With Russia committed to conventional total war in Ukraine & losing how long will it take for the Russian military to collapse?

[Drewtate]

https://youtu.be/_UAsA-MWrRQ?si=RtW9hqw9xNyLrXvC

https://youtu.be/Qm8Dsu7rk6I?si=wfcmdWNGONWgQ_G3

https://youtu.be/hZn5_RHNyPk?si=7kPT5fA-chAdU46q

[RealMarek]

I seriously doubt Russia will collapse before Ukraine. If you look carefully at only geolocated videos (cut through the propaganda on both sides) it’s clear that after three months of counteroffensive, Ukraine hasn’t managed to break through the first major defensive belt with armor and much of the Western armor and artillery had burned. Furthermore, the West is short on 155 mm rounds (necessitating the use of cluster rounds as a stop-gap) and its manufacturing capacity for artillery rounds is woefully behind that of Russia’s, and certainly Russia and China’s combined. Without direct NATO involvement Ukraine will lose this war through attrition.

[Drewtate]

Yet no Ukrainian forces have broken away and marched on the capital

[RealMarek]

They can’t break away with Azov units acting as anti-retreat forces to their rear.

[RealMarek]

The Ukrainians are brave, but an attritional war ends suddenly when reserves, ammo, money… a critical ingredient… is expended.

[Drewtate]

Yes and the Russians are running out of ammunition and having to look to north Korea, Iran and China

[RealMarek]

Not really. Remember how inaccurate the Western media and defense dept (especially the UK MoD) statements have been. When have our current set of leaders told the truth? They’ve claimed for a year that Russia is almost out of missiles, but they keep firing missiles. Believe me, their supply of missiles and capacity to manufacture them is greater than you have been told. I’ve not seen evidence of Chinese and NK weapons at the front except in mainstream Western media, which also claimed that the Russians were out of weapons and fighting with shovels in Bakhmut last spring. If so, I want one of those shovels! I wouldn’t be surprised if China sent some weaponry to have it tested in field conditions, but we haven’t seen any evidence of this. Rather, even some more serious Western sources admit Russia is massively outproducing the West in shells, tanks, APCs. This is because they never let the Soviet production facilities deteriorate and maintained huge stockpiles of raw materials. Compare that to the West, which has deindustrialized on supposed environmental grounds (really to allow our elites to exploit cheap overseas labor at the cost of stagnant wages here) and just-in-time manufacturing views inventory and spare capacity as inimical to profit. I am from the Rust Belt and the huge manufacturing capacity the US used to had was allowed to rot. Those old factories are in disrepair. So we’re in a bind where the US is trying to be able to raise capacity to build something like 30-40 shells per month (this will take two years if successful, and we’re already behind schedule), while Russia alone builds millions of shells per year and is set to raise capacity again over the course of this year. The Germans are having trouble raising capacity because no company wants to build a factory for a war that will probably be over in a year or two. And China’s capacity dwarfs the West’s collectively.

[Drewtate]

The leader of the Wagner group was complaining about the lack of supplies and ammunition for months

[RealMarek]

Yes, but what do we really know about that, or about his apparent coup attempt, or his death? Was Prigozhin always telling the truth? Did he have an agenda? Do the Russians ever intentionally appear to be weak when they are actually strong like Sun Tzu recommends? What we do know is that Wagner Group managed to take Bakhmut when all was said and done, so they had enough ammo to do that. We also know they generally maintained artillery dominance. This is not admitted in the headlines, but you can find admissions in more serious articles and consistently from UAF troops who are interviewed.

[Drewtate]

I believe the CIA got to him and convinced him he could be president and he only stopped because the FSB would have killed his family.
Russia has been playing the strong man almost through the conflict to cover any weaknesses.

[RealMarek]

I suspect Prigozhin will remain a mystery. As for Russia itself, I think the US civil war is instructive. It was also an attritional war. The European powers looked at it as an opportunity to let the US, north and south alike, weaken itself and then come in and take territory. Instead, what happened was that the North ended the war with the largest, most battle-hardened, most sophisticated military on earth. Lloyd Austin, Anthony Blinken, and other American politicians say things like “we will fight to the last Ukrainian” (a reprehensible and dishonorable statement often uttered by our elites, who don’t see fit to fight themselves), “this is good because we get to kill enemies without Americans getting killed” (also highly dishonorable), “our goal is to weaken Russia” or to “give Russia a bloody nose.” What I suspect they will find after the conflict is over is that Russia will have made huge improvements to its weaponry (we already see this with the Lancet drones, TOS flame thrower systems, and some of its long-range artillery, for example), it’s military industrial complex will be spun up to levels we never imagined despite the sanctions, and its military will he large and battle-hardened. This is because whichever side wins an attritional war usually comes out of it stronger, not weaker.

