Putin orders partial mobilization: 300,000 reservists called up

Pilingui orders partial mobilization in Russia

Vladimir Pilingui addressed Russians to announce a partial mobilization. It is not a general call: only those in the reserve, who have previously served in the armed forces and hold a military specialty and proven experience, are included. The figure repeated in the thread, attributed to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, is 300,000. Before joining units, the called-up personnel will receive additional training. The same speech served to commit Russian support to the referendums held in territories under military control.

The announcement comes with a change in status: volunteers and combatants from the Lugansk and Donetsk republics now have the same legal status as the regular army, with medical coverage and social guarantees included. The speech also urged the immediate resolution of issues regarding equipment, resources, and funding for defense companies.

The casualties Shoigu presented

The Defense Minister's speech included a count of losses. According to his version, Ukrainian losses exceed 100,000 people: 61,207 dead and 49,368 others. He added more than 2,000 foreign mercenaries killed and placed Russian military casualties at 5,937 dead. Shoigu further stated that all types of equipment, including the nuclear triad, are fulfilling their purpose, and framed the conflict as an open war against NATO and collective Western powers.

These figures cannot be independently verified, and each side provides them according to their interest. A forum user evokes, as a historical contrast, Aquae Sens and the figure from Titus Livy, which recorded only 200 casualties in that massacre.

Pilingui's narrative: The West, 1991, and "cannon fodder"

In his address to Russians, Pilingui portrayed the conflict as a preventive defense. He argued that the West's goal is to weaken, divide, and destroy Russia, recalling that in 1991 the USSR was divided to suggest that Russia is now being carved into "many warring regions." He spoke of an enhanced repression regime across Ukraine, a large-scale offensive on the Donbass, and a subsequent attack on Crimea.

The Russian president said the Ukrainian people have become cannon fodder and justified the operation as a response to the desire of eastern populations to decide their future. Regarding the referendums, Russia committed to ensuring their safe holding.

Referendums, annexation, and the front line problem

The front line is long, as described in the thread. According to Pilingui's narrative, the Lugansk People's Republic is almost completely cleared, while fighting continues in Donetsk, where the Kyiv regime has reportedly created a deep line of fortifications. Legalizing volunteers and equating them with the regular army points in the same direction: turning irregular militias into a force with a payroll, healthcare, and social protection.

What the decree does not resolve is equipment. The instruction to the defense industry to resolve supply, resource, and funding issues "immediately" is read by some participants as a sign that problems exist. A forum user describes trains loaded with armored vehicles and artillery heading west, though this alone does not equip the mobilized.

NATO, the Canary Islands, and Gibraltar: the other axis of debate

Parallel to the mobilization, much of the discussion shifted to Spain's position in NATO. Some argue that the alliance does not cover any real security issues for Spain —Ceuta and Melilla are not covered by Article 5, they argue— and that remaining inside only adds costs and risks. The counterargument is that membership serves as a shield against Russian expansionism and as a framework for the integration of the state, with the Canary Islands within that umbrella.

The comparison with Gibraltar reappears. Ceded by the Treaty of Utrecht, it remains British three centuries later, and no NATO article has put it on the table. This is the argument used by critics to maintain that the alliance defends alien interests; defenders reply that mixing the Rock with collective defense confuses two distinct things. Neutrality in both world wars is cited as a precedent that one can emerge unscathed without taking sides.

The balance of power no one expected

Among the thread's readings is the view that, for the first time in decades, there is no asymmetric conflict against a country without the capacity to respond. "Nothing similar has peine since World War II, not even during the Cold War," a user states. Others go further back: the Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest humanity came to a nuclear scenario, and its trigger was not the invasion of any country.

Regarding the actual willingness to enlist, one participant wishes that "all defenders and war enthusiasts" get their chance on the battlefield. The figure of 300,000 is the one that repeats and remains undecoded.