Depending on newssource, Russian casualities range from 500K to 1 million. Who is counting? No data avilable concerning Ukrainian losses.

Hardly any news from "the front". Throwing drones and missiles at each other. A strange kind of war.

We had something like that before. The French called it "drole de guerre", the Germans called it "Sitzkrieg".

The UK intelligence agency has reported that Russia has suffered 500,000 deaths in Ukraine. This will further doom Russia.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g44gprnnvo

Edited May 29May 29 by Effective altruism

9 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

The UK intelligence agency has reported

And why not report the Ukrainian numbers...seeing as the UK intelligence agency is

fully wedded to Zelensky and co they should know right ?

1 minute ago, johng said:

And why not report the Ukrainian numbers...seeing as the UK intelligence agency is

fully wedded to Zelensky and co they should know right ?

Being wedded to Zelensky is being on the correct side of history.

3 minutes ago, johng said:

And why not report the Ukrainian numbers...seeing as the UK intelligence agency is

fully wedded to Zelensky and co they should know right ?

They dont want you to know because

1 minute ago, Effective altruism said:

Being wedded to Zelensky is being on the correct side of history.

The OP is a Russophile numbskull. This is at least the second time he has tried to down play the war. Drôle de guerre was of course the "phoney war". He is a idiot if he is truely thinking the situation now is comparable to the situation from September 1939 to May 1940. He's Swiss though, and knows <deleted> all about war except how to profit from it.

He tried the same thing in this thread:

The daily casualty rate is a combination of deaths, seriously injured and slightly injured. Many soldiers are pushed back into the frontline, just like WW2.

The War is akin to WW1, with respect to civilian casualties. Civilians were targeted in WW1, but much less than WW2, and thats because WW1 was a largely static war. There were few civilians hanging around in Flanders and the Somme.

When you consider deaths and injuries, WW1 saw about 550 injured/killed per 1000 mobilized. WW2 was about 450 injured/killed per 1000. The Korean war was 350 per 1000. The Iran-Iraq war was 600 per 1000 mobilised.

Apply the same considerations to Russia's aggression. Russia is seeing about 700 casualties (dead, wounded) per 1000, Ukraine about 550. Now you might think, comparable to WW1 (France in WW1 had 760/1000). No, its worse, much worse. GW1 was a mere 50 per 1000, largely due to precision weapons.

For a start no official data exists from either belligerent. That's not unusual. In WW2, Germany did not issue data on losses..

Those who claim there are no 3rd party estimates on Ukrainian losses are basically Russia loving Nazi liars. Or idiots. Pick their poison.

Takes about 5 minutes

https://github.com/simonhuwiler/russo-ukrainian-data-ressources

"Swissie" actively seeks to insult the dead at every turn, as he continually denies a war. He refers to Ukraine as "the Ukraine", indicating he does not believe Ukraine has a right to exist. During WW2, I suspect he would have been the Swiss man who would cheerfully hand over Jews to the Nazis, and pocket their gold, given his recent rant about Ukrainian refugees. Switzerland lost all moral authority when they chose to turn a blind eye to the holocaust, and sought to profit from it. They're trying it again in 2026 it seems.

I heard at first hand from the Ukrainian side the nature of injuries they are experiencing. In this war, gunshot wounds are rare. Casualties are dominated by blast injuries, as a result of drones and mines.

Its a war where a high proportion of combat deaths are actually filmed, through FPV footage.

The reason the war appears "frozen" is largely because of the use of drones. Drones have changed forever the battlefield. The widespread use of drones in Ukraine has created what military analysts increasingly describe as a "transparent battlefield": a battlespace where almost any movement can be detected and attacked within minutes. This is one of the main reasons why, despite enormous casualties and expenditure of ammunition, territorial gains have often been measured in hundreds of metres rather than tens of kilometres.

Historically, armies achieved breakthroughs by concentrating tanks, infantry and artillery at a chosen point. Today, both sides maintain dense layers of surveillance drones over the front.

