How many Russian soldiers has Putin sacrificed Ukraine?

Care about soldiers' lives wasn't exactly Russian thing all the way from Peter the Great. From late 17th Century, Russia was known between European states for coming with huge number of soldiers and wasting their lives easily. Bismark's famous "The whole of the Balkans is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier"* could not come from Russia as the second half of that sentence contains some strange logic a Russian ruler would have trouble understanding - and mind you the author of that quip was as far from been a Pacifist as possible. Add to that [in]ability to execute. It wouldn't be a problem in Russia to find tens of thousands of contractors without close family associations willing to go and fight in Ukraine "for Russians". If they force people to go, it could only be because intermediaries could not be bothered to search. (*) not intended as an insult to Quorans from that part of the world. My apologies if it came across like that.

Just 1 sentence: As many as it will be necessary.

Russia never counted their killed soldiers. Russian society will not protest as there is a dictatorship in this country. So I think the last argument for  Putin to stop is the number of killed. Reading different sources I've met statistics which states that there are already more than 2000 casualties on the russian side.The total losses of the both sides and civilians are estimated to be almost 15000 people as on September 2, 2014.

Long Answer: The biggest problem that seems to be emanating from the pro-Ukrainian side is the differentiation between forces on BOTH sides. Their main defense for this war has been "Help us from these terrorists and Russian invaders." What is questionable is how many Russian Army regular "boots on the ground" are in Ukraine or could be supporting the Eastern rebels. How many Ukrainian born rebels, Russian born nationals, either retired military, never was in military, ethnic groups like the cossacks, former chechen rebels who are now loyal to Russia, and all the contractor and mercenaries in between are actually fighting there? This is just on the "Russian" side.   Official reports and footage show that the "Ukrainian" government is fielding regular army, para-military, extremist groups, polish mercenaries, English speaking mercenaries, U.S. troops to "train" the army, cossacks, and last but not least again, former Chechen rebels (exiled and anti-Russian.) The hypocrisy here is that while the Russian government and it's people are directly and indirectly involved in another country's civil war, somehow, the western countries being involved in the same war is "OK" by western standards, and they don't even recognize it officially as a civil war. Which any outsider who could view it objectively can clearly see it is. When I see Igor Markov cite a link to an article claiming 3.5k Russian soldiers died in Donbass, I am extremely skeptical to what that is supposed to mean. Am I expected to believe the Russian government would actually allow that many regular Russian army casualties before just invading the country like they did in Georgia, and finishing this war quickly when it started? Where are the photos and official white house statements actually claiming the movement of even 1,000 Russian troops entering into the country? You can't hide movement like that. "Russians building up on the border" statements, and a few blurry non-official satellite photos from the US/Ukrainian ambassador are not showing these movements either. The Western media hasn't had to come up with this proof, whether it actually exists or not, because the average American seems to believe whatever propaganda the TV throws at them, so most do not demand this proof of our government before allowing them to spend millions in support and field our troops there. Short, easy answer: If a nation fielded an army, (pick your color), of "purple people", and those purple people's ancestors came from the country "Purple," but these troops are actually born many different countries, calling those troops "purple troops" would still be an accurate description, wouldn't it? Apply this to Russia. The Russians know this already, and do not hide it. The Ukrainians who are pro-government CERTAINLY know this fact, also, but they prey on the ignorance of the average westerner who doesn't know the difference. That's the biggest issue I am having with this Kiev government. It's the pure dishonesty about the whole situation. Their main leaders seem to be focusing heavily on the "Ivan go home" mantra, which is honestly akin to some white Americans telling all of the black Americans to "Go back to Africa." But then those same white Americans would then have to claim that "African troops" were fighting the government," when the obvious civil war breaks out.

How many Russian soldiers has Putin sacrificed Ukraine?None. Russians in Ukraine are volunteers, not soldiers of regular russian army