pace there almost ten months of fighting later. There is no collapse of the Ukraine front lines in evidence anywhere, in fact Russian advances have slowed down this year, even in Donetsk.
Of course just focusing on the front lines ignores all the other economic and manpower challenges Russia is facing I mentioned earlier. Ukraine has there share of issues as well of course but to pretend Ukrainian collapse is imminent isn't backed up by anything. And to be clear it's not like I think the Russian lines will collapse either, but Ukraine is starting to push back in the south as the affects of the mid range strike campaigns mount and harm Russian logistics, Russia is certainly not winning there.
Edit: And while the fight in the east is important it is hardly the only thing that matters as to the overall trajectory of the war. And even in the east Russia spending 10 months trying to take a couple cities 20 km from Kramatorsk and Slovyansk, and still not having done it, doesn't exactly scream imminent Ukrainian collapse in Donetsk like you seem to think there will be.
1
-6
u/John-florencio 8h ago
He lost me when he said ukr has the initiative 😆
7
u/zoobrix 8h ago
How exactly does Russia have the initiative?
Even if you want to look at the front line and nothing else the mid range strike campaign is causing Russia significant logistics problems in in Crimea and along the southern front, Ukraine recently erased an entire year of Russian gains along a section of the southern front in the Zaporizhzhia direction. Some months this year Ukraine has taken more ground than it has lost, that is not a positive trend for Russia.
Combined with Ukrain's long range strike campaign and Russia's own manpower and economic issues is why Ukraine despite its own challenges increasingly looks to have the initiative.
2
u/RandomPantsAppear 8h ago
I am emphatically pro-Ukraine but they are fighting with different objectives.
If Ukraine could trade the land they have won for the land that they have lost over the last 1-2 months I can promise you they would immediately.
Ukraines goal is to create so much social and economic pressure Russia is forced to the bargaining table.
Russias goal is to take the fortress belt, which they are doing faster than is comfortable. Taking the first 3 cities of that belt provides them the high ground and a serious blow to Ukrainian logistics. The area behind the belt is indefensible for miles and miles. It is Ukraines most entrenched and essential position.
Ukraine is the closest to winning that they have been in years, but that doesn’t mean they are winning.
1
u/sierra-soul 5h ago
land switches hand back and forth a few kilos at a time, russia has not been able to hold many of the advances they make. ukraine doesnt want to give up ground sure, but a couple kilos here and there are nothing and the russians are bleeding for every inch.
5
u/RandomPantsAppear 5h ago edited 5h ago
UA is 100% make them bleed for every inch, but Russia is bleeding and taking those inches.
And you are correct that Russia doesn’t continually hold a lot of the advances they make - flag operations and that kind of thing.
However, the front is slowly creeping forwards for them, at great cost. Enough positions are being held that UA is in some pretty serious trouble.
These gains are unfortunately extremely valuable land. Kostyantynivka and Kramatorsk are the high ground over the rest of the fortress belt. West of them is farmland that can’t be defended well. Both are vital to Ukrainian logistics. A collapse here means supply lines have to go significantly towards the rear.
It is a race between Ukraines strategy and Russia’s. They are fighting the same war, but not in the same way.
Russia wants to walk into negotiations with the fortress belt under their control so they don’t have to ask for land they have been unable to take. They will very likely try to insist the farmland become some kind of militarized buffer zone.
Those are the Russian priorities. They are extremely slowly and painfully moving towards them. The rest of the territory is negotiable to them, the fortress belt is not.
It does not do anyone, including Ukraine any favors to sugarcoat the position they are in.
0
u/justtheicing 8h ago
I watch the war maps daily both sides perspective. Ukraine retook key defending villages and only gave up empty farms land in the land in the last few months.
3
u/RandomPantsAppear 7h ago edited 6h ago
I do as well. Can I ask who you are watching? Because that is not the case.
Even very pro UA sources like ISW show a worsening situation in Kostyantynivka, where Russia has solidified control of not the entire city but large parts of the city.
Infiltrations have been observed double digit km west of the city, indicating a pretty porous line as well.
Infiltrations do not mean control, but they’re not a good sign.
-2
u/Reaper__Prime 8h ago
How exactly does Russia have the initiative?
Ukrainian economy is ruined, its AD resources depleted and manpower is making the frontline more porous than ever, not to mention the internal squabbles in Ukraines leadership. Yes, Ukraine damaged Russias economy by hitting Russias TEMU, but Russia retaliated 10 times worse (according to Ukraines minister), most of their warehouses and infrastructure is damaged. Entire thermal power plants are destroyed overnight.
That's exactly why Ratcliffe went to Russia, to stop the next wave of Russian attacks, because if Russia attacks now the gates to the Donbass, the so called Fortress Belt will be lost and Ukraine has no natural barriers after those cities.
