DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The economy……

Where did I say that 150k Ukranian soldiers were killed?

Exclusive: 150,000 Ukraine soldiers killed in action through October

Funeral announcement and prosthetic maker data indicate Ukraine’s war deaths are much higher than Russia’s

That is the very headline and opening statement from the source you used as your reference point. Take a look for yourself.

What I said:

"Do you really think that one of the best KDR's in war comes from Ukraine with basically no military, tactical history, training, or equipment with a KDR of 1:10?!? LOL...

Vietnam War US 1:3

WW2 was basically1:1

WW1 was basically 1:2


I would bet money that the real Ukraine numbers are 1:2 or 1:1"



I also said...
"What I am saying is that Zelenskyy is full of crap and making things worse by saying they have only lost about 10% of their troops when the reality is they have lost closer to 25-40% of their active military.

Also, it's not that difficult to reference historical data

7 months ago US officials estimated that Ukraine had lost about 70,000 soldiers with 120,000 injured. (about 50% of their military)

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html
Aug. 18, 2023
*Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths
*the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
*Ukraine has around 500,000 troops, including active-duty, reserve, and paramilitary troops, according to analysts."



What you made up...

150k Ukrainian soldiers killed

...Russia has first hand observers and satellites. I don't think anything is really being hidden from Putin in the "big picture." Both governments should have a pretty good idea of the other's losses. They can see how many troops are lined up across the field. On the other hand, lying to civilians to keep up morale makes sense. Yet, the actual numbers do play a significant role in the likelihood of victory. The soldiers in the field can see when they are outnumbered. If Ukraine "breaks" due to low morale, they will definitely lose. Morale is starting to seem pretty low. The noticeable number of "draft dodgers" in a defensive war seems somewhat damning. None of the quotes I see coming out of the Ukrainian military sound good. Bringing in 500,000 green troops, a large number of which don't want to be there it seems, is likely to worsen morale ...if they can even round up that many. Russia will likely still outnumber them by a significant factor. Throw in a collapsing economy as the able bodied men are fighting rather than working, and it's a recipe for further disaster.

What about the numbers in Iraq? Yes, "we" killed a ridiculous number of Iraqi civilians.

I quoted the very source you used at the very beginning to make your point. The Very headline claims that 150k Ukranian soldiers had been killed. The very first statement after the headline stated that more Ukranian soldiers had been killed than Russian troops. After being called out on you saying that it was Ukraine using propaganda when I pointed out that you were disseminating communist propaganda you sang a different tune.

I can't say I blame you. Backing a communist sources statistic and rhetoric was not a good look. But trying to backtrack now and claim you weren't using that information as your talking point from the very beginning isn't a good look either.

Can you explain why you used a source saying those things if you didn't want people to use the source as a basis of fact for what you were saying? Do you often use sources to prove a point that you didn't intend in the first place?

Now that they no longer have the needed weaponry to fight a war against Russia it's no wonder morale is starting to get worse. You are dong nothing more than reporting a self fulfilling prophecy the Republican House as inflicted on Ukraine. They and the people that seem to support our abandoning Ukraine's war efforts are Putin's greatest allies and are supporting the defeat of Ukraine.

You have given the perfect description of what it looks like when soldiers feel abandoned. We are doing nothing but showing the world that the U.S. is not a dependable ally and that we are weak.

It is too bad you don't feel that way about a real US ally Israel. Instead, you support a terrorist organization over a sovereign nation and ally.

US single-family housing starts, permits near two-year highs

Single-family housing starts surge 11.6% in February

Single-family building permits increase 1.0%

Completions soar 20.2%; houses under construction up 0.3%

WASHINGTON, March 19 (Reuters) - U.S. single-family homebuilding rebounded sharply in February, hitting the highest level in nearly two years, boosted by mild temperatures and a persistent shortage of previously owned houses on the market.

Despite the hurdle created for many first-time buyers by higher mortgage rates, builders are cutting prices and offering other incentives to increase sales. They are also reducing the size of the homes being built to manage higher material costs.

The report from the Commerce Department on Tuesday also showed permits for the future construction of single-family housing units rose to more than a 1-1/2-year high last month. With mortgage rates gradually trending lower on expectations the Federal Reserve will start cutting interest rates by June, homebuilding could contribute to economic growth this year.

"Single-family starts could remain strong in the next couple of months as builders continue to see demand for new builds despite the headwinds facing buyers," said Daniel Vielhaber, an economist at Nationwide. "Rate incentives from builders continue to help buyers afford homes on the new side of the market."

