Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited Bucha today. His face says it all.

[Swede]

Grief and rage.

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=UBjC4oY6TdQDyjn_ZLWR-A

[onecaliberal]

1. It's okay, it's not here....

We can’t do things because reasons.

[Evergreen Emerald]

12. What?

I think Biden is doing an excellent job.

[onecaliberal]

15. THIS ISN'T ABOUT BIDEN!!!!!!

[Steven Maurer]

29. Then who is the "we" you're talking about then?

Because your first sentence sure came out critical.

[onecaliberal]

31. NATO the UN, the fucking civilized world. Anyone you would be hoping to help if that were you and

yours.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

43. Thank you!!! Thought I was the only one. Found three more on another thread

[hamsterjill]

82. Here's another one.

We need to do something! It’s only a matter of time.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

88. Of course!!!!!!!:)

[Steven Maurer]

46. NATO is a defensive alliance. The UN a forum...

...and the entire civilized world (except for Hungary) already is helping.

[onecaliberal]

33. Look at this

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/twanhp/first_foto_bucha_russians_burned_the_bodies/

[Justice matters.]

35. Yeah, only JFK deserved credit for preventing a nuclear WWIII.

Joe Biden is doing the same 24/7 but all he gets is critics for 'not doing enough' for Ukraine while completely ignoring he's protecting tens of million civilians from getting vaporized in instant sparks.

Russian nuclear submarine with 160 nuclear warheads surfaced off the coast of the U.S.

So glad the adults are in charge!

[EndlessWire]

42. Aw, they were just trying to surrender. n/t

[Laura PourMeADrink]

44. Hardly similar. Human beings are being slaughtered in their homes & in fucking hospitals

Last edited Mon Apr 4, 2022, 09:02 PM - Edit history (1)

[Justice matters.]

45. Call the world's police.

There's no such thing other than the UN Blue Helmets I guess.

Seriously, we have adults in charge, not the orange useful idiot.

Let them take the right decisions outside of message forums and have their back.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

49. No shit FG not in charge. At least not technically.:( You and I are

diametrically opposed on this... So will just leave at that . You are in majority - although many want no fly zone. Z does too. I read all the recent polls today.

[wnylib]

53. I agree that we must prevent nuclear war.

But I have questions about the source of the video and it's accuracy. The video is from Pravda.

I know that Russians have nuclear subs around the US coast. I presume that we have subs within range of Russia.

This looks like a Russian video intended to spread a threatening message to Americans.

[Justice matters.]

54. I don't care who made it: I post it for lurkers who don't yet know

anything about the real threats those stealth submarines sailing most of the times in international waters around the US (and not just the US but the EU and the UK also).

I don't post it for DUers like you who already know they are there. And of course we have subs over there, as the UK and France do.

There's no comparison with the Cuban missile crisis on the scale of danger those evolved subs represent. I don't see any MSM seriously examining the differences between those crisis.

[wnylib]

56. To me, the source makes a difference in terms of

psychological effect. As a fear mongering move from Russia, it can have the effect on Americans of feeling on the defensive. Repeated often enough, it could encourage a feeling of hopelessness about the aid we now give to Ukraine so that the American public begins to think that we should let Ukraine go and not take the risk of any aid to Ukraine. Russia would love to see us give up

I am not advocating an escalation of the war, either. I am just adding that we and our allies also have nuclear subs, which gives us some leverage in continuing to aid Ukraine. But it is precisely because of the amount of nukes around the world that we cannot risk escalation to a nuclear holocaust.

[Justice matters.]

58. "we cannot risk escalation to a nuclear holocaust"

More so with such an unpredictable war-criminal autocrat who's lied to by his inner circle, and without knowing all the facts about his current health condition, both physical AND more importantly, psychological.

So let's just appreciate the - so-far - pretty awesome job President Biden and his administration is doing without letting emotions guide their tough decisions on a 24/7 basis.

[Justice matters.]

13. We can do things because reasons.

The Biden Administration does the things needed to make sure it's not here, but never gets the credit for it.

[onecaliberal]

16. What is happening isn't because of Biden. It's been happening for decades. Putrid has rolled over

several countries. Maybe killing is okay with you if it's not here, but that is not how everyone feels and certainly not how I feel. Everything isn't up to Biden and every critique isn't a reflection on him.

[Sherman A1]

25. We have and are doing a host of things to support Ukraine

to say otherwise is to be very, very charitable rather silly.

[onecaliberal]

40. The things we're doing are not stopping down men from

Raping children and beheading parents.