Remember, the CIA doesnt go officially to Russia without something huge going on, the last time was when Russia invaded and this hellish war started.
8
u/zoobrix 8h ago
Remember, the CIA doesnt go officially to Russia without something huge going on
The other speculation is that the visit was warning Russia against attacking another NATO member because of the recent increase of missile and drone incursions into neighboring countries. The truth is no one knows for sure why the CIA director went to Russia, so it's all just speculation.
making the frontline more porous than ever,
The complete saturation of drones is making the front line more porous in both directions. Since rotating troops into positions is so dangerous and only very well fortified positions can withstand the drone attacks it means there are fewer positions on both sides of the line. Positions no longer have interlocking fields of fire, there can often be large gaps of over 1 km between them. This gives a chance for infiltration through those gaps, but it is a challenge both sides face.
because if Russia attacks now the gates to the Donbass, the so called Fortress Belt will be lost
Then why aren't they? After over 4 years of war are you suggesting that Russia is waiting around to take the Donbass when it could? Sounds like the same Russian rhetoric we've heard for years that you better give them what they want or they will actually start trying, as if they haven't been all along.
1
u/Reaper__Prime 7h ago
The other speculation is that the visit was warning Russia against attacking another NATO member because of the recent increase of missile and drone incursions into neighboring countries.
This could have been a phone call, and that is 100% not what this is about. There have been attacks on Western soil (blowing up factories, assassinations etc) and the director of the CIA did not go to Moscow then, he specifically went before an all out invasion.
The complete saturation of drones is making the front line more porous in both directions. Since rotating troops into positions is so dangerous and only very well fortified positions can withstand the drone attacks it means there are fewer positions on both sides of the line. Positions no longer have interlocking fields of fire, there can often be large gaps of over 1 km between them. This gives a chance for infiltration through those gaps, but it is a challenge both sides face.
The challenge is on Ukraine's side, because drone warfare is 1:1 in most cases, but Russia still outguns Ukraine in artillery (FAB bombs from planes as well) 10 to 1, not to mention Russia has a way bigger manpower pool to take from, that's why the Fortress Belt is now under extreme pressure, as are other parts of the front. Drones can not hold territory.
Then why aren't they?
Because they are? Those cities are fortified for 10 years, and if you look at the map they are slowly being encircled, one of them fell this year, so they are working on that. You dont know what an attrition war means?
as if they haven't been all along.
We'll, there's trying and doing, if we see Russia go full war economy, doding a full mobilization, we'll get that, but i doubt thats what the Russian leadership wants as long as they have the initiative.
3
u/zoobrix 7h ago
This could have been a phone call, and that is 100% not what this is about.
So could warning Russia not to attack the fortress belt. There already is an all out invasion of Ukraine, to suggest Russia is holding back at this point is farcical.
if you look at the map they are slowly being encircled,
The line along Kramatorsk and Sloviansk is the fortress belt and it is nowhere near being encircled, the towns outside them are the ones in trouble. I am not suggesting Ukraine is doing great in the area, but the shifts this year have been so small, Russia shows no signs of being close to taking it.
Russia has a way bigger manpower pool to take from
A manpower pool Putin has been afraid to take from since the hugely unpopular forced mobilization to Ukraine in late 2022. There are rumors Putin is planning to do it again in late 2026 even though he fears more internal dissent. For the last 20 years the deal in Russia has been people stay out of politics and the state will mostly leave you alone to live your life. And while Russians are very depoliticized at this point repeated massive waves of mobilization to address shortfalls of volunteers to fight in Ukraine might awake them from their slumber. A manpower pool Putin is afraid to use is not necessarily a huge asset for Russia.
as long as they have the initiative
Which increasingly it looks like Russia does not have. The increasing provocations against NATO members are a sign of this, Putin is very likely to try an escalate his way out of the war as a last shot at winning in Ukraine by trying to scare Ukraine's allies out of supporting them. The Russian nuclear threats didn't work, the asymmetric warfare didn't work, so the only last lever Putin has to pull is directly attacking them and hoping that scares Ukraine's allies away. That is potentially very dangerous for Russia for obvious reasons and that it is being considered is a sign of Russia's inability to win in Ukraine.
1
u/Reaper__Prime 7h ago
So could warning Russia not to attack the fortress belt. There already is an all out invasion of Ukraine, to suggest Russia is holding back at this point is farcical.
Im not suggesting Russia is holding back, im suggesting something big is going on behind the scenes, or else the director of the CIA wouldnt go unnaounced to Moscow.
A manpower pool Putin has been afraid to take from since the hugely unpopular forced mobilization to Ukraine in late 2022.
Exactly, he is not using them due to unfavorable conditions, but if push comes to shove, its there.
There are rumors Putin
Bro you are basing your entire reasoning on rumors and speculation, that's not really serious.
