- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
The average life expectancy for a Russian soldier in Ukraine is between 20-30 minutes, CIA director John Ratcliffe said. Speaking at a defense summit in Pennsylvania, he attributed the deadly conditions for Vladimir Putin’s forces to Ukraine’s combat drones equipped with AI. “What I would say is, our intelligence is consistent with some of the open-source reporting you may have seen in Ukraine,” Ratcliffe said. “So the average life expectancy of a Russian recruit, right now, arriving on the battlefield in Ukraine, is estimated to be between 20 and 30 minutes.” “And that’s because AI-powered drones have gotten to be such specialized, low-cost killing machines. And it’s why we’re now four and a half years into that conflict,” Ratcliffe added. Ukraine said this month that Russia has lost about 1.4 million soldiers since the beginning of its full-scale invasion, with over 1,000 of the Kremlin’s troops killed or wounded almost every day. In May, Ukraine’s defense ministry said it was killing roughly 200 Russian soldiers for every kilometer of territory that Moscow claimed.
You must log in or # to comment.
The source of this claim is a tiny anonymous telegram channel, that was then cited by NY Post, which was then presumably quoted by Ratcliffe.
It seems from HIS quote that he was referencing the CIAs own sources
“Our intelligence is consistent with some of the open-source reporting you may have seen in Ukraine,” Ratcliffe said
deleted by creator
Honestly, my heart goes out to all these people. Every person on both sides of this senseless invasion is a person. They have parents who probably love them and want to see them again. Friends, siblings likely.
Also, Russia has a long history of conscription, right? I’m wondering how many of these soldiers want to be there.
So much senseless violence and loss of life on both sides, and for what? It’s gross.
There hasn’t been much conscription on the Russian side (though recently that’s changing) because conscription is tremendously politically unpopular, most people joined the war on that side by willingly signing a contract because they’re offering huge sums of money compared to what Russian people outside of the biggest cities can make.
The Russians have been taking from small rural villages and newly annexed territories in the far East among ethnic minorities. They say they’ll pay them well but their commanders pocket the bonuses and pay, and send the men to die in meat waves. It’s only this year that the war is reaching Moscow and muscovites are forced to face the reality of war.
Couple of nitpicks.
newly annexed territories in the far East
I would argue that it’s not really newly annexed as most of the far east was nabbed by the time of the 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk and present day borders were more or less set by 1860 though some wiggling occurred in between.
They say they’ll pay them well but their commanders pocket the bonuses and pay, and send the men to die in meat waves.
Certainly Russia has huge corruption issues, this definitely happens and people run into bureaucratic issues all the time in getting what they were promised to be paid, but it’s not literally all vaporware. You need some veterans returning and be seen spending high or barring that at least their families observed spending the death benefits, if it’s all stolen in it’s entirety then your willing recruitments are going to dry up and limit you to convicts. The federal subjects of Russia have been in something of a competition with each other to recruit as many people as possible so that their heads will look good to the Kremlin so being limited like that would put them on Putin’s naughty list. Even regions like St. Petersburg that are comparatively rich (and therefore have a populace far less accepting of such a hazardous job when there are decent paying alternatives) compete in this by using their economic strength to recruit less expensive people from other poorer regions to keep their own recruitment numbers up. So there’s effectively a bidding war going on for anyone who will sign a contract nationwide. And since Russia has huge income inequality death benefits that are like a couple years worth of income in a rich region can be decades worth of income for impoverished regions even with variance in the regional contribution to the benefits. Because of this poorer federal subjects like Tuva have actually generally seen a pretty substantial growth in GRP, household bank deposits and tax returns even while bearing a disproportionate share of the deaths in the war.
So yes death is very likely and many do get scammed out of the full amount of what they were promised, but there is nevertheless still a tempting hook to draw in people. Many are one way or another securing life-changing amounts of money for themselves or their families in the poorer areas of Russia by invading Ukraine.
That said… this doesn’t seem to be a terribly stable framework. The high payouts have been funded by nationalizing oligarch assets for resale (targeting especially ones that seem less loyal), raising taxes and cracking down on local elites, raiding welfare outflows and of course selling a huge amount of natural resources, some refined. But the Ukrainian campaign against refineries and logistics has destroyed many of their best exports, reselling oligarchs property has diminishing returns (would-be oligarchs don’t want to be suckers if there’s a high risk to buy in and then wind up nationalized themselves so for saying something wrong so the Kremlin has been having to resale the properties it seizes at significant discount for them to consider it as worth it to buy the properties quickly enough for the Kremlin to get the money it needs right now), and the high taxes and low welfare combined with a gas crisis are damaging local economies and making people upset, while cracking down on elites upsets the elites. Since the point of incentivizing so many people signing contracts was to avoid public unrest, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the escalating payments necessary keep the frontlines staffed without causing public unrest anyway, you could expect for the Kremlin to stop bothering and eat the less popular ways to get more men. And indeed now you have scenes in places like Penza where men are being rounded up en masse and forced to sign contracts although that comes with problems like videos circulating of their wives demanding to say goodbye to their kidnapped husbands but not being allowed to do that and so calling on God to damn the recruiters.
