- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 26,089
- Reaction score
- 23,720
- Location
- PNW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
"Komsomolskaya Pravda, claimed that Russia’s Ministry of Defense disputed Ukrainian military estimates that almost 15,000 Russian troops had died as a result of the military operation and instead estimated 9,861 killed and 16,153 were wounded—far larger than the 498 dead Russia has admitted to thus far. Shortly after the article was published, it was removed without explanation and republished with the casualty figures missing." (Daily Beast) more recently, the paper claims it was "hacked".
First, that is a plausible number. It is only slightly above US intelligence estimates, far below Ukrainian claims, and very specific. Second, while it is possible the paper was hacked, it's unlikely. It's not the leading Putin newspuppet, but it's usually well-sourced, and likely well-protected. It seems more likely the information was available, but was not supposed to be released.
Finally, it is consistent with available open-source intelligence. Battlefield assessments are notoriously difficult to verify. But, US military intelligence is sophisticated and has satellite imagery not available to the public. Other public analysts have endorsed the US estimates as likely, and conservative.
First, that is a plausible number. It is only slightly above US intelligence estimates, far below Ukrainian claims, and very specific. Second, while it is possible the paper was hacked, it's unlikely. It's not the leading Putin newspuppet, but it's usually well-sourced, and likely well-protected. It seems more likely the information was available, but was not supposed to be released.
Finally, it is consistent with available open-source intelligence. Battlefield assessments are notoriously difficult to verify. But, US military intelligence is sophisticated and has satellite imagery not available to the public. Other public analysts have endorsed the US estimates as likely, and conservative.