[jshm2]

Your premise is false. Russia isn't in "total war" as Putin has not met the constitutional requirement to fully engage the military. Ukraine is at best an intervention.

It's why Ukraine and the West aren't openly attacking Russian cities. But relying on terrorists and irregulars to do the work for them.

It's the same tactic the Taliban used to get rid of the USA. Open conflict cost too many lives. Chipping away at a stronger foe to make them run, is better.

[Drewtate]

The west isn't engaged in fighting Russia which is why they aren't attacking Russian cities. As for "intervention" its legal jargon to get around laws and Russian Parliament, the US does this too call an I vision by another name. Irregulars are certainly working in Ukraine but back by modern equipment such as drones.
The Taliban were unsuccessful in their irregular warfare in Afghanistan, couldn't kill or wound enough US military personnel so they basically decided to wait the US out in Pakistan using the time to recruit, train new troops. Half the Afgan national army for instance trained and armed by coalition forces were taliban members. In the end the reasons for the US leaving Afghanistan were financial rather than anything to do with the Taliban, no financial interest in staying. Now compare Afghanistan to Iraq, Iraq was were the real fighting in the war on terror took place, where the US lost the most casualties and where the US still has a military base. What is the difference between Afghanistan & Iraq when it comes to US interests?

[purplepoppy]

It won't. Russia will just keep throwing soldiers at Ukraine until Ukraine runs out of bullets.

[Drewtate]

Ukraine is backed by the arsenal of democracy which is currently replacing all its old stocks of cold war era equipment and giving it to Ukraine. Russia will run out of men before Ukraine runs out of ammunition.

[dreamstar72]

Or until the US runs out of money (supplies)

[Drewtate]

@dreamstar72 nah. The US military is spending trillions on updating the US military. Everything Ukraine is getting is from the 80s, 90s and war on terror. Stuff that's just sitting there mothballed

[strateguy632]

collapse? no, russia military isn't near collapse. simply continue drafting soldiers.

ukraine, i support

Russia started with thousands of tanks and despite losing most of each of the best jets and tanks, still kept plenty jets in other places.

thousands of tanks can still be sent. less hardware? easier maintainance so not collapse.

[strateguy632]

second video qm' mentioned catholic see.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

It can colaps in a small couple of yares, i will say it will not pass like 5 yares till it will fall.

Ukraine is an independent and suseran state who have the right to decide its own destiny.

Ukraine is not an invention of nobady, is a country like any other who its own border had been recognise by all nations, INCLUDING RUSSIA IN 1994

[Jamie05rhs]

@Alexandrubaschet08 5 years from the beginning of the war? Or 5 years from now?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Lets say from now or beggning. It can hapen very very soon

[Jamie05rhs]

There's a big difference. The war started 1 and 1/2 years ago.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

I know, but is aproximatly, so you can start to think from where you want

[Anonymous]

As long as China's support holds out would be my guess. I read an article the other day that said Russia can lose over a million soldiers before they'll start feeling it. If that's true they're still only 5% of the way there.

[Drewtate]

Doubtful. The Soviet Union fought war in Afghanistan between 1979-89 and lost 25,000 soldiers and maybe 50,000 wounded. A year later after it retreated from Afghanistan it started to fall apart. The big problem for the USSR was when all the bodies and wounded came back. Now that was back when it wasn't just Russia but the Soviet Union & the Warsaw pact with a huge military and resources and all the weapons& ammunition they would ever need.

[Drewtate]

What support Is China giving Russia other than buying their oil and gas at a massive discount, India too. India is using Russia to leverage the west for better trade deals.

[Opinion Owner]

This is not the Soviet Union and this is not Afghanistan. Your argument is invalid.

[Drewtate]

Exactly Russia is much weaker than the Soviet Union and the Ukrainians are much better armed than the Mujahadeen.

[Exterminatore]

I think it’s going to take a lot longer.

[HappyWoman34]

Not long