Have you noticed that what this flaming asshole in Russia is doing is changing the way we live our lives? It isn’t as much fun to be alive right now. You can’t read the news or watch it on TV without being flooded with images and stories of the horrors being perpetrated by the Russian army in Ukraine. There are tragic images every day of whole neighborhoods obliterated in Kyiv and Kharkiv and Kherson and Mariupol. But it’s more than apartment buildings with their fronts blasted off and streets covered with the burned-out husks of cars and debris.
I'm not thinking about nuclear war right now. I'm thinking about all the U.S. and European companies that did business with Putin's Russia -- looking particularly at you, Rex Tillerson and ExxonMobil, though you sure as hell weren't alone -- even though it's been fairly clear almost from the get-go what Putin was about and his "vision" for Russia has become clearer year by year by year. For big corporations it was all about the economic opportunities, the potential profits.
Go ahead and call Putin "amoral" -- that probably a polite word for it. But equally amoral are the corporations that operate from behind the lines where the rule of law matters (sort of) and play ball with the likes of Putin and Xi.
Most of what's wrong with the world -- maybe even all of it? -- can be traced back to this amoral economic so-called "imperative." But when anyone points this out, they get trashed, reviled, and silenced as socialists, communists, etc. If we don't get a grip on this, I really do believe democracy is doomed.
My life is being divided into the normal side and the terrified side. Fitzgerald's remark about being able to hold two contradictory thoughts and still function is being sorely tested.
The heartbreaking story behind the picture you posted above, a family destroyed, was made even grimmer by the reporting of the small dog, in a green carrier, who survived but was understandably panicked. We tend, naturally, to see the carnage in human terms, but the costs to the environment — yes, even Russian defectors puncturing their gas tanks — and to the animal and plant world are also worthy of our concern and collective grief.
It is a rare thing for the NY Times to put an explicit photo of death on it's front page. The photo establishes inconvertible truth to the cruelty and savagery of Russia. Perhaps it's a warning to us that experienced journalists can see what's coming. Mr. Putin knows that NATO is sending munitions and unmarked soldiers to fight his army. Ukraine has now shown as Lucian Truscott acknowledges, Russia can't afford a serious war. So what happens? Possibly the war will be decided by Germany and France, both suffered terribly in WW2 and they understand madness. (Napoleon Hitler) They might send a letter to Putin making it clear that he faces absolute destruction and a letter informing President Biden that Putin is a suicide who believes that 'In Death there is nothing' The idea being to sober both sides that this little war can become the trigger to oblivion. The next two weeks might decide the fate of modern civilization, not that anyone wants or expected it.
One form of limited nuclear war would be like a conventional battlefield conflict but using low-yield tactical nuclear weapons. Here’s a hypothetical scenario: After its 2014 annexation of Crimea, Russia attacks a Baltic country with tanks and ground forces while the United States is distracted by a domestic crisis. NATO responds with decisive counterforce, destroying Russian tanks with fighter jets, but this doesn’t quell Russian resolve. Russia responds with even more tanks and by bombing NATO installations, killing several hundred troops. NATO cannot tolerate such aggression and to prevent further Russian advance launches low-yield tactical nuclear weapons with their dial-a-yield positions set to the lowest settings of only 300 tons TNT equivalent. The goal is to signal Russia that it has crossed a line and to deescalate the situation. NATO’s actions are based on fear that if the Russian aggression weren’t stopped the result would be all-out war in northern Europe.
This strategy is actually being discussed in the higher echelons of the Pentagon. The catchy concept is that use of a few low-yield nuclear weapons could show resolve, with the hoped-for outcome that the other party will back down from its aggressive behavior (this concept is known as escalate to deescalate). The assumption is that the nuclear attack would remain limited, that parties would go back to the negotiating table, and that saner voices would prevail. However, this assumes a chain of events where everything unfolds as expected. It neglects the incontrovertible fact that, as the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz observed in the 19th century, “Three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty.” Often coined fog of war, this describes the lack of clarity in wartime situations on which decisions must nevertheless be based. In the scenario described, sensors could have been damaged or lines of communication severed that would have reported the low-yield nature of the nuclear weapons. As a result, Russia might feel its homeland threatened and respond with an all-out attack using strategic nuclear weapons, resulting in millions of deaths.
