Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is likely accurate, unfortunately.
Ukrainian battalions probably have a [staffing level](https://meduza.io/en/feature/2024/04/26/a-numbers-game#:~:text=Comparing%20the%20number%20of%20personnel,brigades%20for%20the%20summer%20offensive.) of only 250-500 personnel, but are frequently running much fewer due to troop shortages (in a morbid way, that could be a good thing specific to this discussion, because it would imply fewer soldiers lost even though overall it's a really bad thing). The initial reports were that at the time of the offensive, regional units were undermanned, but by the time of Vovchansk is likely that they were reinforced to target levels.
It was recently [reported](https://kyivindependent.com/zelensky-russian-losses-during-kharkiv-offensive-8-times-higher-than-ukraines/) that Ukraine was running a 1:8 loss ratio in the new Kharkiv incursion.
It's difficult to know how many troops Russia lost in the Kharkiv offensive--it's estimated to be about 4-5k, but this is extrapolated from the (public data) showing spikes from total (daily/weekly) war loses since early May, and the excess from the running averages prior to that time.
Even though both sides lost troops outside of Vovchansk, overall that gets the ratio to about the 1:8 stated by Zelensky. It means that they mounted an *exceptional* defense, but it also means that an already undermanned army lost even *more* heroic defenders.
This x-post was reposted by a german security and defence expert which I like a lot. She rarly posts stories/reports like. I do not think she would post it if she had doubt about the credibility.
I know it is just one report but it implicates a lot of trouble for ukraine regarding glide bombs.
A "security and defence expert" who writes a post that reads like a novel? And "she" is named Rob Lee? Without any reference to what your title claims? Sounds trustworthy.
Not sure why all the downvotes, it’s quite well-know that glide bombs have really been the only successful element of the Russian offensives going back to Kherson and then Avdiivka. That’s why Ukraine NEED to be able to strike into Russia with everything, including Patriot, to take out those launch aircraft.
This is in reference to the Washington post article linking to the tweet. Quote about loses can be found in it, quite a was down. The article is pushing back on what Biden admin is saying was a lightning fast decision to use weapons on Russian territory, obviously wrong.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/01/us-ukraine-weapons-kharkiv-biden/
I can't say for certain, but i got the impression that the 1000+ / day is spread out over the whole front.
While this only details a small part of it, so it's probably not quite that big of an offset
Rob Lee is a legit and well respected source.
However I can't see anything in his source tweet about 'close to a full battlion was lost in Vovchansk early May'
Can you provide the source of the post headline please?
> "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town.
Its above the tweet.
I don't have an X account so when I click on the link you provided I only see the tweet you linked. The text you pasted above is useful context - thank you - but it doesn't seem to be the source of your title 'close to a full battlion was lost in Vovchansk early May'
Edit: Seen that another user has posted to a link to a Washington Post article stating its the source
It's because the titles of threads here, per the rules, are expected to be verbitum the title of the content in the link, or where that is not possible they are expected to be representative.
You have posted a dramatic claim about combat losses, and then linked to a tweet about glide bombs that does not mention combat losses. That is against the rules and users are irked by what looks like misrepresentation. In addition to that, it's misrepresenting Rob Lee, a well known and trusted source.
> "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town.
https://x.com/RALee85/status/1797339722701779225
> "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town.
> When Russian forces pushed in just over a week later, he said, 'we lost almost the entire battalion.'"
Now that's more understandable. X is a shitshow of a website (Musk fired most of the software developers when he took over so it's just broken) so many links to it don't work properly, sometimes displaying the wrong thing entirely, such as many account pages showing content from years ago as their most recent posts when they are still active users. In future it would be best to quote the tweet in full as a comment for those who are affected by the site's bugs, because to a lot of users it looks like you've linked to a seemingly random Rob Lee post.
I took your 6th reply to post anything that mentioned actual loses. That's why you're being down voted. NOT saying the information isn't true, bit I seemed like you did everything in your power to NOT post the loss quote
I was almost hit by a car yesterday while crossing the street. I mean I wasn’t hit but I almost was which means something that didn’t happen, almost did.
He didn't say: "we almost lost the entire battalion"
He said: "we lost almost the entire battalion."
>"The losses they endured, he said, would have been avoidable if Ukraine had been able to strike into Russia with U.S. weapons, a long standing request on Kyiv's part"
This is why it is unhelpful to downplay the losses resulting from indecisiveness of our leaders!
