Ukraine conflict
07-24-2023, 05:30 PM
#1041
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
While we are talking demographics…
Excerpts:
It bears emphasizing that Ukraine is losing to migration not only the general population but people of a relatively young, reproductive age, educated and with work qualifications, usually determined to succeed, efficient and entrepreneurial. So the migration-related losses should be tallied not only in numbers but in the quality of the demographic resources lost to Ukraine.
Another important factor driving population loss is lower fertility rates. First the COVID-19 pandemic and then Russia's aggression caused a decline in Ukraine’s fertility rate, which was already the lowest in Europe. The total fertility rate (TFR) in 2021 was 1.2, and for 2022 it is expected to be 0.9. Since the births planned before the war were still delivered in 2022, a much more dramatic drop in fertility rate is expected in 2023: it will most probably achieve 0.7, and this level will remain at least until the end of the war. I see no reason to expect any compensatory effect in that regard, and the demographic dynamics will follow the models of what was seen after World Wars I and II. This means that after Ukraine’s victory, the TFR may return to the level of 1.3–1.4 only in the 2030s
Irreversible human losses (i.e., deaths, including the direct losses of military and civilians due to hostilities and indirect losses caused by lack of timely medical care in the occupied territories, especially in the areas of active hostilities and shelling) have already had a significant impact on the average life expectancy (ALE) of Ukrainians. For 2023–24, the ALE will remain critically low: 70.9 years for women and 57.3 years for men. We can expect a return to prewar levels—76.4 and 66.4 years, respectively—no earlier than 2032, while the ALE of 77.8 and 67.7 years, respectively, will be back in Ukraine no earlier than the mid-2030s.
Thus, in a best-case scenario of the country's development—that is, a return to the 1991 borders and rapid economic and environmental recovery—further depopulation seems inevitable. Most probably by 2035, the population of Ukraine will have decreased by another 18 percent, falling from the current 37.6 million to 31 million (for the Ukraine-1991 territory). The demographic group of those aged 20–64 years old will decrease by 15 percent, falling from 23.7 million to 20.2 million, while the number of women of the most active reproductive age (i.e., 20–34 years old) will decrease by 11 percent, from 2.9 million to 2.6 million (see figure 2 for projected data).
Thus, in a best-case scenario of the country's development—that is, a return to the 1991 borders and rapid economic and environmental recovery—further depopulation seems inevitable. Most probably by 2035, the population of Ukraine will have decreased by another 18 percent, falling from the current 37.6 million to 31 million (for the Ukraine-1991 territory). The demographic group of those aged 20–64 years old will decrease by 15 percent, falling from 23.7 million to 20.2 million, while the number of women of the most active reproductive age (i.e., 20–34 years old) will decrease by 11 percent, from 2.9 million to 2.6 million (see figure 2 for projected data).
07-24-2023, 06:19 PM
#1042
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,466
I think you missed the quote above so I’ll repeat it.
The current population of Ukraine is 36,825,991 based on projections of the latest United Nations data. The UN estimates the July 1, 2023 population at 36,744,634.
The current population of Russia is 144,414,272 based on projections of the latest United Nations data.
Worse than that, even before the war the number of military age personnel in Ukraine was declining relative to that of Russia. While demographics isn’t destiny, every Ukrainian loss hurts the Ukraine more than three times as much as every Russian loss hurts Russia.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demog...aine-vs-russia
So trench warfare simply does NOT favor the Ukrainians. Especially when they are having to cross minefields and prespotted artillery coordinates to get to those minefields.
We do find ourselves in rare agreement though. The presence or absence of body armor in trench warfare is unlikely to make much difference. I just don’t think we agree on what the likely outcome is to begin with.
The current population of Ukraine is 36,825,991 based on projections of the latest United Nations data. The UN estimates the July 1, 2023 population at 36,744,634.
The current population of Russia is 144,414,272 based on projections of the latest United Nations data.
Worse than that, even before the war the number of military age personnel in Ukraine was declining relative to that of Russia. While demographics isn’t destiny, every Ukrainian loss hurts the Ukraine more than three times as much as every Russian loss hurts Russia.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demog...aine-vs-russia
So trench warfare simply does NOT favor the Ukrainians. Especially when they are having to cross minefields and prespotted artillery coordinates to get to those minefields.
