I never know what to understand. A few months back the news was all about how the prisioners where basically sacrificial lambs being slaughtered to cater to the unreasonable demand to capture Bakhmut. Now apparently they are all going to go back and wreck havoc.
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?
Edit: Ok – two murders and one (habitually) disorderly conduct already reported.
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.
You … DO realize wars do not have a 100% death rate, right? You DO understand “casualty” can refer to someone who has only been wounded enough to stop fighting, right?
I fail to see what I had mentioned in the comment that lead you to believe that I thought wars have a 100% death rate or that the word casualty did not include the injured.
I seemed to have not conveyed what bothered me about the topic. Essentially the article states that a wave of crime awaits yet several previous articles stated that a big majority of the prisioners were killed. People fleeing were also said to have been shot and given the kind of gruesome tactics, being wounded would be life changing.
During the autumn and winter clashes at Bakhmut, the Wagner Group suffered huge losses. It is estimated that out of approximately 50,000 prisoners recruited in the second half of 2022, only about 10,000 continued their service at the end of January; the rest had been killed, wounded or deserted.>
That was the situation in January, they took Bakhmut in May (with the battle getting much worse during the end).
Given those numbers, I doubt that a wave of crime as stated seems realistic.
I never know what to understand. A few months back the news was all about how the prisioners where basically sacrificial lambs being slaughtered to cater to the unreasonable demand to capture Bakhmut. Now apparently they are all going to go back and wreck havoc.
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?
Edit: Ok – two murders and one (habitually) disorderly conduct already reported.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/22/alcohol-and-prostitutes-wagner-convicts-pardoned-by-putin-return-to-terrorise-home-towns
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.
You … DO realize wars do not have a 100% death rate, right? You DO understand “casualty” can refer to someone who has only been wounded enough to stop fighting, right?
I fail to see what I had mentioned in the comment that lead you to believe that I thought wars have a 100% death rate or that the word casualty did not include the injured.
Yes, why not both?
I seemed to have not conveyed what bothered me about the topic. Essentially the article states that a wave of crime awaits yet several previous articles stated that a big majority of the prisioners were killed. People fleeing were also said to have been shot and given the kind of gruesome tactics, being wounded would be life changing.
https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2023-04-28/popasna-to-bakhmut-wagner-group-russia-ukraine-war
That was the situation in January, they took Bakhmut in May (with the battle getting much worse during the end). Given those numbers, I doubt that a wave of crime as stated seems realistic.
@vegetarian_pacemaker
Here you go: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/08/18/murders-drugs-and-brawls-russias-pardoned-ex-convicts-return-home-after-fighting-in-ukraine-a82175
https://www.newsweek.com/crime-russia-ukraine-prigozhin-wagner-1807597