A battalion-sized concentration that might once have remained hidden for hours is now likely to be spotted almost immediately. Once detected, coordinates can be passed to artillery, loitering munitions, or FPV drone operators. This makes massing forces extremely dangerous.

The result is that neither side can easily assemble the large armoured formations needed for classic manoeuvre warfare.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/chapter-9-technological-evolution-battlefield

Soldiers hike for miles, ducking into cover, through drone-infested territory too dangerous for jeeps, armored personnel carriers or tanks. Soldiers say it has become strangely personal, as buzzing robots hunt specific cars or even individual soldiers. It is, they say, a feeling of a thousand snipers in the sky.”

– Marc Santora, “Rise of the Dragons: Fire-Breathing Drones Duel in Ukraine,” New York Times

Drone surveillance has meant that within 10-15km of the front line, the movement of vehicles is almost impossible. The irony is that while these methods reduce the visibility of a force, they also dramatically reduce the speed of advance.

Instead of a narrow front line, there is now often a broad zone where movement is lethal.

Recent reporting describes drone-dominated "kill zones" stretching many kilometres behind the nominal front line. Soldiers can spend weeks or months in isolated positions because rotations, resupply and casualty evacuation are so dangerous. Even routine logistical movements are increasingly conducted by unmanned systems.

There are parallels with the Great War, another war the Swiss displayed what moral cowards they are as a nation. In 1914, my Great Grandfather was stationed in Egypt; he had been a boy soldier in the Dragoons, and by the start of the war was a 4 year veteran. He was sent to France in October 1914 with his horses. Got to use them twice, in 1914 and in 1918.

The belligerents in WW1 went to war fighting the last war. The machine gun and use of barbed wire made it a defensive war, with largely frozen front lines that the Swiss contributor would probably indicate that, in his thick skull, it wasn't a real war.

The Germans innovated with the Stormtrooper tactics, where you use elite troops in probing attacks to bypass strong points, and take territory through exploiting weaknesses. That was the 1917 Spring Offensive summed up. But the problem is you run out of your best troops, and the speed of advance meant logistics couldn't keep up. Hence the offensive faltered.

The Allies also innovated, but innovated in a way that changed warfare. The British called it All Arms Warfare, today we call it Combined Arms. First used at the Battle of Cambrai, and then the Battle of Amiens, where Ludendorff called it "a black day for the German Army".

There is an interesting parallel with Ukraine. In 1914–17, machine guns, artillery and barbed wire gave defenders a huge advantage. In Ukraine, drones, precision artillery and surveillance create a similar defensive bias.

What broke the WWI stalemate was not a single wonder weapon. It was the emergence of a new military system that combined technology, tactics, communications, logistics and overwhelming manpower.

If there is a lesson for Ukraine, it may be that the current drone-dominated stalemate is unlikely to be broken by one innovation alone.

Both sides are using now long range drones, but the Russian drones seem to be used injudiciously and crudely, with parallels to when Goering switched from attacking airfields to attacking cities, a mistake that probably doomed Germany (it was a mistake that kept Britain in the war).

Ukrainian use of long range drone is more judicious; attacking logistics. Crimea is reportedly now out of petrol and diesel.

21 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

Being wedded to Zelensky is being on the correct side of history.

yeah right side of history 😵‍💫

In Ukraine, a Divisive 20th-Century Figure Comes Home

Andriy Melnyk, criticized as a Nazi collaborator and lionized as an anti-Soviet resistance leader, was given state honors for his reburial near Kyiv.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/24/world/europe/ukraine-melnyk-nationalist-collaborator.html

2 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Crimea is reportedly now out of petrol and diesel.

They ran out of washing machines,shovels and ball bearings yonks ago Russia will surely collapse anytime soon..21st sanctions package will deliver the killer blow for sure this time

or perhaps the 150 Gripen war planes..SAAB obviously delighted for a piece of the latest 90 billion Euro's boondoggle.

If the Netanyahu/Trump war continues for much longer many places will really be without petrol and diesel and gas fertiliser and food...