There is every reason to believe that a limited nuclear war wouldn’t remain limited. A 1983 war game known as Proud Prophet involved top-secret nuclear war plans and had as participants high-level decision makers including President Reagan’s Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. The war game followed actual plans but unexpectedly ended in total nuclear annihilation with more than half a billion fatalities in the initial onslaught — not including subsequent deaths from starvation. The exercise revealed that a limited nuclear strike may not achieve the desired results! In this case, that was because the team playing the Soviet Union responded to a limited U.S. nuclear strike with a massive all-out nuclear attack.
The authors go on to ask a most compelling question: Do we trust the professional strategic planners who prepare our possible nuclear responses to an adversary’s threats?
You’re right that Putin has robbed some joy particularly when we should be feeling it with the seeming end of Covid as a major crisis.
I watch these brave people in Ukraine though and they fill me more and more with the righteous determination to take down the fascist supporters of Trump. My rep is the odious Elise Stefanik. Her district has gotten even redder and she likely will win. Her likely opponent is Matt Castelli, a former CIA officer.
I’m a frequent letter writer to my local paper and am determined to not let any of her misdeeds go forgotten. She recently referred to Biden as “weak, feckless and unfit.” That aggression will not stand. I wrote to express my views of how helpful that was to Russian propaganda outlets and several other folks have as well. She was also a major defender of Trump at both impeachments.
I’m hopeful that between the patriots in her district and a man who served the US patriotically her life is at least going to be uncomfortable.
I feel like a blog whore doing this, (apologies) but since I mentioned my letter I’ll include it for anyone with any interest:
There’s a chance President Zelenskyy will be killed in the invasion of Ukraine. Praise his courage in remaining to fight. I’m old enough to remember when this country would be united in supporting the effort of a fledgling democracy to withstand Russian aggression. The statement by Rep. Stefanik calling President Biden “weak, feckless and unfit” seems useful only to Russian propaganda outlets and rightwing media in this country, but I repeat myself. I realize as a Democrat I’m in a minority in the 21st District and she doesn’t aim to represent my views.
Biden is taking the same actions regarding Ukraine that Presidents Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II or Obama would’ve taken. Carter was arming the mujahideen in Afghanistan when Reagan came to office. Russia and Putin are being sanctioned. Ukraine is receiving military aid. The West is united against this invasion. That would not have happened with Donald Trump as president trashing NATO. Trump, in fact, has praised the “genius” of Putin for having taken this action.
Trump’s first impeachment was for holding up military aid to Ukraine because he wanted to pressure them to announce an investigation into Biden’s son. Maybe our representative considers that to be the action of a strong president since she defended him in that impeachment.
There may be more the president could do. There may not be. One thing he’s not doing is running a protection racket out of the Oval Office. Let’s all pray the Ukrainians with the world backing them show Donald Trump that Vladimir Putin is not a genius for launching this invasion.
It's terrifying to see that Putin really has nothing to lose if he falls back on nuclear weapons. And doubly scary is the fact he's totally amoral so has no scruples or even an ounce of empathy or compassion. As always, a great post.
No character. “It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.” — Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Sounds like way too much of the upper-level GOP. I keep wondering why some of them got into politics in the first place, and what happened along the way.
As I read your excellent, frightening piece I thought ‘Is this worse that Oct ‘62?’ I was 15, in Brooklyn, and knew the very short flying time from Cuba to NYC
I've been thinking a lot about that. I was 11 at the time and scared sh*tless in the Boston suburbs. Maybe as a result, I do not think this is a good time for the West to blink.
Consider our "own" dictator wannna-be; He has no personal perception of empathy, or consideration of the consequences of his actions - not an iota of compassion or concern for other's well being. In Putin Trump sees the person he wants to be. That person is a sociopath. When backed into a corner they do not see consequences, only their amygdala reptilian response. Of course Putin is a bully. But he has already murdered many many thousands. My sense is he would do anything including activating nuclear responses and yes, I am terrified of what I'm watching.