ICE is operating the same way
Probably a clause in the contract that they only get paid after returning from combat
No, they just don’t really bother actually paying it out that much or the officer just takes it.
The Russian people need to start saying “no”. Putin is dweeby little nothing of a creature, not a powerful sorceror. Without people to do the evil for him there is nothing.
This, in fact, is a message to all the people in the world who are just thugs for their own nasty piece of shit “leaders”.
If the current quality of life for young adult males in Russia isn’t an eye opener for those who flirt with authoritarian leaders “for the lulz” I don’t know what will get through to them.
You’re not special, dear leader isn’t going to offer your uneducated ass a seat at the table - you’re canon fodder. End.
That seems to be the hardest part for way too many people to accept.
“You are not special. You’re not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You’re the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We’re all part of the same compost heap. We’re all singing, all dancing crap of the world.”
So every single political or even many daily decisions people make should be from the perspective of how it effects/works for the avarage person. “But i’M spEcIaL”, no you’re not. None of us are.
That’s completely unfathomable to me, why or how do so many people think they are special?
Life is cheap in that part of the world
Keep in mind this statement is coming from Trump’s CIA.
The 20 minute claim is definitely shady, it is explored here on More or Less from 6:32 20 mins claim
Considering Trump absolutely bums Putin does that mean the true figure of Russian casualties is higher?
I think 1.4 Megahumans matches what the Ukrainians are saying. Still, an enormous figure, considering Russia as a whole only has hundred times as many.
This is great for Ukraine, but not so hot for the future of warfare. We may have to get good at building EMPs for when the urban pacification terminators come.
yeah I can’t help but read all this as very bad news indeed in the longer term. There’s nothing stopping Russia, North Korea, or indeed any random manchild billionaire deploying this tech within the coming months or years and deciding who they think should die. It’s not like nukes which are difficult to get material for and difficult to build. Most of the advanced stuff is the software, which can be easily copied.
What was stopping russia to deploy it a year ago?
Like now, they don’t have the AI technology.
What i mean is they know about it and had opportunity to do it too, but they didn’t. That means there is something else they are missing
Or they miss nothing but they are not as cruel and dystopian as our media presents them.
Right, they decided to invade out of love.
Lol, you dummy
So, what’s the better explanation?
So they are choosing to lose thousands of soldiers everyday because it would be cruel to use more effective weapons? What the fuck are you talking about?
I thought about North Korea not using killer drones against its own population. For Russia in Ukraine, AI would make sense. So, why are they not using it? I think they don’t have the technology. But also, why is Ukraine not using it?
This isn’t AI related. Russia was counting on a fast win to steal the resources they would need to lock it in. They didn’t get one.
That seems unlikely.
Why? I haven’t heard about existing autonomously flying killer drones yet. Why should Russia have them?
but not so hot for the future of warfare.
Maybe the future of warfare is to figure out a better way for people to settle their differences.
That would, of course, mean we would first have to figure out how to prevent narcissistic megalomaniacs from being in positions of power.
If drones are operated fiber optically, does an EMP even work?
You’re confusing communication with what EMP is really good at - frying digital circuits
Fibre optic drones are usually carbon fibre shielded - which can’t easily be used with traditional radio operated drones because it blocks the communication
Carbon fibre would seriously attenuate an EMP in the same way as a Faraday cage
EMPs also usually require detonation of a nuclear device
EMP destroys electronics. The fibre optics, plastic and metal will all be ok. the circuit boards will all be fried. Future drones will no doubt have emp protections, but its still early days
*fiber. Not fibree or fibray.
“Fibre” in English.
“Fiber” in Americanglish
There is more than one dialect of English.
The reason we’re 4½ years into the conflict is that Putin is a piece of shit
Ok I would make fun of Russia but I would rather not believe a CIA spook who’s probably a trump appointee, of all people.
