53% Ukrainian Casualties

According to Mossad, 53% of the Ukrainian Army is dead or injured.

Claim: Ukrainian and Russian casualties according to MOSSAD

“former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett – Claims WESTERN LEADERS BLOCKED UKRAINE / RUSSIA PEACE DEAL – A deal HE NEGOTIATED at Zelensky’s request in March – Apparently because the West wanted to CONTINUE TO STRIKE Russia”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to 53% Ukrainian Casualties

  1. Rah says:

    And that number doesn’t include what was probably several million military age Ukrainians that fled the country at the beginning of the conflict.

  2. David McFerran says:

    And if you believe all that you’ll probably believe anything.

    • Timo, not that one says:

      “Cognitive dissonance happens when you are confronted with a truth that conflicts with your self-image. To reconcile the conflict, your brain automatically triggers an hallucination to rationalize-away the discrepancy.”
      Scott Adams

  3. arn says:

    That’s not really new.
    It is well known(outside of the realm of western fact checkers) that Boris Johnson sabotaged the peace talks in Istanbul by telling US corporate donkey Zelensky that the money flow to the 51st state will stop if the peace talks don’t.
    This crazy conspiracy theory was not published by Russia ,Turkey or Alex Jones
    but by the Ukrainian Pravda back in april.
    (and ignored the same way by big tech and MSM as the Hunter Laptop,Joes dementia,Epstein and the permanent failures of AGW predictions).

    The peace deal was even confirmed by the guys who really run the show:
    “In April 22nd(when 95%less Ukrainians were killed and crippled) Russian and Ukrainian negotiators agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement.Russian to withdraw to its February 23rd positions,keep the controlled Donbass regions and Crimea and Ukraine to stay out of Nato”
    Fiona Hill CFR

    After Boris Johnsons extremely sudden arrival in Ukraine the peace talks instantly ended.
    As the USA is the major payer in Ukraine it is safe to assume that Boris Johnson was acting on behalf of the MiC ,as Britain neither has the money to pay Ukraine (especially not since the GND)nor the military to challenge Russia nor the control over US spending.

  4. Angela Merkel admitted that the Minsk agreement served only to introduce delay for the Ukrainians to arm themselves to a level which would present a threat to Russia. As the West has shown itself incapable of negotiating in good faith, Russia will not stop until there is unconditional surrender of what is left of Ukraine. The time for meaningful peace talks was a year ago. There is no option but a military solution.

    • arn says:

      This was the worst mistake on Putins side to Trust Merkel and the french.

      The Russian had trapped about 40000 Ukrainians in a cauldron
      when he accepted the deal and the Minsk agreement.
      These 40000 wouldn’t have been there to fight in 2022
      if they were sent to turn big stones into small stones in Siberia.
      = the Ukrainian Army would have only had 50% of its fighting power in 2022 if most of their best trained and willing fighters would be in Russian labor camps.
      And this was the 2nd time the Russians were screwed by the Germans in a short time.
      During the start of the US/Nato coup and corporate takeover called Maidan Ukraine revolution Germans (now) president Steinmeier was leading negotiation with the Janukovitch government ( which was illegally removed as the necessary 2/3 of parliamentary votes to remove him were never reached).
      After the deal for ceasefire was reached Steinmeier went the same day to the Maidan to stir up protests.

      Considering the leaked ” Fuck the EU” call Nulands (with now CiA Boss Burns iirc)
      where she already knew that Jatzenyuk will be Ukraines next prime minister,
      it seems obvious that the germans haven’t been acting for their own interest and that their ‘leaders’ behave like imposters from WEF’s young leader program.

      • All the belligerent rhetoric from the US is coming from the same psychos who got the West to invade Iraq. Why in the name of all that is sacred are those A$$ holes still in post, when they should be weaving baskets adjacent to other nutters who believe themselves to be Napoleon?

  5. Gamecock says:

    As Shelby Foote, noted War for Southern Independence historian, said of the size difference between the Union and the Confederacy, “As long as the Union chose to fight, they couldn’t lose.”

    These numbers show same for Russia-Ukraine.

    It is the fox chasing the rabbit. The rabbit is running for his life; the fox is just looking for a meal.