Russia does not seem as powerful as most people thought ,when Putin started

this war , you expected him to be in Kyiv in a few days ,how wrong we were ,

how long is it now 4 years ,Ukraine knows how to fight a supposed super power,

at the moment Russian is losing more men than it can recruit /Pressgang,

regards Worgeordie

28 minutes ago, johng said:

They ran out of washing machines,shovels and ball bearings yonks ago Russia will surely collapse anytime soon..21st sanctions package will deliver the killer blow for sure this time

or perhaps the 150 Gripen war planes..SAAB obviously delighted for a piece of the latest 90 billion Euro's boondoggle.

If the Netanyahu/Trump war continues for much longer many places will really be without petrol and diesel and gas fertiliser and food...

Obviously you've missed the whole f**king point of the statement, and instead issued a bunch of Russophile guff to deflect. Ukraine is interdicting supply lines between Russia and occupied Crimea. Its f**k all to do with your deflections about ball bearings, washing machines and spades.

A de facto siege of Crimea will increase the likelihood of the US, instead of just abandoning Crimea to its Russian fate, will explicitly link the fate of Crimea in peace negotiations. Frankly, the economies of Luhansk and Donetsk are utterly destroyed, largely due to the actions of their separatist leaders.

The economy of post-war Ukraine will not be the same as the economy pre-war. Pre-war, the economy was basically Soviet, with heavy dependence on coal and steel mines in the east of the country. All of those mines and infrastructure are destroyed. It will take a generation to rebuild that, and by then, no one will want coal. And for the so-called rare-earths, within a generation, prices will have collapsed once they figure out clean ways to process 200 year old slag heaps around the world. Before 2014, the mining industry was in decline, and if we believe you Russya Stronk Putinista Tankies, the people of the Donbas all hate Ukraine anyhow. Russia is welcome to the basket case to subsidise for the next 50 years.

In Soviet times, Ukraine was the heart of the Soviet precision engineering industries. The best missiles, aircraft were designed and built by Ukraine. Even the best Soviet ships were Ukrainian; post collapse of the USSR, the Russians had to go to the French for naval ship design, as they lacked the expertise. That Ukrainian engineers, from all backgrounds, have proven highly innovative, is no surprise. Postwar, their economy will see expanded agriculture, which is dependant on seaborne exports, and technology, which also needs efficient container ports, such as as Sevastopol, is vital.

A permanently hostile military presence in Crimea allows Russia to threaten shipping routes and southern Ukraine.

Conversely, a secure Crimea under Ukrainian control would significantly improve perceptions of long-term security and reduce risk premiums for investment.

Economists often note that trade access can be worth more than ownership of individual industries. A functioning maritime gateway can support agriculture, manufacturing, energy exports and foreign investment simultaneously.

Countries such as South Korea, Poland and Finland grew rapidly not because of any single resource, but because investors believed factories, ports and infrastructure would still exist ten years later.

For post-war Ukraine, a credible security settlement and access to international markets may ultimately contribute more to long-term prosperity than either the coalfields of Donbas or the tourist beaches and naval bases of Crimea. The economic value of stable access to the Black Sea is likely to exceed the future value of Donbas coal mining alone.

So when I highlighted energy issues in Crimea, dips**t, I am not talking about the Russian economy. I couldn't give a flying <deleted> about the Russian economy. Its about making it harder for Russia to hold Crimea.

The war, despite what you Russia loving goons contend, was nothing to do with defending ethnic Russians, and all about a small balding man's puffed up self image as a player on the global stage. Crimea was the reason, and its naval facilities. Control of Crimea also dooms Ukraine as a vassal state.

Make it harder for Russia, you make it more expensive for Russia. Russia has moved to as near a war economy as its going to get. There is no more give in the national budget, without maybe attacking pensions. Russia then has to make a choice; hold Crimea, for absolutely no value whatsoever, or direct state spending to other projects.

One project to pick up on is to restart the project that Siemens stopped in 2022, which was basically to rebuild the entire Soviet era rail network. Unlike the US, Russia does not have an efficient, well designed, coast to coast road network. Without rail, goods from the Russian Far East cannot get to the west and vice versa. Which means Russia ceases as a functioning country, with the Russian Far East increasingly developing its own economy.

Another big project is to rebuild a shattered Russian military.

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

Russia does not seem as powerful as most people thought ,when Putin started

this war , you expected him to be in Kyiv in a few days ,how wrong we were ,

how long is it now 4 years ,Ukraine knows how to fight a supposed super power,

at the moment Russian is losing more men than it can recruit /Pressgang,

regards Worgeordie

Putin is trapped by his own law. In the first Chechen War, the Russian Army, all conscripts, got their butt kicked by basically mountain men. So he created a law such that only contractors can serve in a combat situation. So on paper, all of those in Ukraine are volunteers. In reality, many are coerced, and yes, its effective pressganging. They find their 1 year contracts in fact are automatically renewed until the war has ended.

Ukraine has a similar system, but for the Ukrainian squaddie, the war ends when either Ukraine prevails, or Ukraine is defeated. For the Russian soldier, its when Russia wins, or when they are dead, because they know that Putin will never concede. It ends when the Russian Army votes with its feet, not because of orders from Moscow.

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

Russia does not seem as powerful as most people thought ,when Putin started

this war , you expected him to be in Kyiv in a few days ,how wrong we were ,

how long is it now 4 years ,Ukraine knows how to fight a supposed super power,

at the moment Russian is losing more men than it can recruit /Pressgang,

regards Worgeordie

All rubbish , you seem to forget that Kiev was all but surrounded at the start but negotiations took place and a deal seemed imminent Macron persuaded Putin to withdraw from around Kiev as a sign of goodwill while Johnson persuaded Zelensky to forget the deal and carry on fighting..

Also Putin has been very reluctant up to now to inflict major damage on Kiev as it is an important city in Russian history... many seem to mistake Putin's calculated methodical

actions for weakness.

13 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

A de facto siege of Crimea will increase the likelihood of the US, instead of just abandoning Crimea to its Russian fate, will explicitly link the fate of Crimea in peace negotiations.

I think the Russians are done with any negotiations especially with Trump.

This is a war between Russia and NATO backed ukraine.

Without NATO , this war would have been over years ago.

Yep it would have ended with the Istanbul agreement but that was sabotaged in order to use Ukraine to weaken and break up Russia into smaller states..that gamble has backfired.

On 5/30/2026 at 1:44 PM, Roadsternut said:

Putin is trapped by his own law. In the first Chechen War, the Russian Army, all conscripts, got their butt kicked by basically mountain men. So he created a law such that only contractors can serve in a combat situation. So on paper, all of those in Ukraine are volunteers. In reality, many are coerced, and yes, its effective pressganging. They find their 1 year contracts in fact are automatically renewed until the war has ended.

Ukraine has a similar system, but for the Ukrainian squaddie, the war ends when either Ukraine prevails, or Ukraine is defeated. For the Russian soldier, its when Russia wins, or when they are dead, because they know that Putin will never concede. It ends when the Russian Army votes with its feet, not because of orders from Moscow.

It is undisputed: So far the Russian army consists of "volunteers". Lured by very attracive financial rewards.

How many soldiers could he recruit by "conscription" if necessary? Outnumbering Ukrainian conscripts by 10:1. Those recruits will have 2 choices. The front or the Gulag. Most will prefer the front. The end of the Ukraine. Like it or not.

On 5/30/2026 at 9:44 AM, Roadsternut said:

The OP is a Russophile numbskull. This is at least the second time he has tried to down play the war. Drôle de guerre was of course the "phoney war". He is a idiot if he is truely thinking the situation now is comparable to the situation from September 1939 to May 1940. He's Swiss though, and knows <deleted> all about war except how to profit from it.

He tried the same thing in this thread:

For a start no official data exists from either belligerent. That's not unusual. In WW2, Germany did not issue data on losses..