Yeah part of this sounded like a sneaky ad for killer drones? Like to manipulate weapon stonks or something.
if you watch the drone combat sub on reddit, it is a turkey shoot and has been for well over a year. Bleak, graphic and bloody footage of first POV of human after human getting blowed up by an angry mosquito or a 2 liter bottle filled with explosives dropped from above. Sooo many, and the worst are the ones who only get injured and take their own lives than suffer any longer, all caught on drone video…Its frightening to know what the future of warfare looks like and how effective it is against walking meat sacks
Pop goes the weasels. It’s only a matter of time before these start being used in other countries for assassinations. scary future indeed.
Jammers for personal use is going to get so hot
That’s the point why AI based drones are getting popular or why that tech is being developed. Those are immune to jamming. Those operate on their own, detecting and eliminating targets.
Area jamming was effective in the beginning when drones were radio or any wireless signal controlled.
Then came fiber optic cable based ones to counter the jamming, but those do have a limited range and still must be operated by someone.
Now we have/developing AI controlled drones. Immune to jamming, similarly to fiber optic controlled ones, but no need for an operator to control those after releasing.They have fiberoptic cables, good luck jamming that.
JammersFalconry for personal use is going to get so hot.
Street Justice for white collar criminals like Martin Skreli…
If this statement was true, and Russia was striving to have just 10,000 troops in the battlefield at all times. In the past 6 months Russia would have lost 126 million soldiers.
Given that the population of Russia is 140 millions and that they likely deploy more than 10,000 soldiers at a time, this statement makes no sense.
Can you explain the math?
If you have 10,000 soldiers and on average the life expectancy is of 30 minutes then in 30 minutes you will have no soldiers because they all died. This is of course not the case, but works out if you average it out over a longer period.
This means Russia has to send 10,000 new troops every 30 minutes. That is 48 full replacements of their standing army every day.
48 x 10,000 = 480,000
480,000 x 30 x 6 = 86 millions
Sorry I had made some mistake in the previous calculation, still a huge number though.
Where do you get the 10000 troop number per 30 minutes? Seems absurdly high. I’d personally put it somewhere between 10-25
If they have 10,000 soldiers on the battlefield and the average life expectancy of a soldier is 30 minutes then on average they will lose 10,000 soldiers every 30 minutes.
If the life expectancy of a soldier is 30 minutes then I’d expect that on average their whole standing army will be dead in 30 minutes.
It is an absurdly high number, just like it is absurd to say that average life expectancy on the front is 30 minutes.
You didn’t answer my question and I’m starting to think you really don’t understand the numbers or this article
The only number I got from the article is the following.
The average life expectancy for a Russian soldier in Ukraine is between 20 to 30 minutes
The rest is made up data to show such number is absurd. Other numbers may be correct.
You can’t prove something being absurd with made-up data, especially when that made-up number not correlating with real life numbers, which like I said before, to me looks like somewhere between 10 and 25, not 10000, which is also made-up, but at least to me it actually makes sense. Your number does not.
It’s an arbitrary guess.
What’s the correct understanding of the numbers?
What’s the correct understanding of the numbers?
When a foot soldier gets to an active conflict zone, on average they get hit (not necessarily killed, casualty is also wounded) every 30 minutes. This does not count in drone operators, logistics, etc., but the most dangerous job in the army - front lines. If you see some of the footage from the front, then this does not seem that extreme. That’s why it’s called meatgrinder
Ukraine publishes the number of Russian casualties every day (both wounded and killed) and it’s usually between 600 and 1000. Not every soldier on the “battlefield” is used as assault infantry on the frontline.
The statement says that as soon as a soldier gets to the battlefield they have a life expectancy of 20/30 minutes.
I’m not using these calculations to extrapolate the number of deaths in Russia, I’m using it to prove the statement makes no sense.
I don’t know why it is not correct, but the number is too high for the statement to be correct.
Yeah, and in medieval times everyone only lived to 30 and then just died… /s
No, but you’d expect that every 30 years the number of deaths is the same as the world population.
I did point out this does not work unless averages over longer periods of time. 6 months is in my opinion quite long when compared to 30 minutes.
If you have any actual critique of the maths I’m showing, please bring it up and we may discuss that.
No, but you’d expect that every 30 years the number of deaths is the same as the world population.
Only if population size is stable, births equal deaths, age distribution is stable and so on. Otherwise it doesn’t really add up. The point is: Average doesn’t mean their entire army is gone in 30 minutes. Some make it 2 minutes, others may survive for several months.