  6. Rud Istvan says:

    I saw this elsewhere. The Mossad estimate cannot be traced to a reliable source—I spent the better part of a day trying. A tweet not from Mossad claiming to know Mossad numbers is NOT a reliable source. Plus, we know Ukraine mounted two quite successful counteroffensives. Plus the claimed Russian casualties are a small fraction of what UK intelligence and the USDoD independently estimate. Plus the claimed Russian tank losses are less than half of what has been independently verified outside Ukraine by photographic evidence from inside Ukraine. Looks like disinfo.

    • Timo, not that one says:

      Everything looks like disinformation. Including the UK intelligence and the USDoD “estimates”.
      Using disinformation to debunk disinformation is a fools errand.
      The UK and US information is from the same governments that have told you “Safe and Effective” for the past 3 years.

    • arn says:

      These Mossad number are pretty much the same as Colonel Douglas Macgregors ,
      who estimated the number of Ukrainian losses to be 159000 two weeks ago.
      And if we take into account that the Russian fire 8-10 grenades for every grenade Ukraine fires,then the numbers ain’t off.

      And successfull counteroffensives were part of the massive bodycount,
      as the success was bought with massive losses.

      while the Russians were rather retreating and

  7. conrad ziefle says:

    The numbers are so precise on NATO deaths, etc. that I have to be skeptical. If it is true, then Boris Johnson needs to be tried for crimes against humanity. We know that we have experienced Western disinformation in recent years in many ways. We have heard rumors of Russian disinformation, most of which has proven either false or comical (fat men in the basement posting anti Clinton stuff on Facebook to try to change the election-ha, ha). If the situation is as one-sided as it appears here, then we should see someone calling for a peace treaty.

  8. Thomas says:

    Cut the crap, Tony!

    • rah says:

      So you don’t believe that Russia has a massive advantage in the number of military age people in their population over the numbers available in the population of Ukraine? And you do believe that Ukrainians have managed to inflict about 10 Russian casualties to every 1 that they suffer?

      Wake up man. This is a conventional frontal war, and in such a war size matters a lot!

      No amount of desire or hope can change that fact.

      The advanced weapons being supplied by the west to Ukraine take time to learn to use and established organization and doctrine to make their use most effective. Advisers can teach them how to use the weapons, and teach them doctrine, but the cohesive organization having well trained leadership and an effective command structure takes a lot more time to institute. It requires actual field exercises that can be graded and critiqued so that the leadership at all levels understands how to act and react to given situations.

  9. Off subject a bit. My understanding of American nuclear doctrine is that launch is only permitted when a nuclear explosion is confirmed on US soil. That raises the question of how the doctrine can deal with 100 megaton torpedo attack causing tsunami’s to take out the Eastern seaboard and most of California and Washington state. If there is a response, Russia has in place effective civil defense measures, when in the West they will tell you to hide under the stairs. Furthermore, as Chernobyl demonstrated, prevailing winds will send the fall out Westward, not Eastward. People who live in glass houses really shouldn’t throw stones.

    • Gamecock says:

      Gov watched too many Westerns, where the Good Guy couldn’t draw his gun til the Bad Guy started to draw his.

    • conrad ziefle says:

      If our nuclear doctrine is such, it needs to be revamped. That is a totally suicidal rule.

      • What is needed is a treaty to outlaw the nuclear torpedo. That requires a resumption of the strategic arms limitation talks. No recent US administration has the skills to engage in arms limitation negotiation, they lie to their own people as well as lying through their teeth when negotiating settlements with other nations, based on the principle that their interests can always be backed by force Nuclear arms limitations requires honourable grown ups, not the petulant boy-kings who dominate the administration. Putting the US nuclear forces on a hair trigger is unspeakably dangerous; what happens in the event of a naturally occurring tsunami?

        • A ‘treaty’ REALLY?
          We are talking War not games of LUV!

        • conrad ziefle says:

          Yeah, well, waiting until the other team has lined up for a slam dunk is also incredibly dangerous. Maybe that is why you shoot down a balloon as soon as it goes approximately one mm into your territory, so the other guys think you are a trigger happy nut, and don’t do anything slightly threatening.