Elsewhere on this thread there is a discussion of how a "limited" nuclear war might stay limited. Pardon my skepticism but with nukes the minute one side feels it is losing up we go on the escalation ladder to win the war. But, I digress....................................................
If you are correct. Lucien, in assessing Putin is incapable in his mind of losing this war of opportunity he initiated then any attempt by the West to reverse his fortunes will be, in his mind, a reason to lash out and expand the war more broadly. That is, of course, going to lead to a further expansion of response by the West including exercise of Article 5 of the NATO treaty. Thus, by definition he is blackmailing the West into not doing anything overtly to aid Ukraine and what the Ukrainians are faced with is a forever war of insurrection after the "formal" hostilities" are concluded and Putin declares this sovereign nation officially part of his new Russia.
So, yes, we are dealing with a caged rat who actually got into the cage of his own volition. But, unless we/the West/NATO/EU are willing to risk a nuclear war he is going to get away with it and conclude he can do it again. So the real question the strategists in NATO need to be asking is what exactly can we do to keep him in his cage? What will be the trigger point when we will respond to his next move to acquire more territory. Will it be Poland or the Baltics? Will that be the straw which ends up breaking his back?
My bottom line? We are now involved in a giant game of global chicken and the possibility of a nuclear war of choice by Vladimir Putin is almost guaranteed. That is not any fun to contemplate at all even assuming both sides only use "tactical" nukes. The new Cold War 2.0 has begun. Best we and the civilized nations of Europe get used to it.
This is not your grandfather's Cold War, not even 2.0. This is political terrorism. The idea of getting used to it is beyond my emotion and intellectual capabilities.
I should think that he'd want Kazakstan back before moving against NATO countries. That's another huge piece of valuable real estate with sizeable Russian minorities. And no borders with NATO countries. But maybe he gets what he wants there already, like with Belarus.
Putin can't last forever. I should think that the West can take a long-term view, minimize damages as much as possible, pin him in, isolate Russia as much as practical, spare the world a nuclear war however big or small, and wait for the successor(s) in Moscow who can promise a return to rationality and better behavior. We outlasted the Communists, we can surely outlast one player?
I do feel sorrow and pity for the Ukrainians. But at the same time, I wish they'd stop urging the rest of the world to militarily intervene on their behalf, and make things so much worse. Misery may love company, but the world is a larger place than Ukraine. I think supplying arms and supplies and taking in refugees and allowing volunteers to go and join the fight is a measured response. Plus I'm sure we're sharing a lot of valuable intelligence under the table.
I am visiting my parents today. We have been discussing the situation in Ukraine and Russia, of course. It is a sad state of affairs there and here in terms of economic uncertainty. Don't get me wrong, we are much better off here, but this conflict is a world war in that regard. I have been trying to find amusing or unrelated news items to get my mind off the war. Sometimes I am successful. Unfortunately, the relief is short-lived. I think it is time for more motorcycle riding. 🙂
My husband and I were having a pre-dinner drink at the Palm Springs American Legion last night, and one of the TVs was tuned to Fux (oops, a typo) News. There was no sound but there were pictures of damaged buildings in Ukraine.
We need to get the hostilities in Ukraine stopped before somebody makes a mistake that could lead to nuclear war. I suggest that that allowing Putin his victory in Ukraine now is worth the price.
Putin's ensuing "peace" in Ukraine will eventually do him in. We have "won" a lot of our own wars of choice in recent decades only to lose the ensuing "peace" that followed to those we initially conquered. IEDs anyone? Our problem was, and Putin's will be that, as the invader, we could always just go home. The citizens of the nations we invaded could not do that- they had nowhere else to go. And that made all the difference.
And how do you intend to make that happen and what makes you think that Putin will comply? The only entity, at this point, who will employ nuclear weapons is Vladimir Putin and he will not think that it is a mistake, even if Russia and a good part of the rest of the world are annihilated. I don’t think I am alone in believing that ceding Ukraine to Putin will not embolden him further.
