this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
392 points (94.1% liked)
Europe
8324 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Where is the contradiction? They were light infantry sent to capture a well defended fortress, aka sacrificial lambs being slaughtered to cater to the unreasonable demand to capture Bakhmut. The survivors — I don't know where you got the idea of "all" from — are going to go back. Whether they will wreck havoc remains to be seen.
What is the intent of your post, by the way? Genuine confusion or trolling?
My statement comes from months of what was being told in the news. In terms of estimates it was said that around 40k Russian prisioners were recruited. UK intelligence estimated 20k of them died in the first few months. There was also the famous rule of three cited where for every person killed, you can count roughly 3 people injured. With those figures, most prisoners are wounded or killed. The kind of battles were said to be brutal, my assumption was the wounded would not return to a normal life. My confusion stems for an honest attempt to understand the truth. The way I see it, either the killed and injured are not exaggerated and then we could say a small percentage of the prisioners are potentially problems or the numbers are not what they say they are and the problem of returning prisioners would be as worrisome as the article implies. Please excuse me when I said they are "all" going back. I failed to convey the gist of the contradiction correctly.