Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quartz said:
Funnily enough, while that may be true of the East, it's not true of the UK: for example, in WW1 the upper classes percentage-wise had more deaths than the working classes.

Cite.
Click to expand...
I can't find precise numbers for example this says

In 1912 only about 20% of the population of Britain was middle class. (To be considered middle class you would normally need to have at least one servant). In 1912 well-off people lived in very comfortable houses. However, to us, middle-class homes would seem overcrowded with furniture, ornaments, and knick-knacks.
Click to expand...
and
At the beginning of the 20th century surveys showed that 25% of the population of Britain were living in poverty. They found that at least 15% were living at subsistence level. They had just enough money for food, rent, fuel, and clothes. They could not afford ‘luxuries’ such as newspapers or public transport. About 10% were living below subsistence level and could not afford an adequate diet.
Click to expand...
localhistories.org

Life in 1912 - Local Histories

By Tim Lambert The Middle Class In 1912 only about 20% of the population of Britain was middle class. (To be considered middle class you would normally need to have at least one servant). In 1912 well-off people lived in very comfortable houses. However, middle-class homes would seem overcrowded...
localhistories.org

I doubt much changed in 2 years at outbreak of WW1

So that leaves 55% unaccounted for but looking at the chart on this article

www.theguardian.com

Inequality 'worst since second world war'

Academic Danny Dorling says the last time the best-off took as big a share of all income as they do today was in 1940, two years before the publication of the Beveridge Report
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

54% of the population were in the bottom 10% so perhaps be generous and say 10% were upper class

That means out of a population of 36million people, only 30% would have been officer material or 10.8million and 19.98million as troops, in total there was circa 240k Officers which is 2% of total potential vs 3million total troops or 15% of total potential

Of which according to your link 17% officers died vs 12% soldiers which was 40,800 vs 360,000 so it's pretty much for every officer dead, 9 troops are dead

And only 2% of the well off went to war while 15% of the poor went to war basically a 7 to 1 ratio

So I'm not sure how this means it's not true that more poor people die in wars than rich people ?

Pretty sure given the amount of Generals dead in the last year in Ukraine it's statistically disproportionate the death of Generals to ethnic minorities when you take the % of total generals in isolation which is a poor way to deal with the statistics of overall deaths
 
Quartz said:
Proportionally, more of the British upper classes (17%) died than the lower classes (12%). The British upper classes did not use bone spurs or money or whatever to get out of their duty.
Click to expand...
This is why virtually every public school of note had a CCF (combined cadet force). In my day it was a compulsory activity. Army or Air Force. Anyway a little off topic I think.
 
Somebody I know whose been doing humanitarian work in the region, though I think this was more a social visit - but posting this like it had become an everyday thing:

"Flight to Chisinau on Friday was cancelled on Thursday - too many missiles crossing Moldovan airspace. Scrambled onto a flight to Iasi in NW Romania on Saturday evening."
 
bris said:
So the Wagner boss is running for Putins job, that means one of them has to Die, both will know it.

So its a duel to the death, FSB V Wagnerites, both sides will have excellent assassins.

My moneys on Putin winning the duel, he seems less exposed than Prigozhin. But who knows money talks and finding someone close to Putin to do the job wouldn't be that hard when the payout would be in the millions.
Click to expand...

Roar87 said:
This is most likely just propaganda, Putin owns Wagner and they love him
Click to expand...

Personally I'd err towards it being manufactured drama, possibly to see who sides with Prigozhin to draw out those who might be a threat to Putin, expose potential spies, etc. etc.

Personally I don't see Putin getting bumped off except by pure chance and/or if eventually the bulk of the population rose up against him, he is far too careful, far too much in control, far too paranoid - even those who might think about it are likely too suspicious of those around them to try and engineer something.
 
Last edited:
Certainly seems odd after a long period of seeing no one to visit the moron in the north making your life more difficult to visit him twice in quick succession... Suspect a deal is being hashed out to revert colonised Chinese lands back to Beijing or somewhat less likely he's handing Putin an ultimatum in person because he'd not trust it otherwise.
 
StriderX said:
Certainly seems odd after a long period of seeing no one to visit the moron in the north making your life more difficult to visit him twice in quick succession... Suspect a deal is being hashed out to revert colonised Chinese lands back to Beijing or somewhat less likely he's handing Putin an ultimatum in person because he'd not trust it otherwise.
Click to expand...

Suspect it's the opposite. Suspect it's 'keep going' as it's draining significant resource away should China decide to try and take Taiwan.
 
Dis86 said:
Suspect it's the opposite. Suspect it's 'keep going' as it's draining significant resource away should China decide to try and take Taiwan.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but it's forcing the West to increase production capacity which I wouldn't say is a good outcome for Beijing especially if it means China dealing with dozens of possible warlords if Russia actually succeeds in crumbling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom