By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Recent reports indicate Russia is increasingly deploying assault troops without helmets or body armor, particularly in the Lyman axis in eastern Ukraine. Ukrainian commanders have observed this tactic becoming more prevalent, supported by video evidence showing Russian soldiers advancing without protective gear. The practice of sending ill-equipped troops reflects Russia’s reliance on expendable forces and high-casualty tactics, exacerbated by significant losses and economic constraints. These inadequately equipped soldiers face severe conditions, with reports of insufficient supplies, poor logistics, and even being forced to retrieve gear from fallen comrades.
Read the original article here
Russia Sends “Disposable Soldiers” Into Battle With No Helmets and No Armor: That’s the chilling reality we seem to be facing, a grim echo of past conflicts and a stark reflection of the current situation. The reports paint a picture of soldiers, many likely drawn from poorer backgrounds and lured with promises of a better life, being thrust into the heart of conflict with next to no preparation or protection. It’s a situation that defies logic, making you question the basic regard for human life.
Imagine being sent to war with minimal training – perhaps only two weeks – and then immediately thrown into combat without even a helmet or body armor. The accounts circulating describe soldiers resorting to desperate measures to survive, like eating tree bark due to lack of supplies, and facing accusations of theft when asking for food. The lack of basic necessities, combined with the absence of even rudimentary protective gear, presents a horrific image of a military force that views its own personnel as completely expendable.
The situation is further complicated by the reports of how these soldiers are utilized. One chilling account details a battlefield strategy that relies on the “Zerg rush” tactic, where the front lines are simply overwhelmed by numbers. The horrifying instruction, “The one with the rifle shoots! The one without, follows him! When the one with the rifle gets killed, the one who is following picks up the rifle and shoots!” speaks volumes about the ruthless disregard for individual lives. It’s a strategy rooted in attrition, where quantity trumps quality, and individual survival is an afterthought.
This approach raises fundamental questions. Why not equip these soldiers with helmets and armor? Why not invest in their training and well-being? The answer, tragically, seems to be that they’re not deemed valuable enough. It appears that the elite troops are prioritized for protection and gear, while the less-valued recruits are essentially treated as cannon fodder, designed to absorb enemy fire and expend resources. It’s a grim calculus, where human lives are traded for strategic advantage.
The lack of resources, the poor training, and the reliance on sheer numbers all point to a deeper issue: the strain on the Russian military. We’re seeing evidence of economic pressure, with eco rounds and desperate measures being implemented. This extends to the types of individuals being sent to the front lines. There are reports of mentally disabled and medically unfit men also being deployed, forced into combat despite their obvious vulnerabilities. This suggests that the Russian military is scraping the bottom of the barrel, seeking to replenish its ranks with anyone willing or forced to fight.
The scale of this operation is staggering. The reports suggest that those deployed have only one rifle for every two soldiers. This shortage, coupled with the lack of armor, underscores the dire circumstances. There’s a clear sense of desperation, a willingness to sacrifice vast numbers of soldiers in order to achieve their objectives.
This all creates a feeling of profound sadness. These “disposable soldiers” are not nameless, faceless entities. They are someone’s children, parents, siblings, spouses, or close friends. To contemplate the grief of their families, the senseless waste of their lives, is truly heartbreaking. This is war at its most brutal, where the value of a human life is tragically diminished.
While there may be questions about the credibility of some specific reports or the motivations of those providing the information, the general picture is consistent. The reports align with historical patterns, echoing tactics used in previous conflicts. The scale of the reported losses, the lack of equipment, and the training and logistical shortfalls all point to a military struggling to maintain its forces.
The strategy of deploying poorly equipped and poorly trained soldiers has significant implications. It puts immense pressure on the Ukrainian forces, who must expend resources to defend themselves. It may also be a deliberate tactic to wear down the opposition, hoping to force negotiations from a position of strength. But ultimately, it is a shortsighted strategy, one built on a foundation of human suffering and a blatant disregard for life.
The world is watching this unfold, and the implications of this approach are far-reaching. It is a sign of a broken economy, a flawed military strategy, and a crisis of values. It is a grim reminder that in war, the human cost is often the greatest tragedy of all.