[Sherman A1]

41. Then what would you propose?

Obviously you have some idea of what you would like to see happen.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

57. Stop slaughter of innocents

[Mariana]

59. What specifically do you propose be done that would accomplish that? nt.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

61. Wouldn't know. But know we spend $600+ billion with a B on defense each year

Surely the military would know

In my heart and mind, we've GOT to stop the killing. Period. Paragraph.

[Mariana]

64. "Surely the military would know."

Did they ever stop the killing in Iraq or Afghanistan? No, they didn't. Why do you think they could do it now in Ukraine?

[Crunchy Frog]

79. Because those killings were from civil conflict within the countries.

Those kinds of killings are notoriously difficult to stop.

The killing in Ukraine is from foreign aggression. If the aggressor is stopped then the killing is stopped.

[Sherman A1]

68. How?

Offer something a bit more specific as to how it should be done. Otherwise you are offering nothing but wishful thinking.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

87. The more senseless bloodshed the American people see on TV, the more President Biden's numbers

will drop. It's just a simple fact. He sees this himself. Hence the agitated impatient state. He is aggravated that we can't stop this? That someone told him we couldn't? He's a good man with a heart of gold. Can totally understand his frustration. IMHO, he listened to the wrong experts.

Of course I'm not a military expert to give you a military roadmap you ask for. But I do know we spend $600+ million a year on defense. Surely they have a plan in ice ??

[Sherman A1]

91. How many American lives are you willing to lose?

Both direct combat, at sea and on the North American continent even without the use of nuclear weapons.

Because that is precisely what you are discussing.

I fully trust the Biden Administration to chart the best course through this difficult time without taking the advice of a bunch of internet armchair generals.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

92. Lose me whenever someone

says " I trust " You are saying American life worth more than human life?

[Sherman A1]

94. You are free to contact the Embassy of Ukraine

And volunteer year services to join them on the battlefield, short of that, sounds just like another internet armchair general or TV talking head to me.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

95. Ya... The ole armchairs against blind-faithers :)

[Sherman A1]

96. I can only assume from your comment that you don't trust Biden to to make the right decisions?

Must be nice to enjoy the comfort of that armchair…………

[Laura PourMeADrink]

97. I don't trust anyone blindly. People being slaughtered and its

just ho hum is completely unacceptable in my mind.

[Sherman A1]

98. And armchair generals who want to blindly expand

A very bad limited war into a potential global catastrophe is completely unacceptable to me.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

99. You and I are diametrically opposed. If you're the worst on the other side I'm happy:)

[Sherman A1]

100. Yes, we most certainly are

I don’t want a global war which even if it doesn’t go nuclear will add countless numbers to the death toll and cause mind numbing devastation both here and abroad.

[TomSlick]

47. We are doing something.

We will defend liberal democracy and international law to the last Ukrainian.

It is not being critical of President Biden to say that he is doing what a majority of Americans - certainly a majority of Democrats - want him to do (or not do). No President would risk a war with Russia without the support of the American people.

The US will stop Putin's war crimes only when a substantial majority of our citizens demand that it be done. With the wide-spread fear of Putin "going nuclear," it is unclear that there is any level of atrocity that will cause public opinion to favor using force to stop any number of murders, kidnappings, and rapes in countries most Americans could not identify on a map.

The only remaining alternative is to arm Ukrainians. Eventually, there will be too few Ukrainians left to continue the fight and Putin will have won.

The decision to tolerate Putin's war crimes is not President Biden's responsibility. It's our responsibility.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

62. ???? So killing of civilians ok since most people don't give a shit?

[Calculating]

65. Cowardice honestly

The world said NEVER AGAIN after WW2, and now they're all afraid because some lunatic threatened nukes. Russia and their culture is an abomination upon the world. How much misery have they brought over the years? Lennin, Stalin, Putin, etc it just never ends. They're constantly ruled by murderous sociopaths who feel nothing slaughtering millions to get their way.

[Sherman A1]

70. Seriously?

So a global catastrophe is preferable to a very bad limited war? Think very long and hard about what you are suggesting because that is exactly what would occur.

[Calculating]

74. You don't know that though

I personally don't think Russia would release the nukes over Ukraine if the international community forced them out.

[Sherman A1]

75. And you do not know that they would not do so

I still prefer a very bad limited war to a global catastrophe with millions dead on the chance... "Hey, he won't push the button."

[Calculating]

76. So you're willing to throw the people of Ukraine under the bus

To avoid the risk of angering Putin.

[Sherman A1]

77. And you are willing to expand to a global catastrophe?

[Calculating]

78. If that's what it takes to stop another holocaust

Which is exactly what the Russians seem intent on. These people are monsters from their culture to how they handle warfare. The Russian people would basically support killing every damn thing in Ukraine to get their way.