  10. MJMJ says:

    Russia 18,480 dead is not credible. I reject everything else as a result.

  11. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Those numbers don’t pass the sniff test. That’s because (a) Russia is doing the attacking*, (b) the front line is almost entirely static and (c) it’s WW1 style trench warfare.

    I strongly suspect that means casualties are roughly equal, like in WW1. Some of the secondary data like recruitment of prisoners and Africans by Wagner also suggest Russia has much more of a personnel problem than those figures suggest.

    (* Attacks against dug in positions are a major force multiplier for the defender. That is offset by Russia’s superiority in artillery. But since the front isn’t moving much it suggests the attacks are being repelled, which is always very costly for an attacker. If Russia rediscovers their inner Brusilov that may change, but the troops would need to be carefully trained for that tactical approach.)

    • arn says:

      Wagner recruitment is an indicator for … Nothing.

      What a private mercenary group is doing does not scale in any way with a national army.
      A simple strategy in growth or further contracts can massively increase demand in personal without any victims at all.
      It’s the same on the Ukrainian side with all their foreign fighters.

      Real indicators are mobilization.
      The Russian have one while
      Ukraine is in a permanent state or remobilization
      ans started mobilizing women in October –
      and old men way before.
      What do you think is the reason to mobilize women?
      Does this raise any red flags in your head?

  12. conrad ziefle says:

    Well the first, and most damning part of this story, came out today. West blamed by ex-Israel PM for thwarting a peace treaty, appears to be true. Or, at least is being reported today elsewhere.

  13. An Inquirer says:

    I do regret when “Tony” ventures outside of Climate issues. Often in those subjects, he transmits #s or ideas that are not credible. Even if he quotes a source, if the numbers that he quotes do not pass critical analysis thinking, then all information that he transmits is tainted.
    I really do think he gives us good info on the climate, but the idea of 157,000 dead Ukrainian soldiers just does not pass the credibility test. Russia is a huge country, and in the little pieces that we have been shown, we have see thousands of Russian soldier graves. That is in addition to soldier bodies that went to the portable crematoriums or were just abandoned on the battlefield. The land area of Ukraine is a small % of the size of Russia, and we have not see nearly as many graves of Ukrainian soldiers.

    • tonyheller says:

      I heard exactly the same complaints when I started talking about COVID and vaccines three years ago, and climate fifteen years ago. It gets tiresome.

      • Luigi says:

        Dear Tony,
        if we believe that then why shouldn’t we believe that human made CO2 is heating the earth?


        So the real figures are probably Russian casualties and losses amounting at least to 150% of the Ukrainian ones.

        The blitzkrieg in 1942 the most notable exception, but only because the attack was not expected by Stalin, who had worked very efficiently to purge (and weaken) his own armed forces.

        • conrad ziefle says:

          The whole point is that you have to read what Tony puts up with an open and logical mind. If you review the evidence he puts up and think it is not sufficient to at least show that global warming is exaggerated and politicized, then don’t believe it. If you think that the stuff he puts up about Russian v Ukraine is not adequate, according to your rational mind, then don’t believe it.
          I think the evidence regarding the rewriting of weather data from the last 100 years or so is clear, and the fact that it has been rewritten to match CO2 with precision that is impossible in a multiparameter system, is damning, and it is embarrassing that people with even a marginal scientific understanding don’t question that.

          • Luigi says:

            The point in not that. I do not believe in AGW neither in any of the catastrophic stories told by mainstream and politics. I really appreciate the evidence that Tony puts and have the possibility to check it by other sources. I can access to most scientific papers read them and see whether they tell nonsenses or not. But I do not either believe in such low Russian losses for a couple of simple reasons.
            1 the one who attacks is generally subjected to most losses unless it has not a huge superiority (and this is not the case in this conflict).
            2 Russians had good reasons to retreat from north Ukraine and from Kherson region. And these reasons were exactly unsustainable losses, due to Ukrainian pressure.
            3 the following constant failure of any new offensive effort.
            4 completely wrong tactics Russian army has been using during the last year and massive provision of weapons by the wester countries.