Single-family housing starts, which account for the bulk of homebuilding, surged 11.6% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.129 million units last month, the Commerce Department's Census Bureau said. That was the highest level since April 2022.

Data for January was revised up to show single-family starts falling to a rate of 1.012 million units instead of the previously reported 1.004 million units.

Though the housing market has been pummeled by aggressive rate hikes from the U.S. central bank as it battles inflation, homebuilding has been supported by an acute housing shortage, with most homeowners locked into lower mortgage rates.

Recent government data showed there were 757,000 housing units for sale in the fourth quarter, well below the 1.145 million units before the COVID-19 pandemic.

A survey from the National Association of Home Builders on Monday showed confidence among single-family home builders rose to an eight-month high in March amid optimism about sales now and over the coming six months.

Fed officials were expected to leave the central bank's policy rate unchanged in the current 5.25%-5.50% range at the end of a two-day meeting on Wednesday, having raised it by 525 basis points since March 2022.
The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed-rate mortgage has retreated in recent weeks after flirting with the 7% level in late February, according to data from mortgage finance agency Freddie Mac.

Single-family homebuilding jumped 40.2% in the Midwest and increased 16.6% in the densely populated South. It accelerated 16.4% in the Northeast, but declined 15.4% in the West.

Starts for housing projects with five units or more advanced 8.6% to a rate of 377,000 units.

Overall housing starts increased 10.7% to a rate of 1.521 million units in February. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast starts would rebound to a rate 1.425 million units.

Single-family building permits rose 1.0% to a rate of 1.031 million units in February, the highest level since May 2022. Multi-family building permits rose 2.4% to a rate of 429,000 units. Building permits as a whole climbed 1.9% to a rate of 1.518 million units.

Homebuilding activity this year is expected to be concentrated in the single-family housing segment amid a huge backlog of multi-family units under construction.

Residential investment rebounded in the second half of 2023 after contracting for nine straight quarters, the longest such stretch since the housing market collapse in 2006. It has been a drag on gross domestic product for two straight years.

"Housing construction is likely to add modestly to economic growth in the months ahead as builders look forward to the Fed rate cuts that policymakers are forecasting for later this year," said Christopher Rupkey, chief economist at FWDBONDS. "Housing construction has likely turned the corner in this economic cycle and will cease to be a drag on the overall economy."

A minority of economists believe the Fed will not cut rates this year, especially if inflation remains elevated.

Stocks on Wall Street mostly were trading lower. The dollar gained versus a basket of currencies. Prices of U.S. Treasuries rose.

MORE COMPLETIONS

The number of houses approved for construction that were yet to be started increased 0.4% to 270,000 units in February. The single-family homebuilding backlog fell 1.4% to 141,000 units. The completions rate for that housing segment surged 20.2% to 1.072 million units, the highest level since November 2022.

Overall housing completions soared 19.7% to a rate of 1.729 million units, the highest level since January 2007. That is goods news for supply, which is keeping house prices high and contributing to rental inflation.

Realtors estimate that housing starts and completion rates need to be in a range of 1.5 million to 1.6 million units per month over time to bridge the inventory gap.

The number of housing units under construction slipped 0.5% to a rate of 1.666 million units. The inventory of single-family housing under construction rose 0.3% to a rate of 683,000 units.

The stock of multi-family housing under construction dropped 1.0% to 966,000 units. Multi-family housing inventory under construction hit a record 1.001 million units in July 2023. An increased supply of apartments will slow growth in rental prices, the major driver of inflation.

"More multi-family units should continue to weigh on rental inflation, which is decelerating but still elevated," said Nancy Vanden Houten, U.S. lead economist at Oxford Economics.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-single-family-housing-starts-soar-february-2024-03-19/

Yet another lie. You can support Israel without making excuses why Netanyahu uses 2000lb dumb bombs to needlessly kill civilians and to cut off food and medical supplies to civilians. I support Israel but not Netanyahu. You know, the same way you support America but not Biden. You're up to your usual nonsense I see.

Not tryin to be a thread Nazi but there are threads for BD and you to discuss Israel and the Ukraine. Kinda got off our fantastic economy here.

I don't disagree.

At the same time, we were being weak when we were giving them "material aid," too. Your alleged allies shouldn't have to ask for troops when being invaded.

Both sides of our political system are more worried about winning elections than doing what's right.

High minded ideals aren't worth a lick when you don't back them up with actions. Duplicitous arms deals to prop up the economy for political purposes aren't really putting one's money where their mouth is. It's much more putting one's mouth where the money is. That's our country in a nutshell.