Allowing Putin a victory should not be an option. The bully that threatens the school yard does not become satiated at some point and cease being a bully. Putin’s threat to use nukes is holding the world hostage. Even if the sanctions work, a retreat of Russian forces is now not enough. Putin has to be removed from power and put on trial for crimes against humanity.
Thank you for your continued articles on this tragic event. Saw those pictures of the family of four. Beyond frightening. Putin is literally holding the world hostage. If Putin’s plan succeeds and his forces conquer Ukraine, will it calm his desire for expansion? If Ukraine stops Putin’s efforts and Russia retreats, will NATO then finally accept Ukraine in the club? If they don’t, is Finland next? By avoiding involvement is NATO sending a message to other countries that desire to reclaim their borders of old? China…Taiwan?
It's a slow burn, but World War Three might've already commenced, make no mistake about it. Cyber will be a massive weapon used by both sides. The obliteration of the Earth with nukes a real possibility. The Extinction a certainty if that happens. We should be scared, really scared but we can't because it's too frightening to actually face that IMPOSSIBLE reality. But, here we are. Furthermore, There's 450 nuclear power plants on the planet. Just two, Chernobyl and Fukushima show how dangerous they can be. What happens to all of us if the people who shut them down are killed? Or a dozen or so plants are blown up? Can this be a reality we're living in now that one either crazy or stupid man has the entire existence of the human race in his hands? How has this happened?
I'm not thinking about nuclear war right now. I'm thinking about all the U.S. and European companies that did business with Putin's Russia -- looking particularly at you, Rex Tillerson and ExxonMobil, though you sure as hell weren't alone -- even though it's been fairly clear almost from the get-go what Putin was about and his "vision" for Russia has become clearer year by year by year. For big corporations it was all about the economic opportunities, the potential profits.
Go ahead and call Putin "amoral" -- that probably a polite word for it. But equally amoral are the corporations that operate from behind the lines where the rule of law matters (sort of) and play ball with the likes of Putin and Xi.
Most of what's wrong with the world -- maybe even all of it? -- can be traced back to this amoral economic so-called "imperative." But when anyone points this out, they get trashed, reviled, and silenced as socialists, communists, etc. If we don't get a grip on this, I really do believe democracy is doomed.
My life is being divided into the normal side and the terrified side. Fitzgerald's remark about being able to hold two contradictory thoughts and still function is being sorely tested.
The heartbreaking story behind the picture you posted above, a family destroyed, was made even grimmer by the reporting of the small dog, in a green carrier, who survived but was understandably panicked. We tend, naturally, to see the carnage in human terms, but the costs to the environment — yes, even Russian defectors puncturing their gas tanks — and to the animal and plant world are also worthy of our concern and collective grief.
It is a rare thing for the NY Times to put an explicit photo of death on it's front page. The photo establishes inconvertible truth to the cruelty and savagery of Russia. Perhaps it's a warning to us that experienced journalists can see what's coming. Mr. Putin knows that NATO is sending munitions and unmarked soldiers to fight his army. Ukraine has now shown as Lucian Truscott acknowledges, Russia can't afford a serious war. So what happens? Possibly the war will be decided by Germany and France, both suffered terribly in WW2 and they understand madness. (Napoleon Hitler) They might send a letter to Putin making it clear that he faces absolute destruction and a letter informing President Biden that Putin is a suicide who believes that 'In Death there is nothing' The idea being to sober both sides that this little war can become the trigger to oblivion. The next two weeks might decide the fate of modern civilization, not that anyone wants or expected it.
One form of limited nuclear war would be like a conventional battlefield conflict but using low-yield tactical nuclear weapons. Here’s a hypothetical scenario: After its 2014 annexation of Crimea, Russia attacks a Baltic country with tanks and ground forces while the United States is distracted by a domestic crisis. NATO responds with decisive counterforce, destroying Russian tanks with fighter jets, but this doesn’t quell Russian resolve. Russia responds with even more tanks and by bombing NATO installations, killing several hundred troops. NATO cannot tolerate such aggression and to prevent further Russian advance launches low-yield tactical nuclear weapons with their dial-a-yield positions set to the lowest settings of only 300 tons TNT equivalent. The goal is to signal Russia that it has crossed a line and to deescalate the situation. NATO’s actions are based on fear that if the Russian aggression weren’t stopped the result would be all-out war in northern Europe.