            Russians have not lost their attitude toward human life: they consider it worth zero and send prisoners to fight promising them something they will never see cause they die at war. this is the truth.
            The renewed offensive effort is carried out at the expenses of new conscrits or volunteers and yes in this respect, the number of available men, Russia has an huge advantage.

            We’ll see during this next offensive if I am right or those who state that Ukraine is collapsing.

            That said, I am not judging the motives that brought Russia to invade Ukraine. there are many claims by each side. I just know that Russia imperialistic attitude, the fascination of the old communistic empire, open bills from the age of the Bolshevik massacres against Ukrainians are probably behind the hate between those two populations.

            I am also not judging if the west is doing well or not. I would not go to war to defend my country (Italy) neither the one where I live (Germany) because I find that the base of these societies are rotten, people are egoists, corruption and disregard for human rights have never been so spread and they are no real democracies (in both countries constitutional courts are not independent from political power).
            Russia is simply not worse neither better, it is only another form of dictatorial power.

          • conrad ziefle says:

            Sometimes you fight for your country, not because you support the government, but because your people are being killed. Anyway, I understand that you dislike governments, but that should make you even more suspect of government science. I’ve heard the negatives on both Ukraine and Russia, and I’m not supportive of either. I wish someone with real determination would try to come to some ceasefire. The people of both countries deserve that.

        • The Russians initially underestimated the influence of the Western puppet masters, ans initially conducted their campaign on the assumption that the Ukrainian regime was in a position to act rationally in the best interests of its own citizens. That clearly is not the case, it is a puppet regime controlled by its Western masters, who couldn’t give two hoots for the people of Ukraine.

          The terrorist attacks on the Kerch bridge and the Nordstream pipelines made it clear that the war had to be total, so the Russian strategy changed from one of merely seeking protection for the Dombass to actual war with Ukraine.

          Since Russia retreated from Kharkov and Kherson, neither of which were defensible, it has been the Ukrainians on the attack for the past three months. The Russians have been consolidating defensive positions East of the Dnieper. They have been gradually advancing in the Bakhmud area, but it is the Ukrainians who have been throwing resources into the Bakhmud meat grinders. The Russians have been wiping them out with superior artillery. The Russsian retreats to more defensible positions involved few losses on their side, but the advancing Ukrainians were slaughtered. Hardly the great victory the western media claimed.

          The Russians now have the resources for a comprehensive offensive. Any idea that Ukraine will survive, let alone beat the Russians is pie in the sky.

      • rah says:

        Don’t you just Love it when guests at YOUR site try to demand that you limit the subject matter to what THEY think it should be? That takes a certain kind of arrogance. The same kind of arrogance that collectivist progressives always display.

        • An Inquirer says:

          Demand is a strong word. “advise” and “plea” would be more appropriate. Not because Tony is bad, but because he is hurting the effort to have rational discussion on AGW.

      • An Inquirer says:

        Bennett — the one who supposedly provided the information for this post — says that his article is a bunch of bull. Russian war crimes killed any progress that he was making on a peace deal.

        Tony, I do think you are the greatest in the discussion of AGW. However, no one can vet every article in every subject. And the problem is that you lose credibility when you venture into other fields where have less opportunity to vet. Rational discussion on AGW is hindered when your adversaries can point to this article and simply say that you are as off base in AGW as you are in this article.

        • conrad ziefle says:

          How do you look at a NASA temperature record and say it is not credible because you think that the Russian-Ukraine numbers are not credible? Do you just grade it down on morality points, or something like that? Maybe you worry about other people who don’t understand the graphs when they see them and are often stampeded by herd mentality, and that they will dismiss a well crafted argument against global warming, because of a controversial position on Russia v Ukraine. Unfortunately, there are a lot of journalists out there looking for an opportunity to stampede the herd.

    • arn says:

      There was an interview of Col Macgregor with Judge Napolitano about 2 weeks ago.

      He exactly tells where this numbers come from.
      They are identical with those of the Mossad as they use identical methods.

      Why do you think the Ukraine is using the Kraken (german name,so you can guess their orientation )group behind their own lines?
      They are there to shoot the huge number of deserters.
      This is going on for month.

      Btw the Russians are launching 40-60000 grenade per day.
      One does not need to be an expert to estimate a huge bodycount if only a fraction of a fraction of them hits the target.