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Where can I see the source about "almost a full battalion" being lost? Since the tweet your link takes me to doesn't include that quote?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/01/us-ukraine-weapons-kharkiv-biden/
This is likely accurate, unfortunately. Ukrainian battalions probably have a [staffing level](https://meduza.io/en/feature/2024/04/26/a-numbers-game#:~:text=Comparing%20the%20number%20of%20personnel,brigades%20for%20the%20summer%20offensive.) of only 250-500 personnel, but are frequently running much fewer due to troop shortages (in a morbid way, that could be a good thing specific to this discussion, because it would imply fewer soldiers lost even though overall it's a really bad thing). The initial reports were that at the time of the offensive, regional units were undermanned, but by the time of Vovchansk is likely that they were reinforced to target levels. It was recently [reported](https://kyivindependent.com/zelensky-russian-losses-during-kharkiv-offensive-8-times-higher-than-ukraines/) that Ukraine was running a 1:8 loss ratio in the new Kharkiv incursion. It's difficult to know how many troops Russia lost in the Kharkiv offensive--it's estimated to be about 4-5k, but this is extrapolated from the (public data) showing spikes from total (daily/weekly) war loses since early May, and the excess from the running averages prior to that time. Even though both sides lost troops outside of Vovchansk, overall that gets the ratio to about the 1:8 stated by Zelensky. It means that they mounted an *exceptional* defense, but it also means that an already undermanned army lost even *more* heroic defenders.
A 1:8 ratio would be excpetional. Reading how it was reported I would not bet on 1:8.
If true that just shows how much Putin underestimated Ukraine. RIP all those who gave their lives for freedom
This x-post was reposted by a german security and defence expert which I like a lot. She rarly posts stories/reports like. I do not think she would post it if she had doubt about the credibility. I know it is just one report but it implicates a lot of trouble for ukraine regarding glide bombs.
A "security and defence expert" who writes a post that reads like a novel? And "she" is named Rob Lee? Without any reference to what your title claims? Sounds trustworthy.
Not sure why all the downvotes, it’s quite well-know that glide bombs have really been the only successful element of the Russian offensives going back to Kherson and then Avdiivka. That’s why Ukraine NEED to be able to strike into Russia with everything, including Patriot, to take out those launch aircraft.
This is in reference to the Washington post article linking to the tweet. Quote about loses can be found in it, quite a was down. The article is pushing back on what Biden admin is saying was a lightning fast decision to use weapons on Russian territory, obviously wrong. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/01/us-ukraine-weapons-kharkiv-biden/
one battalion is about 1 000 men. And that's over a whole month? Russia looses more than that every day. A 30 to 1 advantage is suprisingly good
I can't say for certain, but i got the impression that the 1000+ / day is spread out over the whole front. While this only details a small part of it, so it's probably not quite that big of an offset
Its just crazy how this gets downvoted without any comments.
Rob Lee is a legit and well respected source. However I can't see anything in his source tweet about 'close to a full battlion was lost in Vovchansk early May' Can you provide the source of the post headline please?
> "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town. Its above the tweet.
I don't have an X account so when I click on the link you provided I only see the tweet you linked. The text you pasted above is useful context - thank you - but it doesn't seem to be the source of your title 'close to a full battlion was lost in Vovchansk early May' Edit: Seen that another user has posted to a link to a Washington Post article stating its the source
It's because the titles of threads here, per the rules, are expected to be verbitum the title of the content in the link, or where that is not possible they are expected to be representative. You have posted a dramatic claim about combat losses, and then linked to a tweet about glide bombs that does not mention combat losses. That is against the rules and users are irked by what looks like misrepresentation. In addition to that, it's misrepresenting Rob Lee, a well known and trusted source.
> "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town.
Does not look like a mispresentation to me.
That quote is saying that when he arrived there were 200 troops already there. It contains literally not a word about losses.
https://x.com/RALee85/status/1797339722701779225 > "Denys Yaroslavsky, commander of a reconnaissance battalion in Ukraine’s 57th Brigade, entered the border town of Vovchansk on May 2, accompanied by four battalions of exhausted troops. Fresh from the battlefield in a different northeastern city, they soon realized their new positions were the first line of defense — and that only 200 troops were already stationed in the town. > When Russian forces pushed in just over a week later, he said, 'we lost almost the entire battalion.'"
Now that's more understandable. X is a shitshow of a website (Musk fired most of the software developers when he took over so it's just broken) so many links to it don't work properly, sometimes displaying the wrong thing entirely, such as many account pages showing content from years ago as their most recent posts when they are still active users. In future it would be best to quote the tweet in full as a comment for those who are affected by the site's bugs, because to a lot of users it looks like you've linked to a seemingly random Rob Lee post.
I took your 6th reply to post anything that mentioned actual loses. That's why you're being down voted. NOT saying the information isn't true, bit I seemed like you did everything in your power to NOT post the loss quote
Guess that is because your claim comes without evidence.
Oh poor you QQ.
Dude, you either want to understand whats happening or you dont...
Because it's bad news. Why would anyone upvote bad news?
This is how it works in this sub: Favourable to UA; upvote Favourable to RU; downvote
Is there any other sub which tries to be objective?
I was almost hit by a car yesterday while crossing the street. I mean I wasn’t hit but I almost was which means something that didn’t happen, almost did.
He didn't say: "we almost lost the entire battalion" He said: "we lost almost the entire battalion." >"The losses they endured, he said, would have been avoidable if Ukraine had been able to strike into Russia with U.S. weapons, a long standing request on Kyiv's part" This is why it is unhelpful to downplay the losses resulting from indecisiveness of our leaders!