Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
BD – “ratio of 100,000 front line troops to 400,000 logistical troops.”
TW – “I must admit I only skimmed your post before replying. Alone, there were 100,000 far right militia at the beginning of the conflict. I fundamentally disagree with your calculations. Your estimates of frontline troops are off the scales wrong.”
So, TW, can you enlighten me as to why my estimates of frontline troops are “off the scales wrong”
Do you question my figure of 500,000 Ukrainian troops over the course of the conflict? Are you are saying the number is higher?
The 500,000 figure is the figure given by the US and the Ukrainians, the Russians are estimating far smaller numbers.
Is it that the Ukrainian military are actually underestimating the number of its troops.
I can think of many, many examples of military forces and countries over exaggerating the size of their forces. The 1,000 bomber raids very rarely reached 1,000 planes, the Allies in the Second World War invented a whole Army force during the Normandy landings, the Union Army in the Civil War exaggerated the number of guns by using black pained logs as mock up of guns, Saddam Hussein was in part responsible for the story about WDM, Goring invented large numbers of planes and pilots during the 1930’s. There have been examples of tactical use of lowering numbers to attempt to lull enemies into false confidence, but I cannot think of a single example of this being done in terms of overall figures.
So does TW think that somehow he has information, so unusual, that the Russian armed forces do not know about?
Or is it that my estimation of teeth to tail ratios are wrong?
The figures given by Table from John J. McGrath, “The Other End of the Spear: The Tooth-to-Tail Ratio (T3R) in Modern
Military Operations.” The Long War Series, have a ratio of greater than 1:3 for every major war in the 20th Century. The tooth to tail ration for the US Civil War was estimated at 1:1.5. Even if we take that as our benchmark (which is crazy because of the change in the technical nature of warfare) this would give a breakdown of the 500,000 troops of 200,000 combat soldiers and 300,000 logistical support troops. So for your estimate, every single Ukrainian front line soldier had been killed. Not only that, working on US civil war figures (where medical support was practically nonexistent) the death to serious injury figure hovered around 1:1.5. Using these figures, which are underestimates of an unbelievably level. Not only would 2/5ths of the Ukrainian Armed forces to date have been killed, the rest would have been seriously wounded.Let us put the figure of deaths you have confidently predicted for the Ukrainian army into some context.
The North African Campaign in the Western Desert between 1940 and 1943 has death figues of:
British 35,478 killed
Free French 16,000 killed
United States United States 2,715 killed
6,528 missing in action
Italy 22,341 killed
Germany: 18,594 killed
3,400 missing
Vichy France 1,346 killedA total of 106,402
If you then add the deaths for the Italian campaign (1943 – 1945)
Where an estimated 60,000 allied troops were killed and 38,805 (German figures taken from Germany and the Second World War published by the Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt) this makes a total of 98,805 troops killed from the Allied and German sides.So in the whole of these two campaigns, from 1940 – 1945 a total of 203, 207 troops were killed, yet in one year of this “Special Military Operation”, one side of that conflict, the Ukrainian side, has suffered the same level of casualties taken by all sides of these 5 years of full scale war?
Again just to add a little context, these campaigns included the following episodes:
The Battle of Sidi Barrani
The Battle of Beda Fomm
The capture of Tobruk
The siege of Tobruk
The fall of Tobruk
The Siege of Malta
Battle of Mersa Matruh
The first battle of El Alamein
The Second battle of El Alamein
The Invasion of North Africa (The Torch Landing)
The battle of Kasserine Pass
The Siege of Tunis
The invasion of Sicily (The Operation Husky)
The Salerno landings
The Battle of Anzio
The Liberation of Rome
The four assaults on Monte Cassino
The River Rapido crossings
Storming the Winter Line
The River Po CrossingsTo name just a few
So perhaps you can correct my estimates and show me how I have got it so wrong?
BD – “This would mean that your estimate of 200,000 number would claim that 75,000 more troops had been killed than had ever served at the front line!”
TW – “A fair point. But you are presuming a high number of wounded. From the sources I listen to that is not the case. Shocking numbers of the wounded are dying in situ because they’re unable to be evacuated. This would account for the higher number of deaths.”
I was referring to the number of deaths to front line troops. This was not a reference in any way to the wounded. You estimate 200,000 troop deaths. Even using the highest number of estimated Ukrainian troops during the whole conflict (500,000) and using a tooth to tail ratio which is less than any other modern war(as explained above). This would give a maximum of 125,000 front line troops (by Russian Estimates far less). This would mean that 75,000 soldiers were killed over and above the number that had ever served on the front line.
