Accurate casualty numbers for the war in Ukraine are hard to come by. The writer shows that Ukrainian casualty estimates are not to be believed.
This is important, because Western sources repeat the Ukrainian estimates without verification, creating a false picture of battlefield realities and the status of the conflict.
It should be noted that casualty numbers are not the best measurement of success in battle. Even so, given Ukrainian lies, you gotta wonder if they are worth helping.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
“Accurate casualty numbers for the war in Ukraine are hard to come by. The writer shows that Ukrainian casualty estimates are not to be believed.”
While I agree that casualty numbers are hard to come by in any war, the it appears you are taking another pro-Putin mouthpiece’s words as gospel.
So Moon is right and Ukraine is wrong.
…”Western sources repeat the Ukrainian estimates without verification,”
Proof? Or just your own personal beleif? Yeah. That’s what Ithough.
…”given Ukrainian lies,”…
What lies are those? Or is only Russia capable of telling you at “truth” you want to believe.
As far as wroth helping, Ukraine is worth helping for numerous reason, none of which you believe, so I won’t even bother listing them all. The most important one is supporting a DEMOCRATICALLY elected government that is on the border with a belligerent, anti-Western country who has delusions of re-establishing the old RUSSIAN empire. – IMO
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Proof? Or just your own personal beleif?”
The proof is in the MOA article, but the problem of relying on Ukrainian estimates without verification is widely acknowledged. Larry Johnson, for one, has written about it:
“The explanation is simple and shocking — the analysts are ignoring valid open source reporting and they are relying on liaison reports, i.e. intelligence provided by “friendly foreign” intelligence agencies without seeking corroboration. Specifically, it appears the United States intel analysts are accepting information from Ukraine and the United Kingdom as ‘pure gold’ without realizing that it is fool’s gold.”
https://sonar21.com/when-it-comes-to-ukraine-the-united-states-intel-community-is-confusing-pyrite-with-genuine-gold/
RE: “What lies are those?”
The Ukrainian casualty estimates are lies.
RE: “The most important [reason for helping Ukraine] is supporting a DEMOCRATICALLY elected government that is on the border with a belligerent, anti-Western country who has delusions of re-establishing the old RUSSIAN empire.”
You are correct. I reject this reasoning.
LikeLike
“The proof is in the MOA article,”
Russian propaganda.
So you have proof that the Ukrainians are lying. Good for you. If you shared some actual proof and not the rants of pro-Putin voices, maybe you would have some validity. But you don’t – IMO
Of course you reject the reasoning. You come off as anti-democracy voice at almost every turn.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Russian propaganda.”
Tell us where MOA is wrong.
LikeLike
Perhaps tell us why you think he is right.
Asking to prove a negative is Conspiracy 103, Tactics Tried and True.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Asking to prove a negative is Conspiracy 103,”
If Mr. Green believes MOA is wrong, that is a positive assertion he should be able to substantiate. Asking him to do so is not asking him to prove a negative.
But to answer your question, I find MOA credible because the writer makes rational arguments and supports them with credible sources that he identifies.
LikeLike
My proof: MOA is pro-Putin propaganda. You fid it “credible” because it feeds your own pro-Putin/anti-Democracy rhetoric.
Prove ME wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No matter how we parse the numbers, the reality is that Russia is not far from where they started a year ago. Sure they increased the land bridge to Crimea, but that is pretty much it after an incredible sacrifice of manpower and materiel.
Yevgeny Prigozhin, the oligarch with an army of rental fighters makes money daily. The current battle in Bakhmut is as much of interest to him for its financial value, mineral mines, as siphoning fees from Putin. He has built some of his wealth on the spoils of adventures around the globe.
He is a thug for hire.
Bakhmut is more of a prize for him and a face saving “victory for Putin, than any real gain for Russia. The casualties on both side are high, but if a country with 180 million and a massive military can’t push past that for 7 months, something is really wrong with their capabilities.
Putin is on a face saving rampage with limited time, IMO.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Bakhmut is more of a prize for him and a face saving victory for Putin, than any real gain for Russia.”
If only wars could be decided by philosophers.
Whatever Bakhmut’s merits may be in its own right, it is of strategic significance in a military sense due to its location and the railroads that run through it.
LikeLike
Here is my take. Prigozhin is a plunderer with an army financed by Putin. If Russia wins, he wants dibs on spoils, and Bakhmut has value commercially.
For that he is more than willing to collect fees from Putin, materiel and hapless men to absorb bullets first, so his gang can push the Ukrainian army out.
He has not done so in months against a target that is flattened, but not ripe for his portfolio yet. And I think the Russian army fared no better in 2022.
Some suggest that there is a strategic value, but if a town of 70,000 in size, much fewer now with no standing buildings can withstand the invasion of an army the size of Russia’s for a long time, someone is not winning…I think it is Russia.
IMO
LikeLiked by 2 people
To start on a positive note, you are correct when you say that “Accurate casualty numbers for the war in Ukraine are hard to come by” and I will also agree that the belligerents – BOTH OF THEM – will under report their own casualties and over estimate those of the enemy.
