Let’s Choose

Has Ukraine’s Army Been Reduced by Almost 50%?

Source: A Son of the New American Revolution.

More Information About Ukraine’s Military Deaths

Source: A Son of the New American Revolution.

Casualty numbers — like territorial gains and losses — don’t tell the full story about a war, but they do enlighten. Ukrainian casualties tell us that Ukraine is fighting a lost cause.

This reality should force the U.S. to reconsider our support. To save Ukraine on the battlefield would require a substantial escalation, whereas to continue our current support is to waste Ukrainian lives and our own resources.

46 thoughts on “Let’s Choose

  1. Ukrainian casualties tell us Ukraine is fighting for its life. Whether or not the cause is lost is debatable. What is not debatable is that people who are fighting for freedom in their homeland that has been invaded by tyrants deserve to be helped. And any country that is able to help and does not deserves nothing but contempt and a similar fate… which it will surely receive. If Hitler taught us anything it’s that tyrants left unchecked do not stop at borders.

    The Ukrainians have proven they will fight to the death, with or without our support. They don’t consider their lives “wasted” in the fight for freedom. If we ever sink to a level where we consider helping such people a “waste of our resources,” may God have mercy on us all, because our enemies will not.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “What is not debatable is that people who are fighting for freedom in their homeland that has been invaded by tyrants deserve to be helped.”

      Your choice, then, is to escalate, perhaps send a NATO invasion force into Ukraine?


      1. I see no reason to send in NATO forces. The Ukrainians are whipping Russia’s ass quite nicely.

        The only thing the Ukrainians need right now is a stronger missile defense. The Russians are firing missiles from safely inside their borders because they can’t take the Ukrainian army in a fair fight. Personally, I think we should give Ukraine long range missiles, but that would be “attacking Russia inside its borders.” (Yeah, like that’s something they’d never do.) But if the Israelis will give the Ukrainians their Iron Dome technology, which they say they are going to do, I’d settle for that.

        Liked by 2 people

      1. Just because you don’t LIKE the evidence presented, does not mean there is none. You just don’t LIKE sources that present it and you continue to use Putin mouthpieces in an attempt to promote your anti-Democracy agenda.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. Why show it to you? No matter what evidence is shown, you call it propaganda or untrue or some other comment that denies you will believe ANYTHING presented. Unless it is form of your own sordid sources.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. “Because there is no evidence.”

        No evidence except for the facts.

        Your Dear Leader correctly stated Putin’s “genius” objective – to gain a whole country at the cost of a few unimportant sanctions. Genius! Putin has failed in that objective and now it will never happen. The cost is massive in blood and treasure, the sanctions are ruinous, and Ukraine will NEVER accept being part of Russia. Meanwhile, NATO has expanded and the Russian federation is fraying at the edges.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. “So you claim, without evidence?

            It is truly pitiful is that you really seem to think that simply denying the truth makes it go away. Russia IS losing. The costs to Russia in blood and treasure HAVE been massive. Its economy IS in a deep sanction-induced recession. Hundreds of thousands of their best and brightest have fled the country. And Ukrainians will NEVER forgive them.

            Maybe you could try to learn something instead of doubling down on nonsense. For example, you should be embarassed to have offered a piece by Larry C. Johnson as evdience of anything. Maybe you did not know what a shithead he is? Lois did the work. Learn from her.

            Liked by 3 people

      3. If a country decides to invade another in an elective war and then 9 months later orders a general conscription for 3 million more soldiers along with domestic martial law they are not doing so well.

        Recruiting prisoners for cannon fodder after 8 months of a botched war is also indicative of failure.

        Putin is responsible for tens of thousands deaths, from critical journalists, politicians and errant oligarchs to innocent civilians in Georgia, Syria, Chechnya and now Ukraine. By any definition he is a monster in our midst. At some point nations can’t stand by and watch anymore than a town could standby and watch a mass murderer.

        He is threatening Europe by trying to extend his borders. And picking Ukraine, which has not forgotten how Soviet Russia treated them in the last century, he made a major mistake.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Russia’s hasn’t ordered conscription for 3 million more soldier or enacted domestic martial law. Their partial mobilization activated about 300,000 reservists and (some estimate) 80,000 volunteers. Douglas MacGregor claims that his (Pentagon) sources have told him the forces Russia has dedicated to Ukraine total 540,000 troops and all the hardware and ammunition they need for whatever they are planning to do.


          1. “ Vladimir Budaev of the U.S.-based pro-democracy group Free Buryatia told Newsweek last week that he believed that the troop mobilization was unlikely to end soon due to mounting Russian troop losses.

            “It’s [mobilization] not stopping, actually,” said Budaev. “We don’t know when the mobilization is going to stop—probably never. Putin definitely needs more than 300,000 soldiers. The Russian army has had a lot of losses from mobilized people already.”


            Apparently the original 300,000 didn’t cut it. I defer to the 3 million as my guesstimate. But conscription is ongoing, along with prisoners offered clemency if they survive.

            Martial law was declared in Ukraine…by Putin. That and a clampdown on dissent increased in Russia. Close enough for me.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. Since you refuse to believe any source that says Ukraine is winning, let’s consider your source of information: Larry C Johnson.

    Larry is best known for spreading a hoax in 2008 that Republican operatives had a videotape of Michelle Obama complaining about “whitey.” There was no tape. When confronted with the lie, he said John McCain had blocked the release of the tape.

