Ukraine on Wednesday lowered the military conscription age from 27 to 25 in an effort to replenish its depleted ranks after more than two years of war following Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The new mobilization law came into force a day after Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed it. Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, passed it last year.

It was not immediately clear why Zelenskyy took so long to sign the measure into law. He didn’t make any public comment about it, and officials did not say how many new soldiers the country expected to gain or for which units.

Conscription has been a sensitive matter in Ukraine for many months amid a growing shortage of infantry on top of a severe ammunition shortfall that has handed Russia the battlefield initiative. Russia’s own problems with manpower and planning have so far prevented it from taking full advantage of its edge.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    58
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wow a few volunteers. Meanwhile tens of thousands of Ukrainian men are forcibly thrown into the meat grinder while people wave on enthusiastically with their flag sending them into their deaths.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        While taking no sides, I must say this is a personal attack.

        If someone is bothering you and you plan on blocking them, just block them and go about your day.

        No amount of righteousness is enough to ignore basic politeness, or else all discussions will turn into trash.

        • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 months ago

          Lots of discussions aren’t trash at all! Some of them start that way, and end in an object lesson. Nothing gets wasted round here.

        • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It has to be said I don’t agree with the downvotes here, even if it’s kind of funny. You went to bat for civility, and you’re right that it’s how the world should work.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          When NATO had to attack Serbia to stop the ethnic cleansing, how many soldiers did Ukraine send to help NATO?

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            185. Iraq, 1600. Couldn’t find good numbers on Afghanistan quickly but it seems to be on the order of 30.

            Iraq sticks out, without being aware of the reasoning Ukraine had I’d say it’s to ingratiate themselves with the US, just as Poland did. 1600 people are more moral support than anything else.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            There is an ethnic cleansing going on in Palestine right now where is NATO at?

            Oh right supplying the bombs to do it.

            • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              NATO is a defense treaty organization, not offensive. This isn’t complicated. Member nations can do what they they see fit as needed but only unprovoked attacks on members are the real purview.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      A kill ratio of up to 1:10 is a meat grinder, yes, but not on the Ukrainian side.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I said “up to”. Places like Bakhmut have an overall 1:3 kill ratio, Avdivka is similar. Those rates are already bad enough and Russia has no qualms sending troops into a 1:10 killbox, those kinds of numbers are on the tactical not strategic level.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            They’re certainly not but they could have been far lower if Europe and America were actually serious about sending weapons to Ukraine instead of just their old junk.

            Russia has ramped up their production and is now producing almost 10 times the amount of artillery shells a year as get delivered to Ukraine. Meanwhile Biden is ignoring Ukraine to send all his weapons to israel.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Biden isn’t ignoring Ukraine, the GOP or better said the MAGA crowd is playing the conflict for political points.

              Over here in Europe we understand the message: Trump wasn’t an exception, the US will stay, at best, fickle regarding any of their commitments, the Americans can’t be relied upon as a partner. I say fuck them good riddance.

              And, no, stuff like IRIS-T aren’t “old junk” Germany itself doesn’t field those systems they’re that new. Stuff like the Gepard is old but so capable it’s still the best Flak out there. And yes I think we should send Taurus, pretty much everyone but the Chancellor and peaceniks think so. I guess it’s political calculation on his part: As long as there’s something we hold back the peaceniks have a hard time framing him as a war-monger, it’s trading immediate support vs. long-term support.

              Also frankly speaking Taurus seems to be overkill when it comes to striking deep into Russia’s rear, Russian refineries aren’t protected by the anti-air installations that the thing is capable of circumventing and even taking down something highly protected like the Kerch bridge, even with bunker busters (which Taurus are) would take a massive barrage practically depleting the whole stock. It’s a lot of concrete.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  The US clarified their position on that: They’re “not encouraging” attacks on refineries. Which is different from both “discouraging” and “encouraging”.

                  In fact it’s so effective that Biden told Ukraine to cut it out because it’s actually effective and they don’t want Ukraine to actually win something.

                  That’s some serious “US does everything it does because US is bad” thinking. 6-d CIA chess with evil cackling. There’s plenty of valid economic reasons to not be excited about Russian refineries getting decarbonised, first and foremost the world market price for petroleum products.

                  My take on that is that economy strategists in the White House are sitting there gritting their teeth after having been told to pound sand by the military strategists.

                  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    It’s really effective though. Ukraine was hitting Russia exactly where it hurts, their fuel storage and production. The big money. And then America says "No don’t do that, they might retaliate (as if Russia isn’t at war with Ukraine already?)

                    This is practically America saying “Go do war with Russia but don’t hit them where it hurts! Just throw some wet noodles at them!”

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            With China, India, and North Korea all helping Russia, it’s basically getting an extra seven armies per turn at this point.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              China isn’t so much helping but stringing along. They sent golf carts, the overall motto is “never interrupt your enemy while they’re making a mistake”. India’s friendship (if it can be called that) with Russia is only valid as long as Russia is still independent of China. Neither would risk actually breaking with the west over Russia, they’re not even up to exchanging a couple of blows. North Korea is a joke, anyway, and btw another reason for China to get pissed at Russia, the Chinese are not amused at the Russians handing NK rocket tech etc.