Those who claim there are no 3rd party estimates on Ukrainian losses are basically Russia loving Nazi liars. Or idiots. Pick their poison.

Takes about 5 minutes

https://github.com/simonhuwiler/russo-ukrainian-data-ressources

"Swissie" actively seeks to insult the dead at every turn, as he continually denies a war. He refers to Ukraine as "the Ukraine", indicating he does not believe Ukraine has a right to exist. During WW2, I suspect he would have been the Swiss man who would cheerfully hand over Jews to the Nazis, and pocket their gold, given his recent rant about Ukrainian refugees. Switzerland lost all moral authority when they chose to turn a blind eye to the holocaust, and sought to profit from it. They're trying it again in 2026 it seems.

I heard at first hand from the Ukrainian side the nature of injuries they are experiencing. In this war, gunshot wounds are rare. Casualties are dominated by blast injuries, as a result of drones and mines.

Its a war where a high proportion of combat deaths are actually filmed, through FPV footage.

The reason the war appears "frozen" is largely because of the use of drones. Drones have changed forever the battlefield. The widespread use of drones in Ukraine has created what military analysts increasingly describe as a "transparent battlefield": a battlespace where almost any movement can be detected and attacked within minutes. This is one of the main reasons why, despite enormous casualties and expenditure of ammunition, territorial gains have often been measured in hundreds of metres rather than tens of kilometres.

Historically, armies achieved breakthroughs by concentrating tanks, infantry and artillery at a chosen point. Today, both sides maintain dense layers of surveillance drones over the front.

A battalion-sized concentration that might once have remained hidden for hours is now likely to be spotted almost immediately. Once detected, coordinates can be passed to artillery, loitering munitions, or FPV drone operators. This makes massing forces extremely dangerous.

The result is that neither side can easily assemble the large armoured formations needed for classic manoeuvre warfare.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/chapter-9-technological-evolution-battlefield

Drone surveillance has meant that within 10-15km of the front line, the movement of vehicles is almost impossible. The irony is that while these methods reduce the visibility of a force, they also dramatically reduce the speed of advance.

Instead of a narrow front line, there is now often a broad zone where movement is lethal.

Recent reporting describes drone-dominated "kill zones" stretching many kilometres behind the nominal front line. Soldiers can spend weeks or months in isolated positions because rotations, resupply and casualty evacuation are so dangerous. Even routine logistical movements are increasingly conducted by unmanned systems.

There are parallels with the Great War, another war the Swiss displayed what moral cowards they are as a nation. In 1914, my Great Grandfather was stationed in Egypt; he had been a boy soldier in the Dragoons, and by the start of the war was a 4 year veteran. He was sent to France in October 1914 with his horses. Got to use them twice, in 1914 and in 1918.

The belligerents in WW1 went to war fighting the last war. The machine gun and use of barbed wire made it a defensive war, with largely frozen front lines that the Swiss contributor would probably indicate that, in his thick skull, it wasn't a real war.

The Germans innovated with the Stormtrooper tactics, where you use elite troops in probing attacks to bypass strong points, and take territory through exploiting weaknesses. That was the 1917 Spring Offensive summed up. But the problem is you run out of your best troops, and the speed of advance meant logistics couldn't keep up. Hence the offensive faltered.

The Allies also innovated, but innovated in a way that changed warfare. The British called it All Arms Warfare, today we call it Combined Arms. First used at the Battle of Cambrai, and then the Battle of Amiens, where Ludendorff called it "a black day for the German Army".

There is an interesting parallel with Ukraine. In 1914–17, machine guns, artillery and barbed wire gave defenders a huge advantage. In Ukraine, drones, precision artillery and surveillance create a similar defensive bias.

What broke the WWI stalemate was not a single wonder weapon. It was the emergence of a new military system that combined technology, tactics, communications, logistics and overwhelming manpower.

If there is a lesson for Ukraine, it may be that the current drone-dominated stalemate is unlikely to be broken by one innovation alone.