We do find ourselves in rare agreement though. The presence or absence of body armor in trench warfare is unlikely to make much difference. I just don’t think we agree on what the likely outcome is to begin with.
what exactly are you trying to say? Its hard work? They should give up? What exactly is your point with spamming these boards in your retirement 4 times a day with every uphill battle ukraine has but none of the russian ones?
what
Are
you
trying
to
say?
please answer 2 questions without obfuscation so i can finally figure out what your angle is:
should we not have gotten involved?
should they give up?
oh ya and what british army readiness has to do with ukraine…..
Last edited by Hubcapped; 07-24-2023 at 06:30 PM.
07-24-2023, 07:10 PM
#1043
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
overall this is my problem with you, i never said it’s easy and yet you say things like “you missed it so ill repost it”
what exactly are you trying to say? Its hard work? They should give up? What exactly is your point with spamming these boards in your retirement 4 times a day with every uphill battle ukraine has but none of the russian ones?
what
Are
you
trying
to
say?
please answer 2 questions without obfuscation so i can finally figure out what your angle is:
should we not have gotten involved?
should they give up?
oh ya and what british army readiness has to do with ukraine…..
what exactly are you trying to say? Its hard work? They should give up? What exactly is your point with spamming these boards in your retirement 4 times a day with every uphill battle ukraine has but none of the russian ones?
what
Are
you
trying
to
say?
please answer 2 questions without obfuscation so i can finally figure out what your angle is:
should we not have gotten involved?
should they give up?
oh ya and what british army readiness has to do with ukraine…..
A trench to trench meat grinder does NOT favor the Ukrainians.
Your other strawman questions are irrelevant to that statement.
07-24-2023, 09:03 PM
#1044
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,466
do you think ukraine should continue to fight?
do you think the US and EU should stop support?
07-24-2023, 11:17 PM
#1045
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
I understand you are an Ukraine fan boy. I don’t call you names or impugn your motives because of that. I think they are currently a preferable government to the current government of Russia. And in this case morally (by the way, the attitude of the troops is morale, not moral) the Ukrainian government appears superior. But the good guys don’t always win and in this case they are fighting an adversary three times their size with a GDP nine times the size of theirs - even before the war dropped Ukraine’s GDP by an additional 30%.
A bunch of castoff odds and sods of poorly maintained equipment from the EU/NATO isn’t going to offset that and the US now admits it has grossly underestimated the munitions needed to fight a conventional war in Europe and the cupboard is getting pretty bare. Oh yeah, and Russia has to remain pretty much a safe haven because nobody wants this to go nuclear. Those circumstances rather overwhelmingly favor Russia.
What little chance the Ukraine had sort of evaporated - I believe - when we f@rted around with progressive weapons deliveries hoping each incremental step would make the Russians back off. If you are a student of military history, this is somewhat reminiscent of the Robert S McNamara’s “gradual escalation” policy in Vietnam. It didn’t work then and there was little reason to think it would work now. But that’s just my opinion, it doesn’t change the facts on the round. Nor, unfortunately, does your opinion.
07-25-2023, 07:16 AM
#1046
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
And yet another opinion
https://www.csis.org/analysis/ukrain...jor-offensives
Some excerpts:
It is always tempting to push for a quick end to a conflict and to call for decisive action. But the United States may now be calling for far quicker and more decisive action from Ukraine than Ukrainian forces can actually execute. It may also be doing so in ways which ignore the strategic realities of the ways in which war is most likely to evolve. Pushing Ukraine to take the offensive may well do little more than help exhaust it and raise casualties. A war that many in the United States seem to tactically predict will somehow largely end this year, may also go on and on until one side breaks in the face of the strain and attrition or both sides become locked into a near stalemate that neither side knows how to win.
Many in the United States seem to have a degree of optimism that owes more to the past than the present. Earlier in the war, Ukraine was able to take advantage of Russian massive miscalculation in assuming it could repeat its experience in seizing Crimea in 2014 and virtually drive in and take control of the country. Russia was unprepared for serious Ukrainian resistance, failed to understand how limited the success of its effort at modernization of its forces and command and control structure had been, and was not ready at any level to fight a serious war.