    In interviews in 1999 and 2000, Johnson said Americans exaggerated the threats stemming from bin Laden. In July 2001, two months before the September 11 attacks, Johnson wrote a New York Times op-ed entitled, “The Declining Terrorist Threat,” arguing that “terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.”

    In 2013, Johnson falsely accused John Kerry of war crimes in Vietnam, alleging that Kerry had “raped some poor Vietnamese woman.” To support his claim, Johnson used a YouTube video that contained audio clips from a 1971 debate on The Dick Cavett Show between John Kerry and John O’Neill. The original interview audio was altered to piece together words that Kerry spoke at different times during the debate, falsely making it sound as if he said, “I personally raped for pleasure.” When the falsehood was exposed by a reader of Johnson’s blog, Johnson deleted the article without apology.

    In March 2017, Andrew Napolitano spread the unfounded conspiracy theory that GCHQ, one of Britain’s top intelligence agencies, had wiretapped Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign on orders from President Obama. Johnson was the source for Napolitano’s claim. The conspiracy theory was later asserted as fact by President Trump, with him citing Fox News and Napolitano. GCHQ responded, stating that the claims were “nonsense, utterly ridiculous and should be ignored.” Fox News later disavowed the statement by Napolitano.

    When even FOX disavows your BS, you are not a reliable source of information! So yeah, keep listening to Larry about how the Russians are kicking butt in Ukraine and we’d better not get involved because we don’t want to make Putin mad.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I am aware of the criticisms of Johnson you cite, but find him credible on the topic at hand. So, unless you can refute either of the two articles I cited in the post, I have no reason to disbelieve them.

      As a rule I don’t pay attention to criticism of sources that offer no proof that the criticism is justified. If you think Johnson is wrong, tell us where he is wrong. Otherwise, you got nothing.


      1. When every court in the country has said you lost the election, you can accept defeat or continue making a fool of yourself until you die.

        When your only argument is “you have no evidence that I will accept,” you can accept defeat or continue making a fool of yourself until you die.

        I’m sensing a pattern here.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Of course I have a point. I posted two stories about Ukrainian military losses in the war. On the basis of those two stories I opined that the U.S. should reconsider our support to Ukraine: Either stop what we are doing, or commit to an major escalation of hostilities.

          You have challenged my point, but incompetently. For example, you have yet to show that the EU Commission’s estimate of Ukrainian killed-in-action is something other than 100,000 soldiers, or that Ukrainian casualties since February are something other than 400,000 soldier, or roughly half the army it started with.

          You persist in the belief that Ukraine is winning the war, but you have no evidence.


          1. Speaking of a speech given by Ursula von Der Leyen, the head of the EU, the discredited author of your article begins by saying:

            “During a speech condemning Russia for committing war crimes, she noted in passing that 100,000 Ukrainian “officers” (sic) have been killed since the start of the SMO.”

            The EU has since said she misspoke but your cutesy author claims they can’t “moon walk back as good as Michael Jackson.” If she didn’t misspeak, then you have to believe Ukraine lost 100,000 OFFICERS.

            Since the smallest size group of soldiers any officer commands is a platoon, which consists of 16 to 44 soldiers, you would have to assume the Ukrainian army had no less than 32 million soldiers when the war began.

            Maybe the Ukrainian army did have 32 million soldiers. But since their entire population is a little over 43 million people, I doubt it.

            Or maybe good ol’ Larry was twisting the story to make it sound like he knows more than other people about what’s “really” going on in Ukraine? Maybe he knows what his readers want to hear and he’s just playing to a room full of suckers?

            “Of course I have a point. I posted two stories about Ukrainian military losses in the war.”
            You posted stories about what Larry wanted you to hear without thinking through what he said. Your point is invalid.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. “You have challenged my point, but incompetently. ”

            Once again you rely on your sources alone as being the only arbiters of truth.

            You and your sources are full of fertilizer suitable for keeping the corn growing in Iowa for a century.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. “I am aware of the criticisms of Johnson you cite, but find him credible . . .”

        Why would any thinking person cite evidence provided by a known fabricator of vicious lies? Why in the world – besides his saying what you desperately want to believe – would you find him credible?

        Liked by 3 people

        1. RE: “Why in the world – besides his saying what you desperately want to believe – would you find him credible?”

          I find him credible because of his resume, because I have followed him in multiple venues where I have found him to be consistent, and because the criticisms you and Ms. Radford make are stupid.


          1. “Consistent” is not a good thing when you are consistently full of shit as this fellow has been.

            Noting that Mr. Johnson has made a career out of falsifying facts is not stupid. Stupid is knowing that this is the case and still citing him as an authority. Now, that’s stupid.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. RE: “Stupid is knowing that this is the case and still citing him as an authority.”

            I haven’t cited Johnson as an authority, I sourced his articles for my post because I think he makes points worth knowing. So far, you have yet to dispute in any credible way anything Johnson has to say as it relates to this thread.

            Please get back to us when you, yourself, can demonstrate some credibility.


          3. You calling for credibility from others is like Tweeting calling for Sylvester to hunt another bird. It ain’t gonna happen because no matter how credible sources are provided to you, you doubt them out of hand.


          4. Calling those who call a liar stupid is what is really stupid here.

            You have become a raging anti-Democracy idiot and you would believe that the moon is made of green cheese if this dolt of a fabricator told you it was.

            Liked by 1 person

  3. I assume that if Russia had won this war, they would immediately have started conflict with Poland, Finland, the Baltic states and everybody else they could reach. I think Ukraine has done us all a great service by neutering Russia, which seems to me what is happening. I think we should all be grateful to Ukraine.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s