Both sides are using now long range drones, but the Russian drones seem to be used injudiciously and crudely, with parallels to when Goering switched from attacking airfields to attacking cities, a mistake that probably doomed Germany (it was a mistake that kept Britain in the war).

Ukrainian use of long range drone is more judicious; attacking logistics. Crimea is reportedly now out of petrol and diesel.

I forgive you for the first few sentences concering your post.

Once more it shows that you are one of the veritable "keyboard warriers" here. Anyone, not agreeing with you is showered with a barrage of foul language and personal insults.

I am sure you like the Internet, because by dispersing such insults in your neighborhood bar, you would leave with a bloody nose in no time at all.

But AN is tolerant, although a Forum rule states:

Quote: "Aggression, personal attacks, derogatiry comments or any form of abuse toward moderators, Admin, or this forum in general will not be tolerated and will result in strict consequences".

I keep it simple. Once the "keyboard warriers" enter the scene, I drop out of the thread.

Regardless of which side they are on they all have parents wives girlfriends children brothers sisters.

For every one that died countless others lives have been destroyed and are now filled with a sense of loss and for some a loathing and hatred for those responsible wanting nothing more than vengeance and revenge on those responsible.

I've seen it too many times in my life I was in the army for 22 years more than a quarter of my life I'm 85 now, it was seeing the family's when we returned that I dreaded the most and every time it ripped another piece of my heart away.

Though in some ways it hardened me and it's only now that I would admit to how it really affected me.

Casualties of war no matter who they are or what religion they believe Russian, Ukrainian, Iranian, Israeli, Palestinian muslim christian they are all human beings with people that loved them not just numbers.

Sometimes it's all too easy to forget that.

Edited May 31May 31 by Bannoi

1 hour ago, Bannoi said:

Regardless of which side they are on they all have parents wives girlfriends children brothers sisters.

For every one that died countless others lives have been destroyed and are now filled with a sense of loss and for some a loathing and hatred for those responsible wanting nothing more than vengeance and revenge on those responsible.

I've seen it too many times in my life I was in the army for 22 years more than a quarter of my life I'm 85 now, it was seeing the family's when we returned that I dreaded the most and every time it ripped another piece of my heart away.

Though in some ways it hardened me and it's only now that I would admit to how it really affected me.

Casualties of war no matter who they are or what religion they believe Russian, Ukrainian, Iranian, Israeli, Palestinian muslim christian they are all human beings with people that loved them not just numbers.

Sometimes it's all too easy to forget that.

Looking back in written history, it was basically war war war. Always good reasons for war. "I want the land of my neighbor including his goat. If we don't attack our neighbors, they will attack us first. They don't believe in our God, so we must fight them". Etc etc etc.............

The only amazing thing is, that once a"ruler" decides to wage war, the "little people" join the army of "the ruler". Without the armed "little people" the "rulers" would have to fight it out in a 1 to 1 duel. With swords or pistols. The "little people " observing. Accepting the outcome. Only 1 live lost instead of a couple of millions. But appearanty, the little people are always willing to join a war.

So, my hopes that Putin and Trump will face off with swords and pistols are slim. They will rather call in the "little people" once more to settle matters. And "the little people will" once more take up arms, because the "rulers" told them there is no alternative.

Let's face it, without "little people", major wars would not be possible. Rats. Even 3000 years before the birth of Christ, the old Phareoes in ancient Egypt managed to convince the "little people" that war was "inevitable".

Anything new? No.

10 minutes ago, swissie said:

Looking back in written history, it was basically war war war. Always good reasons for war. "I want the land of my neighbor including his goat. If we don't attack our neighbors, they will attack us first. They don't believe in our God, so we must fight them". Etc etc etc.............

The only amazing thing is, that once a"ruler" decides to wage war, the "little people" join the army of "the ruler". Without the armed "little people" the "rulers" would have to fight it out in a 1 to 1 duel. With swords or pistols. The "little people " observing. Accepting the outcome. Only 1 live lost instead of a couple of millions. But appearanty, the little people are always willing to join a war.