  14. Alastair says:

    You can get a list of verified Russian losses here:

    and Ukrainian losses here:

    After each vehicle/equipment type is listed you will see something like “(1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (1, captured)” click inside the parentheses to see photographs or video of the destroyed/captured/etc. item in question – this is how you can verify the losses.

    At present these lists show that Russia has lost 69 aircraft (of which 64 were destroyed and 5 damaged) and 75 helicopters (64 destroyed, 10 damaged, and 1 captured). Ukraine has lost 57 aircraft (56 destroyed and 1 captured) and 29 helicopters (25 destroyed, 1 damaged, and 3 captured). These figures don’t tally with the alleged Mossad report. The under reporting of Russian losses being of greater importance since these are verified losses and the real losses for both sides will be higher.

    • Timo not that one says:

      So how difficult is it to exclude photos that are inconvenient?
      People are so easy to fool.

      • czechlist says:

        Lying by omission. Don’t report anything inconvenient to your narrative. And if/ when you are proven wrong just report it as “old news” and move on to the next fabrication.
        I find it incredible that after years of proven hyped lies people still return to those sources for “news” proving they are looking for validation of their hatred/entrenched beliefs – not valid information

    • conrad ziefle says:

      I’m going by memory, and not looking it up, but just as a comparison. In the entire Viet Nam War the US lost about 40,000 men. This was about equal to US losses in one battle in WW2, The Battle of the Bulge. If the Russians or the Ukrainians have lost 127,000 men, then the fighting is ferocious. Cities should be hulls of bombed out buildings. Lots of civilian casualties.

      • rah says:

        It was a little over 50,000.

      • arn says:

        If you think the fighting is ferocious than watch yesterdays Interview of Scott Ritter with George Galloway :
        Scott Ritter thinks that the number of Ukrainian victims maybe twice as high as the number Israel put out as the Ukrainians tend to abandon the corpses of their soldiers
        and those abandoned are hard to track down and keep the losses officially low.

  15. Vietnam deaths of American and Allies = 282,000.
    58,220 U.S. military fatalities.
    Vietnam Era Vet here…Brother served in Nam and made some of the NVA numbers…a good commie is a dead commie…trust me.

  16. Martin says:

    A very Russia-friendly Turkish newspaper launches alleged intelligence from MOSSAD that allegedly knows the losses down to the cartridge. Very credible.

  17. Shaen Marshall says:

    I am not a Putin fan. Perhaps he is a murderer as our yellow press always infers. Question: have our corrupt politicians murdered? Before Trump few of us realized the utter corruption of US government.
    Russia has explicitly stated objectives vis-a-vis Ukraine. They seem quite reasonable to me since Ukraine seems to be a sinkhole of corruption itself.
    I do believe Russia would accept internationally monitored plebiscites in the Donbas and Crimea. Would the US consent to the consent of the governed? Or does our corrupt government have devious objectives?

  18. An Inquirer says:

    Bennett — the one who supposedly provided the information for this article — says that his article is a bunch of bull. Russian war crimes killed any progress that he was making on a peace deal.

  19. Oztruthseeker says:

    Actually, it is probably more accurate to reverse the headers, i.e. the listed figures for Ukraine are actually the Russian figures and vice versa, and while there are foreign fighters (on Both Sides) there are no NATO troops in Ukraine and many Ukrainians are being trained outside of Ukraine. So put Russia in place of Ukraine and Ukraine in place of Russia on the above list and double or triple troop casualties on both sides and you are probably closer to the truth.

  20. An Inquirer says:

    Not only does Bennett say that the article (about his role) quoted by Tony is a bunch of bull; but also there is no evidence that Mossad provided the numbers to the spurious website quoted by Tony.

    • conrad ziefle says:

      But Bennett has clarified that no such deal existed — and said talks broke down because of apparent Russian war crimes.

      Wonder which time he was lying, and why he changed his story? You think Israel is somewhat dependent on US good will, kind of like “Son of a Bitch, the guy was fired,” type threats. With Biden in power and all of his nefarious connections in the Ukraine, anything could be going on behind the scenes.
      I’m not closing any doors on this one.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *