From
Ukraine is taking a pasting, but they are totally repaying in spades.
Russian infrastructure is in ruins west of the Urals.
There have been rumours of 1km queues for petrol, so the attacks on the oil infrastructure certainly are having an effect.
Also mentioned recently was the estimated number of Russian soldiers killed per month at 12-15000; wounded will be 3x or 4x that number.
In message snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net>, Spike snipped-for-privacy@mail.com writes
Spoon Rest . It's a very old system
Brian
Of course, but it probably operates usefully against stealth/LO air vehicles.
Given the performance figures mention, back-of-an-envelope calculation estimates that against an air vehicle of RCS 0.001 square metre it should have a detection range of 20-30km, which could be useful.
UK MoD are estimating Russia has suffered 415,000 killed and wounded in
2025 alone, and after all of that they still control less Ukrainian territory than they did at the end of 2022.Not bad going for a 3 day SMO (which they have now been fighting for longer than they fought in WW2)!
The other evidence is that Russia has banned any export of refined gasoline products[1], due to the scarcity at home. Russia needs all the foreign income it can get, so this is a painful measure which shows how bad the situation is.
[1] The current ban has been in place since September 2025.
There have been reports that because of the cannon folder nature of Russian warfare and the lack of in-field Russian medical facilities that the wounded number may be closer to x1 or x2 the number of dead.
What I don't understand is why we don't see more of this sort of information on the BBC. All we get are reports of Russian rockets and drones destroying buildings in Ukraine and the deaths incurred, but hardly ever anything on the Russian losses or the damage Ukraine is doing to Russia.
I read the BBC News website and there are certainly articles on those subjects.
For example, an article on the growing Russian losses in 2025:
Perhaps these don't appear on the television.
-- Richard
The article is still pro Ukrainian.
It had not occurred to me that the comment was about whether it was pro- or anti-Ukrainian.
-- Richard
BBC journalists can cover events in Ukraine - especially missile strikes in Kyiv. At the same time it is much harder for them to cover events across the whole of Russia - even if Russia didn't have a tendency to 'discourage' coverage of events they don't want to be covered. After all, Steve Rosenberg can't be everywhere.
The Boy Buggering Communists are all on special pensions from Moscow.
Maybe we should have "opinion checking" as well as "fact checking". <g>
+1
I guess it must be at least in part due to the difficulty in getting anything close to verifiable information about Russia. But I suppose the BBC could add that coda.
Steve Rosenberg was still reporting from Russia last time I checked, he might be somewhat limited what he can say, but on his youtube channel he re-reports things such as the fuel queues from their papers.
That has to be one of journalism's most depressing assignments. The restrictions he has to work with, the overall toadying . . . but yes, at least he gets something out.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required