Many in the United States seem to have a degree of optimism that owes more to the past than the present. Earlier in the war, Ukraine was able to take advantage of Russian massive miscalculation in assuming it could repeat its experience in seizing Crimea in 2014 and virtually drive in and take control of the country. Russia was unprepared for serious Ukrainian resistance, failed to understand how limited the success of its effort at modernization of its forces and command and control structure had been, and was not ready at any level to fight a serious war.
Ukraine first successfully held in the face of the original Russian offensive and then sent in effective military forces that could push back Russian forces that were never properly organized for sustained combat, had no recent warfighting experience, and were not prepared to resist. Ukraine scored major gains, and if it had been properly equipped for sustained offensive action during the period in which Russian was being forced to retreat, it might have driven Russia out of far more territory and made some form of a major victory a far more realistic probability.
No one can totally dismiss the possibility that Ukraine can still do this. Putin’s problems with Yevgeny Prigozhin and the Wagner Group highlight his political challenges. Russia remains largely on the defensive and the lack of any clear Russian path to a shift to the offensive all illustrate Russia’s limits. War is not predictable, and a real, sustainable Ukrainian breakthrough might occur. Russia might be driven into a sustained retreat, and Putin might lose power or must negotiate a peace that Ukraine would willingly accept.
The most probable outcome, however, is a war of attrition that has no clear outcome or time limit. It is a war where both sides fight a long series of relatively static battles with high levels of attrition while they increasingly dig in along the entire front, using drones and missiles to attack each other. Defense in depth will be fought with light precision guided weapons that limit efforts to create and sustain major armored breakthroughs. Missiles will not fully counter trenches, and mines and artillery will halt smaller breakthroughs. It is a war that may come grimly close to a modernized version of World War I or Stalingrad.
No one can totally dismiss the possibility that Ukraine can still do this. Putin’s problems with Yevgeny Prigozhin and the Wagner Group highlight his political challenges. Russia remains largely on the defensive and the lack of any clear Russian path to a shift to the offensive all illustrate Russia’s limits. War is not predictable, and a real, sustainable Ukrainian breakthrough might occur. Russia might be driven into a sustained retreat, and Putin might lose power or must negotiate a peace that Ukraine would willingly accept.
The most probable outcome, however, is a war of attrition that has no clear outcome or time limit. It is a war where both sides fight a long series of relatively static battles with high levels of attrition while they increasingly dig in along the entire front, using drones and missiles to attack each other. Defense in depth will be fought with light precision guided weapons that limit efforts to create and sustain major armored breakthroughs. Missiles will not fully counter trenches, and mines and artillery will halt smaller breakthroughs. It is a war that may come grimly close to a modernized version of World War I or Stalingrad.
Seven months into 2023, Ukraine’s territorial gains are largely meaningless. Russia has made limited retreats, but such retreats often increase the advantage of the defender. They reduce the net casualties of the defensive forces and the limited gains of the attacker occur at the cost of higher casualties and losses of equipment. It is also far from clear that such offensives create opportunities for major breakthroughs. Slow, well-organized Russian fighting retreats do not defeat the defense as much as move it while clearly indicating the possible line of Ukrainian advance. The Ukrainian offensives are also doing major damage to the cities and toward where they are being fought, and the lack of serious gains and the casualties involved may well have a major impact on Ukrainian morale.
07-25-2023, 07:25 AM
#1047
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,466
I post information I believe is relevant to the topic - the Ukraine conflict. Posting what I think countries should have done or should stop doing seems pretty pointless, since one is a fait accompli and any one person (other perhaps than the president) has little say over such future decisions. What I wonder about is why you are always trying to make this about me rather than the topic?
I understand you are an Ukraine fan boy. I don’t call you names or impugn your motives because of that. I think they are currently a preferable government to the current government of Russia. And in this case morally (by the way, the attitude of the troops is morale, not moral) the Ukrainian government appears superior. But the good guys don’t always win and in this case they are fighting an adversary three times their size with a GDP nine times the size of theirs - even before the war dropped Ukraine’s GDP by an additional 30%.