This strategy is actually being discussed in the higher echelons of the Pentagon. The catchy concept is that use of a few low-yield nuclear weapons could show resolve, with the hoped-for outcome that the other party will back down from its aggressive behavior (this concept is known as escalate to deescalate). The assumption is that the nuclear attack would remain limited, that parties would go back to the negotiating table, and that saner voices would prevail. However, this assumes a chain of events where everything unfolds as expected. It neglects the incontrovertible fact that, as the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz observed in the 19th century, “Three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty.” Often coined fog of war, this describes the lack of clarity in wartime situations on which decisions must nevertheless be based. In the scenario described, sensors could have been damaged or lines of communication severed that would have reported the low-yield nature of the nuclear weapons. As a result, Russia might feel its homeland threatened and respond with an all-out attack using strategic nuclear weapons, resulting in millions of deaths.
There is every reason to believe that a limited nuclear war wouldn’t remain limited. A 1983 war game known as Proud Prophet involved top-secret nuclear war plans and had as participants high-level decision makers including President Reagan’s Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. The war game followed actual plans but unexpectedly ended in total nuclear annihilation with more than half a billion fatalities in the initial onslaught — not including subsequent deaths from starvation. The exercise revealed that a limited nuclear strike may not achieve the desired results! In this case, that was because the team playing the Soviet Union responded to a limited U.S. nuclear strike with a massive all-out nuclear attack.
-From https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/devastating-effects-of-nuclear-weapons-war/
"Dr. Strangelove" all over again. Nukes of any type have to be off the table.
The authors go on to ask a most compelling question: Do we trust the professional strategic planners who prepare our possible nuclear responses to an adversary’s threats?
You’re right that Putin has robbed some joy particularly when we should be feeling it with the seeming end of Covid as a major crisis.
I watch these brave people in Ukraine though and they fill me more and more with the righteous determination to take down the fascist supporters of Trump. My rep is the odious Elise Stefanik. Her district has gotten even redder and she likely will win. Her likely opponent is Matt Castelli, a former CIA officer.
I’m a frequent letter writer to my local paper and am determined to not let any of her misdeeds go forgotten. She recently referred to Biden as “weak, feckless and unfit.” That aggression will not stand. I wrote to express my views of how helpful that was to Russian propaganda outlets and several other folks have as well. She was also a major defender of Trump at both impeachments.
I’m hopeful that between the patriots in her district and a man who served the US patriotically her life is at least going to be uncomfortable.
I feel like a blog whore doing this, (apologies) but since I mentioned my letter I’ll include it for anyone with any interest:
There’s a chance President Zelenskyy will be killed in the invasion of Ukraine. Praise his courage in remaining to fight. I’m old enough to remember when this country would be united in supporting the effort of a fledgling democracy to withstand Russian aggression. The statement by Rep. Stefanik calling President Biden “weak, feckless and unfit” seems useful only to Russian propaganda outlets and rightwing media in this country, but I repeat myself. I realize as a Democrat I’m in a minority in the 21st District and she doesn’t aim to represent my views.
Biden is taking the same actions regarding Ukraine that Presidents Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II or Obama would’ve taken. Carter was arming the mujahideen in Afghanistan when Reagan came to office. Russia and Putin are being sanctioned. Ukraine is receiving military aid. The West is united against this invasion. That would not have happened with Donald Trump as president trashing NATO. Trump, in fact, has praised the “genius” of Putin for having taken this action.
Trump’s first impeachment was for holding up military aid to Ukraine because he wanted to pressure them to announce an investigation into Biden’s son. Maybe our representative considers that to be the action of a strong president since she defended him in that impeachment.
