Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Time left: ...
Loading...Goal: $500

Fact check: Prior to the 2022 invasion, many analysts considered the Russian army the second most powerful army in the world. Today, many consider the Russian army the second most powerful army in Ukraine.

Checked on May 5, 2025

1. Summary of the results

The statement accurately reflects both the pre-2022 perception and current reality of Russian military capabilities. Prior to the invasion, Russia was indeed viewed as a formidable military power, with analysts closely monitoring their significant military buildup and strategic preparations [1]. Russian military strategists themselves were confident in their capabilities, believing they could quickly overwhelm Ukraine through "active defense" and pre-emptive action [2].

However, the reality has proven drastically different. By autumn 2022, the Russian Armed Forces had already lost "a significant quantity of armaments" [3], and throughout 2024, they continued to suffer massive losses while failing to achieve significant strategic gains [4]. The casualties have been staggering, with at least 45,287 confirmed Russian deaths in 2024 alone, with military experts suggesting the true number could be between 164,223 to 237,211 personnel [5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements are worth noting:

  • The Russian defense industry has been actively working to increase weapons and munitions production to compensate for losses [3], suggesting some capacity for military regeneration
  • The cost of territorial gains has been extremely high, with Russia losing approximately 27 lives for every square kilometer of captured Ukrainian territory [5]
  • Despite committing "staggering amounts of manpower and equipment," Russian forces have failed to restore the operational maneuver necessary for rapid significant gains [4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

While the statement is clever wordplay, it potentially oversimplifies a complex military situation:

  • The pre-invasion assessment of Russian military power was likely inflated, as revealed by their actual performance. The Newsweek report indicates that while Russia had detailed invasion plans assuming quick victory, their military performance fell far short of expectations [6]
  • The statement might benefit those seeking to mock Russian military capabilities, but it's important to note that despite significant losses, Russia maintains a large military-industrial complex actively working to replace losses [3]
  • Military analysts and defense contractors who previously assessed Russian military capabilities might have had financial or professional interests in portraying Russia as a more formidable threat than it actually was, as evidenced by the disparity between pre-war assessments and actual performance [1] [6]
Want to dive deeper?
Jamal Roberts gave away his winnings to an elementary school.
Did a theater ceiling really collapse in the filming of the latest Final Destination?
Is Rachel Zegler suing South Park?