Abandoning them totally is not abetter solution no matter how much you type. Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Providing them with weapons was action. Just not to the lengths you think we should have gone to. If you think the weaponry we were supplying Ukraine alone was enough to "prop up the economy for political purposes" I think you are sadly misinformed. Our defense budget for 2024 is currently is 842 billion dollars. Those high minded ideas you speak of were enough for Ukraine to stand its ground.

I don't disagree with you that both sides of politics care more about elections than anything but that has nothing to do with either abandoning Ukraine or starting WW3. Neither of those seems like a logical nor reasonable option.

I've never said to abandon them. Who has? Literally no one here but you has typed that.

Ukraine isn't a member of NATO because Russia told NATO there would be consequences if they did let Ukraine in. They're (we're/NATO is) still kowtowing to Russia. Putin doesn't care if we supply arms because he knows that ultimately they won't matter, and he doesn't care about losses to Russian forces (in a human sense, the loss of face probably annoys him.) This way he can even crow about standing up to the west. Attrition was always going to work in Russia's favor. Standing one's ground is much easier at the beginning of a war than as it drags along.

Unfortunately, WW3 is looking more and more likely. Putin doesn't look likely to stop until someone stops him. We haven't shown a willingness to actually do so. Zelensky has put on a brave face, but it seems like he and the rest of his military command are starting to realize how screwed they are.

Libtards like to make up fake news and then become hysterical about it

And repugnantcans like to sling $#!+ hoping some of it sticks to the wall. Where's the fake news here?

You have made it clear you don't support giving Ukraine military aid without troops to go along with it. If I have that wrong please correct me.

That's correct. Lacking context as you prefer to put other people's words, but correct.

I'm not a fan of setting money on fire. Even less so when politicians on both sides are treating lives like poker chips. Hate it even more when one side gets to use the pointless waste to support the idea that the economy is strong. War profiteering is some shady [censored].

It is what it is. You're opinion seems to go lall in with sending our troops into war or do nothing. what more context is needed? The only one treating lives like poker chips here are the ones promoting Putin just kill people that no longer have the weaponry to defend themselves. So you think the less than 1 percent of our already approved military budget going to weapons for Ukraine is what's propping up the economy? Are you serious?

I've been team take out Putin for awhile.


This is a thread about the economy, though, so I've focused on the spending aspect of the conflict here.

In 2022, Northrup Grumman stock increased in value by 43%. Other arms suppliers saw similar increases. Aid packages to Ukraine were a big reason for those increases.

Now that aid is being held up, those stock prices are falling.

Proving war is an absolute necessity for these companies to succeed.

I'm not sure how you think far less than 1% of our defense spending makes the point you think it does.

Yeah. Pretty much. To me, that's a problem. Thus, helping these companies to succeed is a problem. So, if we're going to help these companies succeed, we should at least make sure that Ukraine actually wins.

Personally, I'd rather find another way.

How much is 1% of our defense budget? We account for 39% of the globe's military spending. 1 percent of that is more than some countries' GDP.

Oh, it's only 1%. 1% is actually a dollar amount with a bunch of zeros after it. But, hey, do you, minimize that away.

Edit: Here are the countries with the lowest GDP's in case you thought I was being hyperbolic: link

In your previous posts you indicated that supporting Ukraine would help prop up these military contractors. Yet with being such a small fraction of our defense spending it has basically no impact in the grand scheme of things. The things you have been proposing would increase that spending to the point it would accomplish exactly what you claimed you wish to avoid. Plus what makes you think that supporting Ukraine with troops would actually insure they win? You seem to claim that if they don't follow your plan they lose but if they follow your plan they win. You have no idea whether China and or N. Korea would get involved. How much that would escalate things and what cost would have to be paid. And just for a point of reference, I remember how quickly people predicted we would win the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's not as simple as you make it sound on paper. It usually never is.

I've never guaranteed winning. Is it worth fighting for or not?

Doing only what we've been doing would seem to guarantee losing.

Yet as long as they were getting the weaponry the needed to fight they weren't losing. That's what it looks like when projection meets reality.

Have you ever been outside of the US? How much of the rest of the world have you seen in person? Have you ever lived in a foreign country?

Just because we can do something here does not mean that the rest of the world can.

They were losing. It has just taken them a while to realize it. Some people won't realize it until it is too late.

No, they weren't losing. Since you're the great world traveler did you go to Ukraine just before they ran out of funding and had the ability to defend themselves? They're realizing they're running out of arms, ammunition and equipment to fight with. Something the far right House Republicans have insured would happen.