So, my hopes that Putin and Trump will face off with swords and pistols are slim. They will rather call in the "little people" once more to settle matters. And "the little people will" once more take up arms, because the "rulers" told them there is no alternative.

Let's face it, without "little people", major wars would not be possible. Rats. Even 3000 years before the birth of Christ, the old Phareoes in ancient Egypt managed to convince the "little people" that war was "inevitable".

Anything new? No.

10 minutes ago, swissie said:

Looking back in written history, it was basically war war war. Always good reasons for war. "I want the land of my neighbor including his goat. If we don't attack our neighbors, they will attack us first. They don't believe in our God, so we must fight them". Etc etc etc.............

The only amazing thing is, that once a"ruler" decides to wage war, the "little people" join the army of "the ruler". Without the armed "little people" the "rulers" would have to fight it out in a 1 to 1 duel. With swords or pistols. The "little people " observing. Accepting the outcome. Only 1 live lost instead of a couple of millions. But appearanty, the little people are always willing to join a war.

So, my hopes that Putin and Trump will face off with swords and pistols are slim. They will rather call in the "little people" once more to settle matters. And "the little people will" once more take up arms, because the "rulers" told them there is no alternative.

Let's face it, without "little people", major wars would not be possible. Rats. Even 3000 years before the birth of Christ, the old Phareoes in ancient Egypt managed to convince the "little people" that war was "inevitable".

Anything new? No.

10 minutes ago, swissie said:

Looking back in written history, it was basically war war war. Always good reasons for war. "I want the land of my neighbor including his goat. If we don't attack our neighbors, they will attack us first. They don't believe in our God, so we must fight them". Etc etc etc.............

The only amazing thing is, that once a"ruler" decides to wage war, the "little people" join the army of "the ruler". Without the armed "little people" the "rulers" would have to fight it out in a 1 to 1 duel. With swords or pistols. The "little people " observing. Accepting the outcome. Only 1 live lost instead of a couple of millions. But appearanty, the little people are always willing to join a war.

So, my hopes that Putin and Trump will face off with swords and pistols are slim. They will rather call in the "little people" once more to settle matters. And "the little people will" once more take up arms, because the "rulers" told them there is no alternative.

Let's face it, without "little people", major wars would not be possible. Rats. Even 3000 years before the birth of Christ, the old Phareoes in ancient Egypt managed to convince the "little people" that war was "inevitable".

Anything new? No.

Putin and Trump are on the same side.

14 hours ago, FlorC said:

This is a war between Russia and NATO backed ukraine.

Without NATO , this war would have been over years ago.

Without France America would be a British colony.

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Putin and Trump are on the same side.

Last chance for "little people" "We will not take up arms again for/against nobody".

Again: No massive wars wold have taken place without the agreement of "little people". No army can walk without the support of "little people".

It's up to us "little people" that we refuse to walk in any battlefield, just because the "rulers" said it is absolutely necessary,

It's the "little people" that make devastating wars possible.

I remain: Devastating wars are only possible by the approval of "little people".

Though my heart certainly goes out to these young men and their families, as their deaths are no doubt a tragedy. But Russia has brought this upon themselves and Putin is certainly getting what he deserves. Let us hope there's a real uprising sometime soon.

30 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Without France America would be a British colony.

Considering the fact that French fur traders had their reach from Canada to New Orleans (the Missisipy river) is amazing. Getting along with local indian treibes nicely What's left is Quebec.

Unfortunately, Napoleon III neeeded money, Sold Luisiana for 7 million Dollars, not knowing how large Luisiana was.

Next great real estate deal. Seward bought Alaska from the Russians also for 7 million Dollars.

Talk about great "real estate " deals. Dwarfing Donalds efforts by far.

On 5/30/2026 at 12:50 PM, johng said:

All rubbish , you seem to forget that Kiev was all but surrounded at the start but negotiations took place and a deal seemed imminent Macron persuaded Putin to withdraw from around Kiev as a sign of goodwill while Johnson persuaded Zelensky to forget the deal and carry on fighting..