This in no way relates to the number of wounded.
TW – “No, that was Ursula von der Leyen’s figure. I believe the number at least double that.”
So you are working on the basis of 200,000 deaths.
Given that the estimate of deaths to seriously wounded ratio varies between 1:3 and up to 1:6 (because of the development of better battlefield medicine and anti biotics, the ratio of wounded to deaths has increased substantially oer time, the 1:3 ratio was the figure from WW2 so it is likely to be closer to the higher estimate), however if we go with a conservative estimate of say 1:4 that would give a figure of 200,000 dead and 800,000 seriously wounded but surviving.
Let’s look at the figures in the light of the fact that no estimate of the number of Ukrainian armed forces by either the West or by Russia has exceeded a number of 500,000 Ukrainian troops being involved in the whole war (the Russian estimate is far less).
Let us, for argument’s sake, use the highest estimate of total Ukrainian troop numbers of 500,000 given by the US, which is likely to be an exaggeration. And if we then look at the tooth to tail ratio as it is known in the military (the ratio betwen active troops and their logistical tail) we will find that this ratio has varied between 1:2.6 for WW1, 1:4.3 for WW2 up to 1:8.9 for the Gulf War and then use a conservative estimate of 1:4 the total of your figures, we would have an estimated ratio of 100,000 front line troops to 400,000 logistical troops.
This would mean that your estimate of 200,000 number would claim that 75,000 more troops had been killed than had ever served at the front line! (some logistical troops would have been killed, but your figures would give a minimum ratio of front line troops to logistical troops of 5:3, which is clearly ludicrous).
Not only that if 200,000 troops had been killed, of the remainng 300,000 survivors (Maximum US estimate), all of them had been seriously wounded, nearly three times each!!!
“It will all be over by Christmas”, said in 1914 by many on both sides of that particular conflict.
If the outcome of wars was so easily predictable, the likelihood is that far fewer of them would be fought, the losers would just give in without a fight.
“All you have to do is kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will crumble to the ground” said a certain ex corporal about Operation Barbarossa, another prediction that didn’t go too well.
Just a quick question TW, do you stand by your assertion that the Ukrainian forces have suffered over 100,000 deaths?
BD “Scott Ritter said in February 2022 that Russia would not invade the Ukraine.”
TW – “Dunno where you got that from since he predicted the invasion in late 2021 after NATO rebuffed Moscow’s call to respect its security demands.”
Scott Ritter wrote “Despite the repeated Western warnings, Russia is highly unlikely to invade Ukraine” Published 31-01-22
In the same article, Ritter also wrote that “Russia will exploit US hypocrisy on spheres of influence and military alliances by ……. deploying a naval squadron to the Caribbean.”
I see no ships!
Scott Ritter said in February 2022 that Russia would not invade the Ukraine.
After the invasion he said that, Ukraine will fall in maximimum of a week.
I wouldn’t rely on him for your racing tips, TW
Knacker Dan said “My initial assessment was based on that of Scott Ritter.”
That’ll be the same Scott Ritter who predicted before the 2nd Gulf War that
“The United States is going to leave Iraq with its tail between its legs, defeated. It is a war we can not win … We do not have the military means to take over Baghdad”
The same Scott Ritter who didn’t have the sense to realise he was going to get himself entrapped as seeking out underage sex, not once but twice!!
Presumably he is one of your “trusted and knowledgeable analysts”
According to you ” I am very confident in the numbers state because the sources I follow have proven themselves time and time again to be correct.”
There are 284 pages on this discussion board, can you show just how you have proven the numbers you have stated “time and time again to be correct”. Very little you have predicted has come to fruition.
“Roozenbeek said Bakhmut itself doesn’t hold a lot of strategic value, but the location does.”
I’ll try and explain this to TW. “Bakhmut doesn’t itself hold a lot of strategic value” – This means the city (its resources, its manufacturing, its population, etc.) do not hold a resource based value. “but it’s location does” it has a strategic geographic position in terms of defensibility for the Ukranian Forces.
AJ – “It will take time for them to be produced to replenish. But it will happen.
Perhaps the time-line may not be sufficient to save Ukraine from the anticipated Russian offensive,”
TW “The offensives have already started. You sleeping in class again? Do pay attention. And yes, it is too late for Ukraine. But then again, Ukraine never had a chance as I was saying from the get go.”