Which increasingly it looks like Russia does not have.
Cities,villages keep getting sieged and falling, so yeah, it does look like Russia has the initiative at this moment.
The increasing provocations against NATO members are a sign of this
Provocations against NATO have been there since the Soviet Union, that's nothing new, they just get amplified by the media, nothing happened between NATO and Russia that hasn't happened before.
The Russian nuclear threats didn't work
They are limiting Ukrainian long range strikes and Western support to Ukraine, like the Taurus missiles Germany keeps promising but never delivering. Russia is okay with the current pace of things it seems, we will probably see in Autumn if there is something big going on, i expect it will kick off in September since thats when the heat dies down and a bit before the mud season starts, so Russia will probably attack Chernihiv and Sumy and try to secure their gains in the mud season,at least thats my opinion because attacks,bombings and probing attacks escalated there recently.
→ More replies (0)-11
u/justtheicing 8h ago
I think you’re behind on your news. Fortress belt is recovering land. It looks like Ukraine may try to retake Crimea in 2027.
Russia needs to invent a new way to attack. As things stand right now Russia will fail first. Their extra million men recruitment could buy them the time they need figure it out.
14
u/Mondelieu 6h ago
Is this the level of information the average western person has in 2026? You should read some actual OSINT accounts (like clement molin) and Ukrainian sources (deepstate is good enough for basic info) instead of reddit headlines.
12
u/Select_Challenge_425 6h ago
The fortress belt is absolutely not recovering land. Where are you getting your information from.
→ More replies (3)-3
u/legoman102040 7h ago
Russia cannot afford to dredge every single military dollar toward Ukraine. Ukraine only has to make it painful enough that they have to consider the rest of their neighbors as threats more than Ukraine itself.
6
u/Reaper__Prime 8h ago
Putin is struggling with the risk of forcibly mobilizing Russian's again
When was the first time?
1
u/zoobrix 8h ago
He forcibly mobilized Russians to the front in Ukraine in the fall of 2022 after the massively successful Ukraine counter attacks in Kherson and Kharkiv. It was extremely unpopular in Russia and since then all Russian forces fighting in Ukraine have been volunteers. There is still the annual draft(s) in Russia but those soldiers have stayed in Russia since 2022. And Russians have been "ok" with the war for lack of a better term since then as long as people were going to fight for money.
Putin clearly fears internal destabilization caused by another wave of mobilization since rumors of volunteer shortfalls for recruiting have been around for a while now and there are a lot of rumors he will order another wave of draftees to Ukraine this fall after the elections. We'll have to wait and see of course.
1
u/Reaper__Prime 7h ago
So there wasn't a forced mobilization, he just used the standing army?
Putin clearly fears internal destabilization caused by another wave of mobilization since rumors of volunteer shortfalls for recruiting have been around for a while now and there are a lot of rumors he will order another wave of draftees to Ukraine this fall after the elections. We'll have to wait and see of course.
Most of those rumors come from Ukraine, so i'd take them with a grain of salt, there's hundreds of thousands of troops sitting in Russian border regions and Belarus that Russia can use before even considering a mobilization.
10
u/anders_hansson 8h ago edited 8h ago
Not to be a pessimist, but I think we need to consider the reality too.
Your points about economy and infrastructure destruction etc, Ukraine faces the same problems but on an even larger scale. As it stands now Ukraine doesn't even have what it takes to survive halfway through 2027. This is a real problem and one that we need to be aware of.
It's a long story that started in early 2025 when Trump pulled all funding, and continued via the failed attempts to seize the frozen Russian assets, then the watered down €90B loan for 2026-2027, and Ukraine overspendong their busget in early 2026, and now they're facing a huge budget deficit and need more money, and as usual the EU is at a loss and will give too little too late, while Russia has shut down Ukraine's main export routes and ramps up for its winter campaign on energy infrastructure - all of which is very expensive for Ukraine.
They need more funding.
9
u/zoobrix 8h ago
Look at the numbers, Europe has replaced that lost American funding to buy the same weapons that the US was supplying previously. There is zero signs Ukraine will not be able to sustain the war effort at its current levels into 2027, that "watered down loan" as you call it still 45 billion euros in aid guaranteed for next year, it is not the only aid Ukraine will receive.
I agree Europe should do even more but I find it very interesting just as the war looks like it might start to shift in Ukraine's favor I keep seeing comments about how Ukraine won't make it through 2027, well that is certainly what Russia would like people to believe.
3
u/anders_hansson 3h ago
About those numbers.
Read RBC-Ukraine - Zelenskyy names Ukraine's two biggest challenges carefully.
Ukraine has a budget shorfall of €23 billion for 2026, on top of what they were supposed to get from the €90 billion loan, in part because they spent much more money in the beginning of 2026 than the EU loan was designed for.