A bunch of castoff odds and sods of poorly maintained equipment from the EU/NATO isn’t going to offset that and the US now admits it has grossly underestimated the munitions needed to fight a conventional war in Europe and the cupboard is getting pretty bare. Oh yeah, and Russia has to remain pretty much a safe haven because nobody wants this to go nuclear. Those circumstances rather overwhelmingly favor Russia.
What little chance the Ukraine had sort of evaporated - I believe - when we f@rted around with progressive weapons deliveries hoping each incremental step would make the Russians back off. If you are a student of military history, this is somewhat reminiscent of the Robert S McNamara’s “gradual escalation” policy in Vietnam. It didn’t work then and there was little reason to think it would work now. But that’s just my opinion, it doesn’t change the facts on the round. Nor, unfortunately, does your opinion.
I understand you are an Ukraine fan boy. I don’t call you names or impugn your motives because of that. I think they are currently a preferable government to the current government of Russia. And in this case morally (by the way, the attitude of the troops is morale, not moral) the Ukrainian government appears superior. But the good guys don’t always win and in this case they are fighting an adversary three times their size with a GDP nine times the size of theirs - even before the war dropped Ukraine’s GDP by an additional 30%.
A bunch of castoff odds and sods of poorly maintained equipment from the EU/NATO isn’t going to offset that and the US now admits it has grossly underestimated the munitions needed to fight a conventional war in Europe and the cupboard is getting pretty bare. Oh yeah, and Russia has to remain pretty much a safe haven because nobody wants this to go nuclear. Those circumstances rather overwhelmingly favor Russia.
What little chance the Ukraine had sort of evaporated - I believe - when we f@rted around with progressive weapons deliveries hoping each incremental step would make the Russians back off. If you are a student of military history, this is somewhat reminiscent of the Robert S McNamara’s “gradual escalation” policy in Vietnam. It didn’t work then and there was little reason to think it would work now. But that’s just my opinion, it doesn’t change the facts on the round. Nor, unfortunately, does your opinion.
thank you for not answering the questions clearly for lack of courage…………again.
Ivan called and you forgot your grammar police badge at your station in the basement vlad.
as always my lack of courtesy stems from when we were rude to each other, I admitted it and apologized, and you, true to character, could not.
good day sir
07-25-2023, 01:47 PM
#1048
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
you have been anti Ukraine from the start, you have made an incredible amount of false predictions and lacked the integrity to admit you were wrong. You have posted from extreme rightwing media propaganda sites, you have advocated for appeasement in the face of autocratic rule. I will say again like i said before, thank the universe men like you arent in charge or wed be a little island fortress in the western hemisphere as china and russia rule.
thank you for not answering the questions clearly for lack of courage…………again.
Ivan called and you forgot your grammar police badge at your station in the basement vlad.
as always my lack of courtesy stems from when we were rude to each other, I admitted it and apologized, and you, true to character, could not.
good day sir
thank you for not answering the questions clearly for lack of courage…………again.
Ivan called and you forgot your grammar police badge at your station in the basement vlad.
as always my lack of courtesy stems from when we were rude to each other, I admitted it and apologized, and you, true to character, could not.
good day sir
Now would you care to comment upon the above posting from CSIS? It would seem to me to represent a pretty fair assessment of the current state of affairs. Is there something in it you take issue with?
07-25-2023, 02:43 PM
#1049
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,466
As I have said before. When YOU were rude, called me Vlad, Ivan, Tucker, a commie (a right wing commie??) etc., you did repeatedly apologize, I suspect after some broad hints from a monitor, but then you went right back to doing it again. That calls into question the sincerity of any or all of those apologies.
Now would you care to comment upon the above posting from CSIS? It would seem to me to represent a pretty fair assessment of the current state of affairs. Is there something in it you take issue with?
Now would you care to comment upon the above posting from CSIS? It would seem to me to represent a pretty fair assessment of the current state of affairs. Is there something in it you take issue with?
its all good bro, i finally understand you. Youre salty that the EU didnt run, and that this administration didn’t fulfill your desire for us to be isolationist. Keep posting
07-25-2023, 05:56 PM
#1050
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
Would you care to comment upon the above posting from CSIS? It would seem to me to represent a pretty fair assessment of the current state of affairs. Is there something in it you take issue with?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