“So the average life expectancy of a Russian recruit, right now, arriving on the battlefield in Ukraine, is estimated to be between 20 and 30 minutes”
The question is probably how they define “on the battlefield” (Where does the battlefield start?)
I have no idea, I interpret it as people deployed.
There’s also the possibility that they refer to soldiers actively attacking a Ukrainian position, which would be a strange way to word it. But in that case it wouldn’t be so surprising: I can believe you have about half an hour to live when you’re rushing towards machine guns.
What makes you think they’re pushing 10k people past their trenches at all times?
This statement is about the battlefield. The area between fortifications. Given a M777 howitzer has a range of 21-40 km based on type of shell.
If we go by the most extreme expectations, then the battlefield will be at least 10 kms wide - As both sides will keep artillery a bit further back to protect them against enemy artillery fire.
To get the expert infantry badge in the US army, a soldier needs to be able to march with full equipment at 6.33 km an hour. It’s fair to assume the Russian soldiers running into their death aren’t spotting full equipment. So if we’re setting it a bit high they might be able to move 5 km during the 30 minute expected kill time.
The numbers are similar for the other side of this fight. It means the only way to push the battle lines is by using equipment
I believed the battlefield included trenches as well. Is that not the case?
I would assume fortified positions do not count as battlefield
deleted by creator
The bravery and strength and heart and resilience of the Ukrainian people is awe inspiring…
imma doubt
And yet, they advance regardless.
Not regardless. Their advances have halved compared to last year while their casualties are up by about 75%
Oh yeah. If they keep up with the current speed, they might make it by ~2150 or so. Assuming they don’t run out of fuel in the meantime…
Once the territory is conquered, regardless of its size, it is real hard to get it back, if ever.
The Crimean peninsula is practically under siege now. How long can the occupiers be a threat without fuel, ammo and supplies?
So why is the frontline not receding?
Cause if you think about that statement for a few seconds, it is unclear what it is even saying. 30 minutes in Ukraine? By what definition of Ukraine borders? The international ones? No matter how bad it is, that seems impossible. The Russian ones? Well, yes. Being behind the front lines is hella dangerous. Not sure how they would even get there. The de-facto controlled Ukraine territory? In that case, you are just saying soldiers that charge Ukraine defenses tend to die, which duh.
Semantics ruin everything 😃
Words are fucked.
Yeah, they said they kill 200 Russian soldiers for every kilometer they claim. That’s a steep price to pay for a little bit of territory, but it sounds like Russia is willing to pay it, and it’s working. Not for the soldiers, but for “Russia,” I guess.
It’s not working. Ukraine currently recaptures more than Russia is gaining and it will only get worse for the Russians from this point on.
What is even “Russia” at this point.
They should just split the countries into smaller territories and call it a day.
This is a really really powerful development for defending territory but not as great for going on the offensive as drones can’t directly take and hold territory. To take territory you need ground troops and armored vehicles.
A concentrated group of people that can be taken out at once or an expensive vehicle are tempting priority targets for drones, and drones are more readily replaced than men or tanks… and both sides have them. So attempting to take large swathes of territory is most likely to make whoever is attempting to advance get punished since they have to put prime drone targets in drone range to make the attempt.
So most advances such as they are are being made by tiny groups of people or individuals who infiltrate into the gray zone/behind enemy lines and then secure themselves a hiding area to operate out of before maybe linking up for larger maneuvers. The situation doesn’t really lend itself to big movements in the front lines even with a ton of people dying. In a way it’s kind of reminiscent of how trench warfare and machine gunsmade defending territory very powerful and led to the western front being mostly deadlocked with offensives being insanely bloody until the tank was more well developed and brought more mobility back to the offense.
For the most part Ukraine is content now to target Russian logistics from a distance. If the Russian supply chain is in shambles that weakens Russian use of drones and artillery at the far edges of their reach which could enable offensive operations that aren’t quite as suicidal as they are now.
is it the reason that Ukraine get more body on exchanges?
The swap took place at the Novaya Guta border checkpoint in Gomel Oblast, with Russia handing over 501 bodies of fallen soldiers and Ukraine returning 31 bodies of Russian servicemen.
https://thedefensepost.com/2026/07/17/ukraine-bodies-from-russia/
Not much left of Russian soldier bodies after they are killed by a Ukrainian drone. A few scraps, usually if they haven’t burned up in the fire started by camp stove fuel immediately after the drone explodes.
Are you ready yourself to join the front lines and get killed in less than 30 minutes?
If not you shouldn’t advocate for war.
So… they must be spawning in the grey zone… or are they being catapulted from rostov on don?