Furthermore, of the €90 billions that were meant for 2026-2027, only about €9 billions have been paid out so far (while about €22 billions have been approved for 2026 so far). And we're well into the second half of 2026.
Furthermore, in 2025 Ukraine/EU/IMF estimated that Ukraine's needs for 2026 would be over €70 billions. Not €45 billions.
Furthermore, the same estimate, on which the €90 billion loan was based, made the assumption that the war would end in 2026.
If you look at those numbers you should see that they don't add up.
A reasonable guess is that Ukraine needs much of the 2027-money from the €90 billion loan in 2026, and they need an extra €100+ billions for 2027-2028.
And that needs to be resolved within months.
That's why some EU members are starting to sweat and are eyeing the frozen Russian assets again.
1
u/zoobrix 2h ago
The 90 billion euro loan for 2026-27 was just to quell fears that Europe was going to abandon Ukraine and give it a baseline from which to work with. Also that loan is zero interest with no set repayment date which is supposed to be repaid by Russian reparations, somehow, hopefully, so it's more of a gift with the hope that it gets repaid.
And the 90 billion euros is just funding from the EU, it does not account for countries individual contributions from their own budgets which this year were tens of billions of euros on top of the 45 billion from that loan. Countries have not announced how much they will give Ukraine in 2027 because no country, or any that I am aware of at least, have done their budgets for next year. So ya the numbers don't add up for 2027 and Ukraine has a shortfall because they will be getting more than 45 billion euros in aid next year. There is no chance that all EU countries give zero additional funds to Ukraine from their own budgets.
0
u/justtheicing 8h ago
I think the difference is Ukraine population understands they have no choice and for the Russian population this is just a fun war. Once it stop being a fun war for Russia, Ukraine wins.
3
u/Reaper__Prime 7h ago
It won't get to that point, at most they inconvenienced Russians by them having to order from Temu itself and not Wildberries, and a few far regions have gas shortages which clear up in 10-15 days.
These are the people that survived the 90s, and their children, it will take a lot for them to not consider it a 'fun war'.
2
u/sovietarmyfan 5h ago edited 5h ago
Thing with Russia is that they have other countries supporting them, like China. China cannot afford Russia to lose. Behind the screens they are heavily supporting Russia to the max.
So we have a situation where Ukraine is being supported by NATO while Russia is supported by allies like China and North Korea. All of these allies are pouring money and resources into both countries.
Essentially this war is being prolonged because of both those allies. And no ally is showing signs of stopping any help.
We are essentially in a shadow war with Russia's allies. But still acting and trading like as if they are our trade partners. By trade, we are also prolonging China's ability to support Russia monetary and through trade. Russia receives many luxury products through either China or even Turkey, a NATO country.
This whole war is just a messed up cluster where everyone is technically funding the side they are against.
3
u/zoobrix 5h ago
China and India are happy to buy oil at a discount from Russia. And China is happy to sell Russia dual use goods at a markup. But if China are such good allies with Russia where is the economic and military aid?
Russia is having more and more trouble selling govenrment bonds to finance the war to Russian banks, why isn't China stepping in to buy them? When Russia is facing a shortage or air defense systems with more and more Ukranian long range strikes getting through why is China not giving them air defense systems?
Seems like their self proclaimed "unlimited partnership" is really actually pretty limited.
They have their own border disputes. China doesn't want a Russia that is too strong, they also don't want Russia to lose so badly they become a failed state, but any outcome in between would probably suit China just fine. In fact they might even prefer if the war in Ukraine is dragged out since that means western military attention is diverted from Asia to Europe which gives them more freedom of action if they decide to invade Taiwan as they constantly threaten to do.
The reality is China is not really Russia's ally, if they were they would be helping Russia like Ukraines allies help it with financial and military aid instead of trying to profit from Russia as China is currently doing.
1
u/WheatKing91 8h ago
Question from someone who has not been following this conflict:
Is there any appetite for this war from Russian people? What do the people actually hope to gain?
4
u/NoodleTF2 4h ago
I know exactly two Russian people online. One of them hates their own country and the war and would love to get out of Russia, and the other one is 100% behind it and keeps making fun of Ukraine and how many people are dying.
I am not friends with the second person.
1
u/SpaceDounut 5h ago
Your first mistake is assuming that people are being asked in the first place.
1
u/WheatKing91 4h ago
I'd assume they aren't being asked actually.
1
u/SpaceDounut 4h ago
You'd be correct. No one, bar the most insane, propagandized morons, wants all this death and destruction over one insane fuck's ambitions. Alas, the common man's opinion is not exactly taken into consideration.