There may be more the president could do. There may not be. One thing he’s not doing is running a protection racket out of the Oval Office. Let’s all pray the Ukrainians with the world backing them show Donald Trump that Vladimir Putin is not a genius for launching this invasion.
You're not a "blog whore," you're an effective recycler. ;-)
Bravo!
It's terrifying to see that Putin really has nothing to lose if he falls back on nuclear weapons. And doubly scary is the fact he's totally amoral so has no scruples or even an ounce of empathy or compassion. As always, a great post.
Amoral and no empathy...sounds like Trump.
No character. “It was miraculous. It was almost no trick at all, he saw, to turn vice into virtue and slander into truth, impotence into abstinence, arrogance into humility, plunder into philanthropy, thievery into honor, blasphemy into wisdom, brutality into patriotism, and sadism into justice. Anybody could do it; it required no brains at all. It merely required no character.” — Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Only one of them can read.
Sounds like way too much of the upper-level GOP. I keep wondering why some of them got into politics in the first place, and what happened along the way.
Those that can, do.
Those that can't, run for office!
Hanson's Razor, anybody? There's plenty of malice here but there's even more incompetence. It sure worked to explain the Trump regime.
As I read your excellent, frightening piece I thought ‘Is this worse that Oct ‘62?’ I was 15, in Brooklyn, and knew the very short flying time from Cuba to NYC
I've been thinking a lot about that. I was 11 at the time and scared sh*tless in the Boston suburbs. Maybe as a result, I do not think this is a good time for the West to blink.
Putin’s threats are just that: bullying threats. We are obligated at this point to intervene with a no-fly zone. It has gone too far.
Consider our "own" dictator wannna-be; He has no personal perception of empathy, or consideration of the consequences of his actions - not an iota of compassion or concern for other's well being. In Putin Trump sees the person he wants to be. That person is a sociopath. When backed into a corner they do not see consequences, only their amygdala reptilian response. Of course Putin is a bully. But he has already murdered many many thousands. My sense is he would do anything including activating nuclear responses and yes, I am terrified of what I'm watching.
Elsewhere on this thread there is a discussion of how a "limited" nuclear war might stay limited. Pardon my skepticism but with nukes the minute one side feels it is losing up we go on the escalation ladder to win the war. But, I digress....................................................
If you are correct. Lucien, in assessing Putin is incapable in his mind of losing this war of opportunity he initiated then any attempt by the West to reverse his fortunes will be, in his mind, a reason to lash out and expand the war more broadly. That is, of course, going to lead to a further expansion of response by the West including exercise of Article 5 of the NATO treaty. Thus, by definition he is blackmailing the West into not doing anything overtly to aid Ukraine and what the Ukrainians are faced with is a forever war of insurrection after the "formal" hostilities" are concluded and Putin declares this sovereign nation officially part of his new Russia.
So, yes, we are dealing with a caged rat who actually got into the cage of his own volition. But, unless we/the West/NATO/EU are willing to risk a nuclear war he is going to get away with it and conclude he can do it again. So the real question the strategists in NATO need to be asking is what exactly can we do to keep him in his cage? What will be the trigger point when we will respond to his next move to acquire more territory. Will it be Poland or the Baltics? Will that be the straw which ends up breaking his back?
My bottom line? We are now involved in a giant game of global chicken and the possibility of a nuclear war of choice by Vladimir Putin is almost guaranteed. That is not any fun to contemplate at all even assuming both sides only use "tactical" nukes. The new Cold War 2.0 has begun. Best we and the civilized nations of Europe get used to it.
This is not your grandfather's Cold War, not even 2.0. This is political terrorism. The idea of getting used to it is beyond my emotion and intellectual capabilities.
I should think that he'd want Kazakstan back before moving against NATO countries. That's another huge piece of valuable real estate with sizeable Russian minorities. And no borders with NATO countries. But maybe he gets what he wants there already, like with Belarus.
Putin can't last forever. I should think that the West can take a long-term view, minimize damages as much as possible, pin him in, isolate Russia as much as practical, spare the world a nuclear war however big or small, and wait for the successor(s) in Moscow who can promise a return to rationality and better behavior. We outlasted the Communists, we can surely outlast one player?
