You will see such gems like:
"Our allies are stepping up. But they require, and they hope for, our continued leadership and example. By upholding our commitment to Ukraine and by demonstrating steadfast cohesion with the NATO alliance, we provide a clear deterrent to our adversaries. Should that deterrence fail, U.S. Eucom — alongside our allies — is ready to fight and win."
Or
"Russia poses "a chronic threat" to the world and further aid to Ukraine to repulse the Russian invasion of that country is crucial, said Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli, the commander of U.S. European Command. "
You know since this was on April 10th before the US voted to send more military aid and this whole article is from the general talking to congress about the "russian threat" if Ukraine does not get more shells.... Context is key. But hey they said the number of front like troops went up, that must mean that russia is more powerful then before right? Since that is all we base our military on right? Standing army size is really the modern measuring stick for national power, right? Its not like anything has changed since the great war.
If you look at some of the more recent things he has said on the war (since the US oked that aid package) you can see that he does not think russia is stronger and more so that Ukraine is in a better position.
There are some fun quotes in there like:
"He said Russia has managed to muster additional forces,“but the quality of the troops is lower than the troops they started the conflict with” due to the number of officers “that were killed in the beginning of the war” and so aren't able to train newer soldiers."
This has been the narrative that has been fed to the gullible segments of western population for the past two years. And if there was a shred of truth to it, then Russia would've collapsed a long time ago. The article doesn't actually give any numbers, and just regurgitates nonsense. The article I linked gives specific figures, where Cavoli states that the size of Russian military has increased by 15%.
Yes, as stated as part of his speech to congress in order to get military aid to Ukraine. See how in your article no where does he state that the russian state is stronger or more capable then before the war? That is because he did not say that, he stated that russia remains a threat (and that is true) since they have conscripted more then expected for front line duty. And after Ukraine got the aid package he goes on the record in a few occasions to state the degradation of russian capability (you know like in the article I linked).
Like I get you want to cherry pick this but this is the same guy, If you want to show russia is stronger then before the war you might want to use someone who is not a US general in charge of convincing a congress to send more funds to a proxy war.
See how in your article no where does he state that the russian state is stronger or more capable then before the war?
Numerous other articles I linked state that, including the fact that both Russian economy and military industry have greatly expanded. It's pretty obvious that Russian army couldn't grow without that happening.
The only one doing cherry picking here is you. I provided numerous sources that all substantiate different aspects of the bigger picture. You on the other hand, found an article that regurgitates what you want to be true, which is at odds with all the available evidence.
It's pretty clear that I'm not going to convince you of anything here, but good news is that reality has a way of asserting itself. So, you'll have to start engaging with the real world before long. Best of luck to you.