With that said, the fight around Bakhmut has turned into a war of attrition and in such a war the advantage lies with the defenders. That is Military Science 101. Add to that the fact that the attackers are under-trained recruits with little vehicular support and the defenders are a battle-hardened army the casualty ratio is bound to be lop-side for the defense.
So is the ratio really 7:1? Who knows? But Ukraine’s stubborn fight is making Russia pay a very high price for almost zero gain.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “With that said, the fight around Bakhmut has turned into a war of attrition and in such a war the advantage lies with the defenders. That is Military Science 101. Add to that the fact that the attackers are under-trained recruits with little vehicular support and the defenders are a battle-hardened army the casualty ratio is bound to be lop-side for the defense.”
You are misinformed. I recommend you read carefully MOA’s discussion of casualties due to artillery fire, especially the referernce to the U.S. Army’s book and the European Commission’s estimate that Russia has a 10:1 artillery advantage over Ukraine.
As for the quality of the Ukraine forces in Bakhmut, you are apparently unaware of the reports that many of the Ukrainian dead have been 16 year olds.
LikeLike
“You are misinformed”
Uh, no I am not.
“As to the quality blah blah blah”
The facts do not support your Russophile opinions or the Russian propaganda you rely on. In spite of your claim that Russia has a 10:1 artillery advantage and that Ukraine is fielding school boys, Russia has barely advanced after months of effort. That is the simple truth.
Of course, you will next be telling us that it is the peace-loving Russians holding back their overwhelming forces because of humanitarian concerns. Have at it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Russia has barely advanced after months of effort. That is the simple truth.”
No, it isn’t. Russia has taken 1/3 of the city and has surrounded the remainder.
LikeLike
Taking 1/3 of a small city after months of effort is actually “barely advancing.”
Why do you have so much trouble simply acknowledging obvious facts? It is really odd.
LikeLike
RE: “Taking 1/3 of a small city after months of effort is actually ‘barely advancing.'”
Only to a Wise Monkey. I recommend you compare today’s map of Bakhmut with a map from 2 or 3 months ago.
LikeLike
Wise Monkey?
I suppose that is a lame attempt at an insult. If so, it is a whiff.
I did look at the map. The entire city of Bakhmut is small. It is about 4 miles by 4 miles. If Russia took it ALL, they would still be “barely advancing.”
LikeLike
RE: “If Russia took it ALL, they would still be ‘barely advancing.'”
Pitiful. Soledar fell to the Russians. Bakhmut is about to fall. The Ukrainians haven’t advanced an inch in three months, but you pretend Russia is doing poorly.
LikeLike
Invaders have to advance if they want the prize. Defenders don’t.
Again a huge nation with thousands of tanks, artillery, planes and a million man pool can’t take a tiny city after months of fighting, over a 13 months period, someone ain’t winning.
I hadn’t checked the town size, but I see Paul measured where it is 4 by 4 miles.
Seriously?
Putin is not used to fighting real soldiers. Mostly civilian men, women, children and rebels in his other slaughtering ventures.
Chechens numbered around 1.3 million or so and it took 2 invasions and immense bloodshed to pull it into the fold. I don’t think the Russian soldier can fight. Even when their homeland was invaded by Germany, Stalin had standing order to kill his own if they came back from an insane charge. No need for combat training if the leadership counts on millions for cannon fodder.
Unfortunately, Putin’s corruption was leadership by example. So long as he got his vig, and the contributing oligarchs kissed his ass, he was not watching the military treasure for improvement n training and materiel move to banks in the Med and elsewhere. Whoops! Mafioso style, strip the assets and sell them off. Bada bing.
IMO
LikeLiked by 1 person
“. . . but you pretend Russia is doing poorly.”
No pretense required. Russia is doing poorly, very poorly. If Russia were anything like a civilized country with an informed citizenry, Putin would be gone already.
This Bakhmut campaign has been a full-fledged disaster for Russia. Thousands killed, hard-to-replace ammunition used up, countless tanks and vehicles destroyed and for what? Almost nothing. And they have made themselves vulnerable to a Ukraine counter-punch which could begin very soon with the new weapons and ammunition they are receiving. When it happens, the Ukrainian gains will not be measured in yards.
LikeLike
THe one oversight in the counts is that Russian casualties are ALL soldiers. Ukrainian casualties include civilians. OOOPS War crime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ukrainians have been killing civilians by bombing the city of Donesk for months. Here’s a video that appeared today.
LikeLike
Russia should not be putting its troops and weapons in civilian locations. Doing so is a war crime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Russia should not be putting its troops and weapons in civilian locations.”
Show us that you know what you are talking about: What Russian troops are located in civilian areas of Donetsk, and how are they different from the Ukrainian troops in the civilian areas of Bakhmut?
LikeLike
Why do you think Ukraine would waste sorely needed ammunition firing at locations that do not have Russian troops or weapons? Are they just that evil? (See rules of propaganda Number 5).
LikeLiked by 1 person
In other words, you don’t know what you are talking about.
LikeLike
You make things up or post things that are made up stories. Ukraine bombing MILITARY targets in and around Russian held areas while Russia is bombing CIVILIANS indiscriminately.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Semantics. Russia is bombing CIVILIAN infrastructure and other targets throughout the country. Ukraine is bombing Russian military positions.
LikeLiked by 1 person