I do feel sorrow and pity for the Ukrainians. But at the same time, I wish they'd stop urging the rest of the world to militarily intervene on their behalf, and make things so much worse. Misery may love company, but the world is a larger place than Ukraine. I think supplying arms and supplies and taking in refugees and allowing volunteers to go and join the fight is a measured response. Plus I'm sure we're sharing a lot of valuable intelligence under the table.
I am visiting my parents today. We have been discussing the situation in Ukraine and Russia, of course. It is a sad state of affairs there and here in terms of economic uncertainty. Don't get me wrong, we are much better off here, but this conflict is a world war in that regard. I have been trying to find amusing or unrelated news items to get my mind off the war. Sometimes I am successful. Unfortunately, the relief is short-lived. I think it is time for more motorcycle riding. 🙂
I wonder if Fox News ever shows what is really happening in Ukraine. My family watches only Fox. Is it possible that have no idea what is going on?
My husband and I were having a pre-dinner drink at the Palm Springs American Legion last night, and one of the TVs was tuned to Fux (oops, a typo) News. There was no sound but there were pictures of damaged buildings in Ukraine.
Even Fox has found it difficult to ignore the purposeful murder of women and children by a vicious dictator.
yup.
Can you say Trump won?
No news for decades, what a pity.
We need to get the hostilities in Ukraine stopped before somebody makes a mistake that could lead to nuclear war. I suggest that that allowing Putin his victory in Ukraine now is worth the price.
Putin's ensuing "peace" in Ukraine will eventually do him in. We have "won" a lot of our own wars of choice in recent decades only to lose the ensuing "peace" that followed to those we initially conquered. IEDs anyone? Our problem was, and Putin's will be that, as the invader, we could always just go home. The citizens of the nations we invaded could not do that- they had nowhere else to go. And that made all the difference.
And how do you intend to make that happen and what makes you think that Putin will comply? The only entity, at this point, who will employ nuclear weapons is Vladimir Putin and he will not think that it is a mistake, even if Russia and a good part of the rest of the world are annihilated. I don’t think I am alone in believing that ceding Ukraine to Putin will not embolden him further.
Allowing Putin a victory should not be an option. The bully that threatens the school yard does not become satiated at some point and cease being a bully. Putin’s threat to use nukes is holding the world hostage. Even if the sanctions work, a retreat of Russian forces is now not enough. Putin has to be removed from power and put on trial for crimes against humanity.
Putin controls the world like 2 Senators control events here.
Seems like is this tragic event has potential to be a unifier. We need to all find something we can collectively hate to bring us all together.
Like Trump?
Well…you see that would not bring both sides together. Besides…after praising Putin, Trump is now condemning Russia’s actions.
Thank you for your continued articles on this tragic event. Saw those pictures of the family of four. Beyond frightening. Putin is literally holding the world hostage. If Putin’s plan succeeds and his forces conquer Ukraine, will it calm his desire for expansion? If Ukraine stops Putin’s efforts and Russia retreats, will NATO then finally accept Ukraine in the club? If they don’t, is Finland next? By avoiding involvement is NATO sending a message to other countries that desire to reclaim their borders of old? China…Taiwan?
It's a slow burn, but World War Three might've already commenced, make no mistake about it. Cyber will be a massive weapon used by both sides. The obliteration of the Earth with nukes a real possibility. The Extinction a certainty if that happens. We should be scared, really scared but we can't because it's too frightening to actually face that IMPOSSIBLE reality. But, here we are. Furthermore, There's 450 nuclear power plants on the planet. Just two, Chernobyl and Fukushima show how dangerous they can be. What happens to all of us if the people who shut them down are killed? Or a dozen or so plants are blown up? Can this be a reality we're living in now that one either crazy or stupid man has the entire existence of the human race in his hands? How has this happened?
Ask any Trump voter...
One of the reasons the world is in this unfolding slow-motion end of species is because of responses like this to serious questions.