From the get go you have been saying that Russia would steamroller the Ukrainian state very quickly. One year on this has not happened, tragically to the cost of thousands of working class people on both sides.
As to whether there will be a Russian breakthrough in 2023, the outcome is probably pretty uncertain. The usually expected numerical advantage that attackers need to breakthrough defensive forces has long been set at about 3:1.
The Soviet era Military Author A A Siderenko, stated that although a general 3:1 superiority was the least ratio needed to create a battlefield breakthrough, he also stated that attackers needed a 5:1 advantage in terms of personnel, 8:1 or 9:1 in artillery and 3:1 to 4:1 advantage in tanks.
Has Russia got the level of advantage over Ukrainian forces, I don’t know and I’m very confident that TW doesn’t know either. It is likely in the fog of war neither side can give an accurate forecast of these numbers.
We also need to take into consideration that these are the minimum estimated numbers required. It is also possible that these numbers can be impacted on quality of arms and troops (A British force of 36,000 overwhelmed an Italian force of 150,000 troops during Operation Compass in 1940-41 taking 133,000 prisoners of war).
What is certain that without meaningful peace negotiations and some settlement between these two capitalist powers, thousands of more workers will be fed into the meat grinder to keep the powerful elite in their positions of power.
Thank you for answering the question and I am glad that at least there is one thing we can agree about, i.e. that targeting civilians is abhorant.
As to the source of the quote, as I said in my previous post, I listen to RTE (the Irish broadcaster) more often than to the BBC because it appears to be less biased than the BBC. (it also gives good coverage of Gaelic Games).
I did not state that I thought it was unbiased or accurate. I do not take any media (including Russian and pro Russian media) with a very large pinch of salt.
I’ll add that to the long list of questions you are unable or unwilling to answer.
I would have thought a straight targeting civillians regardless of the situation is not acceptable would have done, but you can’t even give a straight answer to that question.
Are you too frightened to condemn it, just in case it turns out to be the correct?
AJ – “For the working class, it means that national budgets will be adjusted with less GDP spent on social welfare and much more spent on the military.
Tanks for nothing, Putin and Zelensky, for putting more money into the coffers of the armament industry and less into health, education and the elderly.
Something to be proud of. ”
To put this into context Alan, I did some research on military costs regarding ammunition production in Russia.
Russia is claiming that it has produced 3,558,454 152mm shells (the most used artillery shell accounting for approx 45% of artillery shells by Russian forces) between 2014 – 2021 source militarynews.ru
The approximate cost of these shells over the production of the stockpile is about $620 per shell. (cost in 2014 was $446 per unit, cost in 2022 is $650 per unit, but production levels were different across each year with production rising throughout the period from 155,337 for 2014 to 735,260 in 2021, 2022 production was not included)
That works out at a cost of 2.31 billion dollars for just one type of shell.
The costs and production numbers of Multiple Launch Rocket Shells (MLRS) can be estimated as well using Russian sources.
The estimated production of the 70,287 Urgan type shells would cost $11,222 per shell = $788,760,714 and the estimated production of Tornado G shells is 9,651 with a cost of $83,245 per shell = $803,397,495.
For one relatively small part of this war, the cost is nearly $4 billion.
The cost of the Ukraine war (over and above the human lives) has been estimated as being $400 million dollars per day, making a yearly total cost from the Russian side of $146 billion so far.
If you were to estimate roughly that the Ukrainian and Nato costs have been equivalent (they will probably be more because weapons production is more expensive in the US and Western Europe) an estimate of nearly $300 billion in costs so far for this war.
That is roughly 10% of the cost of the whole world’s food production for one year (world bank estimates of $3.1 trillion per year as costs of world food production)
Another startling example of the ludicrous waste that the capitalist system produces.
BD “I was only trying to find out whether TN felt that the statement I quoted re civilians was one he supported or not.”
TW – “Link to the source of the quote, please.”
It was a report on RTE radio, I tend to listen to RTE rather than BBC as it appears to be less heavily biased that BBC and you often hear international stories that aren’t reported in the UK.
That said the veracity of the story is not really important, regardless of the truth of the story or not, the question is about your view on it.
Essentially the question is, “do you agree that it is appropriate to target civilians when there is a “fortress” situation”.
Whether it turns out to a lie or if it turns out to be true, this should not impact on your judgement on the matter.