Also Putin has been very reluctant up to now to inflict major damage on Kiev as it is an important city in Russian history... many seem to mistake Putin's calculated methodical

actions for weakness.

I think the Russians are done with any negotiations especially with Trump.

If Putin was to destory Kiev ... there would be literally no point in taking it over. What would he have achieved other than land space, which Russia already has alot of.

Furthermore, if you were just going openly discriminatly destroy whole wades of cities, then the Ukraines could also do that to Russia too, and that is when public mood may well shift in Russia. So far Ukraine has not really done anything in Russia.

Of course this could lead down a slipperly sloap of escalted nuclear drops .... but again, what would have been the point of invading if you were just going to destroy the country and leave it a wasteland ?

On 5/30/2026 at 5:21 PM, worgeordie said:

Russia does not seem as powerful as most people thought ,when Putin started

this war , you expected him to be in Kyiv in a few days ,how wrong we were ,

how long is it now 4 years ,Ukraine knows how to fight a supposed super power,

at the moment Russian is losing more men than it can recruit /Pressgang,

regards Worgeordie

The nature of the war moved from maneuver warfare to attritional warfare and if you don't understand these terms in relation to battlefield warfare look it up. As for your comment about Russia losing more than it can recruit (where do you get these figures from?) how's it looking for Ukraine which has a lot smaller population. BTW "pressgang" 'recruitment' is a tactic used in Ukraine.

Edited June 1Jun 1 by dinsdale

8 hours ago, swissie said:

Let's face it, without "little people", major wars would not be possible. Rats. Even 3000 years before the birth of Christ, the old Phareoes in ancient Egypt managed to convince the "little people" that war was "inevitable".

Anything new? No.

That is about to change with drone warfare and AI.

No need for the "little people".

5 minutes ago, FlorC said:

That is about to change with drone warfare and AI.

No need for the "little people".

Big difference between strategic long range drones and tactical battlefield drones. The former can sit out of harms way but this isn't the case the the latter. On the battlefield drone teams are the number one target and no mercy is shown by either side. Will AI eventually take over battlefield and strategic drones? It's very likely but not yet.

Edited June 1Jun 1 by dinsdale

The fact that both sides are using endless amount of drones
it is not a war, but a massacre
both sides sending their strong fighting age men into a kill zone very few return from if any.

makes you wonder if the "war" is AI training data with these DC's being built
especially as the US already has millions of drones on order
and have already stated they plan to produce or acquire millions of drones annually

22 minutes ago, patman30 said:

The fact that both sides are using endless amount of drones
it is not a war, but a massacre
both sides sending their strong fighting age men into a kill zone very few return from if any.

makes you wonder if the "war" is AI training data with these DC's being built
especially as the US already has millions of drones on order
and have already stated they plan to produce or acquire millions of drones annually

Yes. This war will go down in history as the war that changed the battlefield. Basically the current versions of tanks have been pretty much made redundant on the battlefield because of drones. Armored personnel carriers (APC)? No thanks. Too easy to target and takes out half a dozen soldiers plus at once. The motorcycle is the new mode of battlefield transportation. Six on bikes compared to six within a single target. I remember people on here laughing and making stupid comments when the Russians were spotted using motorcycles. Well, now both sides use them.

Edited June 1Jun 1 by dinsdale

On 5/30/2026 at 5:04 PM, johng said:

yeah right side of history 😵‍💫

In Ukraine, a Divisive 20th-Century Figure Comes Home

Andriy Melnyk, criticized as a Nazi collaborator and lionized as an anti-Soviet resistance leader, was given state honors for his reburial near Kyiv.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/24/world/europe/ukraine-melnyk-nationalist-collaborator.html

Not to forget the number of monuments to those freedom fighters 14th Waffen SS (Galicia) Division raised in Ukraine to fight Russia in WWII. (Google and be shocked)

Compare the present Ukrainian "Azov" unit insignia with the SS.

Before Russia invaded the "Azov" units were classed as (Google??) by the US State dept.

Edited June 1Jun 1 by tmd5855