Login/Sign up

World Association of International Studies

PAX, LUX ET VERITAS SINCE 1965
Post Ukraine's Current Advantage in Manpower
Created by John Eipper on 08/02/22 4:54 AM

Previous posts in this discussion:

Post

Ukraine's Current Advantage in Manpower (Cameron Sawyer, USA, 08/02/22 4:54 am)

JE commented: "One disturbing statistic for those of us who still sympathize with the Ukrainian side: the reported 3:1 casualty rate suffered by the defenders. This, in brief, cannot be sustained."

It can be sustained, actually, so long as the Russians don't do a bigger mobilization. The Ukrainians at this point have a huge advantage in manpower--about 2.5:1. At 3:1 in casualties, they won't be seriously degraded before the end of the year at least. And we don't even know if it's 3:1, or 5:1, or 1:1, as various sources report--we have to guess at what the correct statistics are. I take the 3:1 figure as most credible, bearing in mind the fact that the Russians are firing about 10x as many artillery shells as the Ukrainians, are not doing much frontal attacking, and remembering that 70% of all WWII casualties were caused by artillery. The Russians are also using the diabolical TOS-1 fuel-air bomb throwing system against Ukrainian trenches, which obliterates large areas with fuel-air explosions (same system as the US MOAB--"mother of all bombs"). The Ukrainians are defending the fortified lines on Donetsk Oblast' they prepared after 2014--that's what the current battle is about. They need to be keeping the Russians back far enough that they can't use these fairly short-range weapons; it's a bad sign that they're not.

Manpower hugely favors the Ukrainians at the moment. What they lack is materiel. The Russians reportedly inherited 150 million rounds of 152mm and 122mm artillery shells, and a similar number of rockets, from the Soviet Army when the USSR collapsed, and retain very large manufacturing capacity.

The Ukrainians can go on for a long time with heavy losses of personnel, but they have almost exhausted their stocks of artillery shells and rocket munitions and are more or less completely dependent on Western aid for these (and everything else). The Russians can go on for a long time firing huge numbers of artillery shells, but can't afford to lose a lot of people. Who will blink first? No one knows. We shall see.

JE comments:  Soviet-era artillery shells are at least 30 years old.  One wonders how many are duds--or as dangerous to the firers as to the "firees."


SHARE:
Rate this post
Informational value 
Insight 
Fairness 
Reader Ratings (0)
0%
Informational value0%
Insight0%
Fairness0%

Visits: 162

Comments/Replies

Please login/register to reply or comment: Login/Sign up

Trending Now



All Forums with Published Content (45407 posts)

- Unassigned

Culture & Language

American Indians Art Awards Bestiary of Insults Books Conspiracy Theories Culture Ethics Film Food Futurology Gender Issues Humor Intellectuals Jews Language Literature Media Coverage Movies Music Newspapers Numismatics Philosophy Plagiarism Prisons Racial Issues Sports Tattoos Western Civilization World Communications

Economics

Capitalism Economics International Finance World Bank World Economy

Education

Education Hoover Institution Journal Publications Libraries Universities World Bibliography Series

History

Biographies Conspiracies Crime Decline of West German Holocaust Historical Figures History Holocausts Individuals Japanese Holocaust Leaders Learning Biographies Learning History Russian Holocaust Turkish Holocaust

Nations

Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Argentina Asia Australia Austria Bangladesh Belgium Belize Bolivia Brazil Canada Central America Chechnya Chile China Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark East Europe East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador England Estonia Ethiopia Europe European Union Finland France French Guiana Germany Greece Guatemala Haiti Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran (Persia) Iraq Ireland Israel/Palestine Italy Japan Jordan Kenya Korea Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latin America Liberia Libya Mali Mexico Middle East Mongolia Morocco Namibia Nations Compared Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North America Norway Pacific Islands Pakistan Palestine Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Polombia Portugal Romania Saudi Arabia Scandinavia Scotland Serbia Singapore Slovakia South Africa South America Southeast Asia Spain Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Thailand The Pacific Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan UK (United Kingdom) Ukraine USA (America) USSR/Russia Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam West Europe Yemen Yugoslavia Zaire

Politics

Balkanization Communism Constitutions Democracy Dictators Diplomacy Floism Global Issues Hegemony Homeland Security Human Rights Immigration International Events Law Nationalism NATO Organizations Peace Politics Terrorism United Nations US Elections 2008 US Elections 2012 US Elections 2016 US Elections 2020 Violence War War Crimes Within the US

Religion

Christianity Hinduism Islam Judaism Liberation Theology Religion

Science & Technology

Alcohol Anthropology Automotives Biological Weapons Design and Architecture Drugs Energy Environment Internet Landmines Mathematics Medicine Natural Disasters Psychology Recycling Research Science and Humanities Sexuality Space Technology World Wide Web (Internet)

Travel

Geography Maps Tourism Transportation

WAIS

1-TRIBUTES TO PROFESSOR HILTON 2001 Conference on Globalizations Academic WAR Forums Ask WAIS Experts Benefactors Chairman General News Member Information Member Nomination PAIS Research News Ronald Hilton Quotes Seasonal Messages Tributes to Prof. Hilton Varia Various Topics WAIS WAIS 2006 Conference WAIS Board Members WAIS History WAIS Interviews WAIS NEWS waisworld.org launch WAR Forums on Media & Research Who's Who