Help me out here. My understanding was that we were giving Ukraine our older weapons and Ammo and such and that the actual money being spent was on new and upgraded weapons for ourselves. Do I have that right?

To my knowledge, we (for the most part) haven't given them any money... just equipment.

To be fair, that equipment has a value attached to it (especially, imo, the ammunition used by said equipment).


Regarding tanks, we definitely gave them older Abrams that didn't have newer technology (or it was removed prior to shipment). The other stuff we've given (anti-missile and/or anti-air defense, HIMAARS, artillery) may be a different story.

Yep. I hate every part of your opinion. Zelensky has been an admirable leader and they have Russia in a stalemate IMHO. Should we fail in our obligation to democracy and do like donny and his cult want, we’ll be fighting Russians in the EU before you know it. F* anything Putin or Trump. GOPers should just get out of the way and let the adults handle things.

Here's what was sent through last December from the congressional report service. Don't think it will let me link the.pdf.

• 39 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
• 12 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems
(NASAMS); 1 Patriot air defense battery; other air
defense systems; and 21 air surveillance radars;
• 31 Abrams tanks, 45 T-72B tanks and 186 Bradley
infantry fighting vehicles;
• 300 M113 and 189 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers;
• 2,000+ Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
• 10,000+ Javelin and 90,000+ other anti-armor systems;
• Phoenix Ghost, Switchblade, and other UAS;
• 198 155 mm and 72 105 mm Howitzers and artillery;
• 227 mortar systems;
• Remote Anti-Armor Mine (RAAM) Systems;
• 9,000+ Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-
Guided (TOW) missiles;
• High-speed anti-radiation missiles (HARMs) and laser-
guided rocket systems;
• 35,000+ grenade launchers and small arms;
• communications, radar, and intelligence equipment; and
• training, maintenance, and sustainment.

Link: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12040

...that might work, trying to copy from Google gave me a whole lot extra

Maybe it was mostly old equipment, but would we really need to replace it on top of what had already been appropriated in the defense budget?

Lol. You hate my opinion and then present my opinion as part of your own only in more colorful language.

The "adults," unfortunately, don't seem to be able to handle Jack squat other than spending and receiving money without any understanding of its effective use. Now excessive and ineffective use they are great at.

If it's all old equipment we are providing them and it appears to be what we've done. Why are weapons makers stock rising? Only one reason, we are buying more for ourselves. Right?

It goes up because more people are buying the stock. They see an endless quagmire of spending and shipping equipment as well as innovations in weapon systems.

Plus, older equipment doesn't mean bad equipment.

Money spent allegedly in search of innovation. Actual innovation, eventually, maybe.... But that's more the appropriations that were already in the budget. Ukraine is more just extra gravy in the trough. Probably end up making it's way to executive bonuses and back into "political contributions."

According to the AP 26 Billion in financial aid has been sent to Ukraine in 2022 to Jan 2023. Not sure how much since. I read somewhere that we were sending cash to pay for pensions. I’m not sure if that was part of the aid package the Republicans in the house are blocking.

Apparently we have been paying for pensions since 2022. There was more money allocated in the bill the Republicans are holding up. The reason for the payments is because Ukraine is spending all their money on defense.

https://www.voanews.com/amp/report-...nsions-without-foreign-aid-/7415086.html

They see margins and defense spending. A lot of the contractors (minus Boeing) have been gouging the Government via margins produced through sole source contracts and they keep changing the laws via lobbyists in ways that favor themselves. Their conduct has been ever increasingly aggressive in "negotiations" because they want to rake the tax payer over the coals to meet or exceed targets which all roll up into performance metrics that are released quarterly to the SEC, which drives stock buying opportunities. I put negotiations in quotes because it's like dealing with a car dealer who knows you have to buy the car from him and also knows your budget.

Edit ~ Boeing is also gouging us. Actually, they have probably been the most aggressive of all the contractors on the defense side, because they are desperate to offset losses on the commercial side. When I excluded them in the paragraph above, I meant to infer that they aren't really making any gains on their stock price as a whole because of their colossal failures on the commercial side. That same type of pig-headedness, corruption, and emphasis on prioritizing margins over safety and all else spreads over to the defense side as well. Anyone can look at the KC-46 and its history and realize that Boeing sucks, and has sucked for quite some time, ever since they stopped listening to their engineers and QA. But hey, after they merged with McDonnell-Douglas, they became too big to fail. And they know it.

"endless quagmire of spending"? So you say., Are you suggesting we let Ukraine twist in the wind while a dictator like Putin runs over them?