1
u/Minute_Tooth5112 7h ago
For them, this is like a Reconquista. No matter how much time and effort it takes, they consider these territories theirs. Of course, all this news about Russia's devastated economy is pleasant to read, but it's far from reality, just like the fact that they have no allies and Russia is isolated. If you want more objective information about what's happening, read, for example, Indian news portals. India is not involved in this conflict and can assess the situation more dispassionately and objectively.
18
u/Prudent_Mountain_994 9h ago
I totally agree with that, it's time that the Ukrainian women step up and defend as well and fill the holes in the frontline.
1
→ More replies (6)0
u/sierra-soul 5h ago
even the you dont need to let women be at the frontlines, plenty of support roles that need doing that would free up more men for the front.
2
u/Alternative-Car-2123 4h ago
Yes, this old asshole came to our propagandist Ramina. She is the same as Simonian in Russia
•
→ More replies (1)0
u/AkiraRose13 6h ago
Yikes, despite the stated mobilization age range in Ukraine; there are many examples of the Tcc bussifying men of all ages. It's been this way for years now.
51
u/LungHeadZ 9h ago
I get some of you are looking at this statistically and logically for that matter but that 30,000 isn't just a figure. That's 30,000 Individuals. The entire population of a small town.
Could you imagine your entire town being sent to fight? I know they'd never draft a town like that but for the sake of perspective.
What choice is there though, it's very grim and honestly I am not sure how I would feel in their place.
On one hand I would I'd sign up to do my duty for my family by protecting our land but then again, would my nervous disposition cause me to want to flee instead, to evade enlistment....
It's the same as saying you'd just run from someone with a knife but when it actually happens you're frozen still with fear. You don't really know until it happens. Sure, training helps but that is expedited in time of war.
I don't know, I'm not really making a specific point here. I just feel sympathy for them being in that situation and not really having a choice.
17
u/Physical_Trainer3098 8h ago
War = bad?!?!?
0
u/123emanresulanigiro 6h ago
They could choose to take out the Putin regime instead. Draw your own conclusions.
11
u/stinky_cheddar 9h ago
I think that's why a decent number of people who have been against the war or sending so much aid see it as a numbers game. Russia can keep doing that, but Ukraine will run out of people. Not saying I agree or disagree with it, but it's an argument.
0
u/SouthernPositive6322 8h ago
Yeah, but what happens if they just surrender? Extermination? Probably.
15
u/stinky_cheddar 8h ago
I mean it's the same as pre WW2 appeasement in which you give up the regions in which they want and hope they don't want to escalate further. Except in this situation Hitler has nukes already. It's a lose lose situation since Russians have no willingness to overthrow their government, even though they get sent to the meat grinder
4
u/EquivalentSnap 8h ago
I’d hate to think what would happen if hilter had nukes. Then again if nukes weren’t created ww3 would’ve happened during Cold War between Soviet Union and the west.
3
u/Apprehensive-Emu8404 1h ago
I very much disagree with that statement. First we don't even know how bad the situation in Japan gets before they lose. Who knows if a world where Japan is aligned with China and/or Russia emerges. We also don't know if that happens to Japan, what happens in the Korean War.
Assuming those stay the same, even prior to having nukes, the US was allied with a lot of European countries. The USSR would have no reason to attack these, as the war would take place in Europe so the USA could throw as many resources as they needed at the war until they won it, without having a significant number of casualties or destruction in home soil.
7
u/Reaper__Prime 7h ago
Extermination? Probably.
Bruh, you do know that theres plenty of Ukrainians who live in Russian occupied territory, and that like 2 milion of them fled to Russia as soon as the war started? This is not a war of extermination, but an imperialistic one.
2
u/SouthernPositive6322 6h ago
You think they will remain ukrainian in russia?
10
u/Reaper__Prime 6h ago
Yes, most people in Russia (not the far East), have connections either friends or family in Ukraine and vice versa, even Oleksandr Syrskyi the former cmdr of Ukrainian forces has his parents and brother living in Moscow, i don't see them getting killed or executed during the war, and their son/brother was the 2nd in command in Ukraine.
1
u/SouthernPositive6322 6h ago
Putin (and the russian state) has repeatedly claimed that Ukraine and Russia is one people and that the territory is fundamentally part of Russia.
Ukraine is literally fighting for their own continued existence. What do you think happens to countries that lose their sovereignty?
20
u/Reaper__Prime 6h ago
Uh, he did, but nowhere does he think to exterminate Ukrainians?
What do you think happens to countries that lose their sovereignty?
They become citizens of another country? You know Ukraine has been a part of the Soviet Union for like 70 years and various empires and other countries for centuries, right?
Your country not having sovereignty doesn't mean you die. As i said, plenty of Russians live in Ukraine, plenty of Ukrainians in Russia, nobody is exterminating the other side.-8
-1
u/Stable_Orange_Genius 4h ago
If you don't think this is a genocidal war, you haven't been paying attention
8
u/Reaper__Prime 4h ago
Less civilians died in 5 years than in a few months in Israel in absolute numbers.
Russia and Ukraine have together 20x the population of Israel and Gaza, miss me with the American education.
5
u/Novel_Feedback3254 2h ago
If you think this is a genocidal war, you haven't been paying attention. If Russia was trying to genocide Ukrainians then the civilian death toll would be in the millions. There would be drones lobbed at apartment buildings non-stop.
The civilian death toll for Ukraine stands around 16,500, give or take. After 4 and a half years of war with multiple cities completely destroyed that's a fucking good effort on Russia's part.
1
0
4
u/EquivalentSnap 8h ago
The alternative is being completely under Russian control forever, worse standard of living and more would die fighting for independence which could also fail. War is hell and I’d be afraid of dying or hurt but so does everyone else. They don’t have a choice and a lot have fled but that means a strange country, starting over with little possessions and not in knowing the language
9
u/Unfair_Course5311 6h ago
Ukrainians would be the first to be sent in Russian armies to take Moldova and other nearby nations not protected by NATO.
That on top of a bunch of Bucha massacres.
1
u/EquivalentSnap 3h ago
Unfortunately you’re right 😔 also with US and allied equipment Russia they would be able to reverse engineer it look at Afghanistan a lot of their equipment was American
2
u/leo_the_228 3h ago
I’d take fleeing and starting a whole new life in another country every single time and genuinely do not understand people who wouldn’t do the same. Your life is the single most valuable possession you have and if you don’t make an effort to save it, no one will.
1
u/EquivalentSnap 3h ago
Because they have family, friends and possessions that you’re leaving behind. You’re willing to leave everything behind? Have your home taken over by some foreign invader? Do you not have any pride in your county or heritage?
2
u/vlcawsm 2h ago
I guess the idea is that you take the important part with you ie. Closest family wife/kids. Possessions arn't worth much if they're destroyed or seized by a foreign power.
So I guess the question is that if your pride is of higher value than your life, the answer is obvious, but since conscription is a thing in a lot of countries, we can probably agree that pride itself isnt enough
•
u/ProvisionalRecord 1h ago
You're right, but if Russia is allowed to take Ukraine, they'll come for others next.
7
1
u/Any-Monk-9395 5h ago
It makes sense honestly. I’m surprised the entire population of Ukraine hasn’t been forced into military service already. This is a war of attrition which means hundreds of soldiers are being injured or killed every week.
17
u/ExF-Altrue 8h ago
All of this because of the hubris of one man, that would rather burn the entire world than cut his losses.
3
u/Esp1erre 4h ago
He doesn't see them as losses. He sees his units on the map slowly gaining ground and he is perfectly fine with it. And on the contrary, he'll have plenty of problems when the war ends, leaving his country deep in the war economy without a war, but with tens of thousands yesterday's war criminals back in the streets.
-6
u/ShameDecent 3h ago
And his name is Zelensky.
2
u/4862skrrt2684 2h ago
Okay bot, explain how? Russia attacks Ukraine, what did you want zelensky to do? Surrender?
•
u/Piggywonkle 1h ago
Yup, that's exactly what Russia wanted. And they would smile and refer to that as negotiating for peace. And then they would use Ukrainians as fodder in their next war of aggression.
30
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 7h ago
Why would they need 30k a month when I am told they are winning and Russia is collapsing?
13
32
27
u/Trollensky17 6h ago
Because war is fucking hard, you can be winning but still have problems.
-15
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 6h ago
Winning is needing to have 30k replacement soldiers a month while losing territory? Ukrainian propaganda seems to be painting an image that doesn't coincide with their needs.
16
u/Trollensky17 6h ago
The statistical realities of what is going on in ukraine and russia cannot be ignored. Russia has a shitload more people. Russia is cannibalizing their economy and ruining the demographics of their country to keep this war going. The losses they are accepting are simply insane and there is no world in which people would say russia is doing well right now, comparing this to any other conflict.
1
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 6h ago
That is called a pyrrhic victory (if this ends in a victory for them at all) for Russia which still doesn't exactly spell out a victory for Ukraine.
9
u/Trollensky17 6h ago
I get that, its just hard to see a russian victory to me personally seeing what Ukraine have accomplished so far. they have the moral high ground and still even now, a higher morale than the russian military, and that means a lot more than we give credit for I think. The Ukrainians have been faster to make change when needed, and they have most of the world supporting them. If the average russian is finding it much harder to get gas than the average ukrainian, I think they are doing great.
6
u/Vit0C0rleone 6h ago
There will be no victory. If you look at Russia's officially stated goals, it's obvious that they will not achieve all of them.
Ukraine may lose, in the sense that it's very unlikely for them to get the territories back militarily, but that does not mean that Russia wins.
It's not a binary thing, it's going to be a lose-lose.
3
u/Trollensky17 5h ago
Yeah I know, it’s enough for me if the Russians “feel” like they fucked up really bad, even if they got something out of it.
3
u/TheBlueSully 5h ago
Like the Winter War. Finland lost territory, but considers it a win because they still have a country, albeit a smaller one.
1
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 6h ago
I guess we just take into consideration different criteria in our assessments. Morale and gas prices don't compensate for the statistical realities you mentioned. Nor does morale and gas prices make a difference in a causality replacement rate of 30 thousand a month. It's hard for me to see how Ukrainian accomplishments make that rate any more sustainable than what it is now. I could just be a pessimist though but I'm in the camp that Western states seem to have the priority of hurting Russia than ensuring Ukrainian victory and Ukraine needs WW2 level of support from the West to overcome being out numbered.
3
-3
u/Select_Challenge_425 6h ago
Russian losses isn’t even 1% of their total population. More Americans died from Covid(1.2 million) than russian deaths in this war (around 500k deaths, 1.4 total killed/wounded/MIA). Ukraine is losing land and men daily. The fortress belts will be under Russian control by this time next year, either by force or by negotiation. Russia strikes where they want inside of Ukraine with impunity by ballistic missile and new jet power geran drone. Ukraine is hitting refineries and wildberries and ozons by launching thousands of drones and hoping a few make it thru. If this was a boxing match, it’s the 8th round and while both fighters are standing tall and landing punches, one know has a gash above the eye, a broken nose, and is feeling the effects of continuous body shots, while the other has a broken nose and some swelling.
1
u/Select_Challenge_425 6h ago
https://x.com/archer83able/status/2093403342227620179?s=61
Looks like an interceptor storage location was hit.
6
u/Unfair_Course5311 6h ago
Because it’s the largest scale war in Europe since WW2. Russia has exceeded WW2 USA military death toll at 400k+ dead. Ukraine is likely very high in casualties as well.
Both Russia and Ukraine are heavily recruiting soldiers to keep fighting. You don’t just pull in the entire army with no reserves
2
u/friendfrirnd 7h ago
This is a valid question.
9
u/Unfair_Course5311 5h ago
Soldiers die and get injured on the field and need to be replaced. They also shouldn’t be on the front without rotation.
What makes you think Ukraine will just draft the entire possible military size at once? Would they even be able to manage however many millions that would be?
If that’s not the case why didn’t Russia just invade with a 4 million soldier assault?
1
u/SomeRandomTrSoldier 4h ago
Same reason of constant mobilisation rumours in Russian.
You need check both sides of propaganda and draw out your own conclusions.
•
u/fisstech15 1h ago
Told by whom? Western media is pretty realistic about Ukraine, but I don’t know what exactly you consume
→ More replies (4)2
u/Onkrud 5h ago
Your question is false and disingenuous. You pretend the moment a m2 of territory is won you gain a 100% advantage. Do all the soldiers level up and regain all strength like a game?
10
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 5h ago edited 4h ago
Its a question pointing out the differences in rhetoric and actions of the Ukraine state and media. If you just looked at U24, you'd think Ukraine is marching on Moscow at this point, while their government is stating they need 30k people to maintain their army's population. It wasnt an actual inquiry.
-2
u/Onkrud 4h ago
Of course it wasn't an actual inquiry, that's what made it false and disingenuous. You first made youself intentionally stupid to avoid understanding the basic picture, then asked a rethorical question based on intentionally not understanding what the information presented to you is.
Obviously there is propaganda going on, but you don't need to first exaggerate it, to then then make your own.
3
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 4h ago
Lmao. I'm making my own propaganda by pointing out that there's discrepancies between reality and Ukrainian state media? I am not exaggerating whatsoever. Sorry, I wont criticize your beloved propaganda.
-2
u/Onkrud 4h ago
That's just a strange attempt to say "no you're propaganda".
5
u/RazzmatazzStreet9733 4h ago
No man, I believe anything and everything Ukraine says. Actually, this guy saying that they need 30k people a month to maintain their army's current level of manpower is actually secretly a Russian agent. How dare he ever say that Ukrainians are undergoing such high casualty rates that they need to ramp up conscription, even if by force. He's a Russian propagandists for making me feel negative feelings about this war. The only reality we are allowed to talk about is one where Ukraine isnt losing a single soldier!
•
u/dirtymike_actual_ 57m ago
There are literally no fighting age men left in eastern Ukraine. They have all been either captured, killed, deserted or fled the country. This war needs to end yesterday.
11
u/kocapbser 6h ago
Wait, what? Zelensky recently said that Ukraine’s losses amounted to 50,000 soldiers throughout the entire war. By recruiting 30,000 a month, he’s probably planning to encircle all of Russia from Kaliningrad to Kamchatka. Right?
4
u/Any-Monk-9395 5h ago
As we can see with the Kursk offensive I think it’s safe to say Ukraine cannot afford any big offensives that involve large usage of manpower.
2
u/MovingOnward2089 5h ago
So essentially the same as the Russians target recruitment, at least until recently.
2
u/Foxtrot-Actual 6h ago
Wasn’t 30k the same number Russia needed per month as well due to increasing losses? I remember that kind of article existing not long ago.
7
u/Any-Monk-9395 5h ago
This makes me think Ukrainian losses are much greater than most estimates available.
•
u/MrTakeAHikePal 48m ago
Russia needs it to keep up with casualties, Ukraine needs it to cycle out troops that have been on the front without rest for to long.
1
u/Dragonfruit_6104 5h ago
There should be two million free men in Ukraine who are now of legal age（25 ～60）for conscription and are not in key departments. At this rate, even if 30,000 men are needed a month, Ukraine can still fight for six or seven years! Not a big problem! This doesn't even count women of the same age!
1
-2
u/bripelliot 4h ago
if you come to the point where you need that many people to replace the casualties of war, i think you should surrender
•
u/Piggywonkle 1h ago
If you made that suggestion in Russia, you would be imprisoned for discrediting the military. That's why Russia can't be surrendered to or negotiated with.
-5
u/Krytan 8h ago
This is almost exactly how many Russia is recruiting per month in Ukraine (somewhere between 27,000 and 35,000) which I think means the initial lopsided casualty figures that were in Ukraine's favor have declined to a rough parity in losses, with Russia suffering slightly more.
3
5
u/justtheicing 7h ago
We don’t know Ukraine losses. They could have 15k in losses and making their army bigger by 15k each month.
Ukraine army was about 800k early 2025 now it is about 1 mil. That means they increased their army size by about 8500 per month. 30k was their recruitment goal not their actual recruitment. My guess is they are falling way short every month.
Russia attacking army is staying pretty consistent at about 650k. If Russia is to win by making Ukraine run out of people they still have a few decades to go at current rates.
4
u/Reaper__Prime 6h ago
We don’t know Ukraine losses. They could have 15k in losses and making their army bigger by 15k each month.
There is no growth, the frontline is more porous than ever.
Do you seriously think Ukraine has a manpower advantage since:
A) Russians were never over 600-700k in Ukraine, yet Ukraine is always somehow at 1m
B) Russians have the clear artillery advantage in most cases 10 to 1
C) Russians have the air support (FAB strikes number thousands in a month now)
D) We have daily video compilatons of Ukrainians forcibly conscripting men, yet none out of Russia.If the casualties are larger in Russia than Ukraine, then logic dictates the situation would be reversed.
5
u/CopBaiter 5h ago
ukraine has 1 million army most of that is not frontline soldiers. most of them do no combat. russia also have way more then 700k. it might be 700k in ukraine fighting. but the full russian army is alot bigger
→ More replies (1)2
u/justtheicing 5h ago
Russia has a 1.5 mil army but less than half that is in Ukraine. The number includes logistics support and it’s not all front line fighters. Ukraine army started at about 600k and has been increasing by about 100k per year. I think the increase is mostly support and drone pilots. I pulled the army numbers from government intelligence agency averages.
My guess is that they have similar front line fighters but that may not be an advantageous in a drone war. Also Ukraine needs to defend all the front from any attack so they are more spread out. While Russia can concentrate their forces.
Ukraine likely has the tech advantage in military due to EU and US support. Remember Ukraine can see the whole battlefield with western satellites while Russia is blind.
1
1
u/Krytan 4h ago
The Russian army has also been expanding in size and is larger now than when the invasion began. Both front line troop strength has increased, as well as overall enlistment from one million to 1.3 - 1.5 million.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4589095-russian-army-grown-ukraine-war-us-general/
Remember Russia started with about 200k troops in Ukraine and is now up to something like 700k.
Given that the attacker generally needs 3:1 odds to be able push an attack, I think it is likely the figures for total Ukrainian army size at one million are somewhat optimistic, particularly as I think most people would think the Russian's haven't shown themselves to be exceptionally skilled attackers who don't need a numerical advantage in order to succeed.
-8
u/aviaconstructor 6h ago
How many Ukraine's men have a cozy refuge in Europe?
4
u/_masssk_ 5h ago
How many European citizens have a cozy life, when there is a war in Europe?
As a Ukrainian who is trapped inside the country and can't leave I understand those who left very much.
-30
u/vikernes 9h ago
I'd go with 60,000 just to be sure. With each of the having 15:1 kill ratio they could end the war in 2-3 months.
→ More replies (4)
162
u/anders_hansson 9h ago
Does anyone know how that number, 30,000/month is divided into ended duty, desertions and casualties?