[Sherman A1]

80. Have a Wonderful National Deep Dish Pizza Day

[TomSlick]

81. Unless the world gives a shit, it condones the atrocities.

The question is whether the world gives a shit.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

89. Nope. Not even an excuse like people had during WW2 because

It's on TV and in social media 24/7. Documented war crimes!!! Just surreal that this horror is peacefully co-existing with Will Smith shenanigans and American Idol auditions.

[TomSlick]

90. Nevertheless, if the world really gives a shit the atrocities would be stopped.

Strongly worded diplomatic condemnation - the international equivalent of thoughts and prayers - is all the world will offer unless and until we finally really give a shit.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

93. Totally agree. You are absolutely positively correct

If you look at bottom line above it all, not just the US, but the world, is sacrificing Ukrainian life.

This is so obvious. Evidently NATO rules.

[Sherman A1]

69. So it is preferable to turn a very bad limited war into a global catastrophe.

There are indeed limits to what can be done vs a nuclear armed nation with a person such as Putin in charge.

I very much trust that the Biden Administration is making the best choices for the world, the United States and Ukraine at this point. That there are horrible things taking place is not our failure to supply and support Ukraine, but on the brutal nature of the Russian and their way of war.

[Scrivener7]

2. He has aged 10 years since the start of this thing.

[Efilroft Sul]

3. I was just about to say that. He looks grim.

[Dave says]

4. Yes, if not 20 years

This man carries the grief of a nation. He deserves a Nobel Peace Prize. He and his nation deserve so much more than that.

What a tragedy has been wrought by Putin and his thugs.

[Irish_Dem]

5. I noticed the aging issue last week, but this picture is shocking.

The change in his appearance due to stress, duty, responsibility and the horrors of war are shown clearly.

Also he has to live every minute knowing Putin wants him dead.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

6. I can never see him shaking hands with Russian negotiator and agreeing to give up anything

I'm afraid this war could go on for months, years, spilled blood means nothing to Putin, and west will get war fatigue reporting on it.

[sboatcar]

10. Given all the lies Russia has told, I can't see him doing it either

I think Russia is intentionally poisoning the well there.

[AngryOldDem]

18. No. You need at least a scintilla of good faith in order to negotiate.

Russia’s actions show its true intent.

As for the West, it’s given Putin a free pass on all his atrocities for years. I don’t see “sanctions” really sticking, or making much of a difference over time.

Give the Ukranians what they need to fight. That is — and has been — the only answer here.

[calimary]

22. Indeed. HARDLY what you'd call "good faith."

Not from this aggressor.

[FM123]

7. Yes, says it all. Heartbreaking.

I just saw your other post about the mayor - I wonder if that is what he just saw. She was left in Bucha, where he is now. This is all just too much to bear.

[texasleo]

8. Is our media still whining about the regime change "gaffe?"

[FoxNewsSucks]

9. He has more leadership and courage in one eyebrow hair

than MF45, that bloated orange anus, has in his entire disgusting body.

And the world watches.

[SergeStorms]

11. I saw it on the news....

and was repulsed and sickened by what I saw.

I can't imagine seeing it in person, especially as the president of Ukraine, where the smells and sounds of the genocide are still fresh in the air.

I can't imagine the rage and sadness he experiences on a daily basis. How he manages to carry on from one day to the next boggles my mind.

[calimary]

23. True. Sickening enough to see in brief news clips.

But imagine having to walk through that. You have to pick your way through, carefully, because of the uneven ground, all the wreckage on that uneven ground, possible land mines and you can’t be sure where they are, bodies strewn about, and if, as I’ve observed in the coverage, they’ve been lying there long enough to stiffen up, some with visible torture evidence…

And the stench of death and explosions and gunpowder ….

ANYBODY who is there, whether Red Cross volunteers or media people or other soldiers and support personnel - if they survive this, they’re ALL going to need psychological counseling and assistance - and that’s not counting those who are wounded as well, and needing medical treatment.

It’s painful and horrifying to see, from our own safe distance. To BE there is quite another thing entirely. The word “apocalyptic” is being used - and understandably so.

I just heard the correspondent, CNN’s Phil Black, make the point that “for those who lived through it, it’s unlikely ever to be forgiven.”

Damn.

No kidding.

[SergeStorms]

37. Ali Velshi was just on....

Nicole Wallace's show, and he said about the same thing. He'll never be able to get it out of his mind.

One other thing to consider apart from the horrors of the war: unexploded ordnance. The Russians don't manufacture the "best" (if there is such a thing) explosive devices. There are thousands of unexploded shells and rockets around, plus land mines and other boobytraps the Russians left behind.

Even when this war is over things are going to be exploding for quite some time.

[calimary]

38. Shit. When I was still working, I worked with people who covered

Last edited Mon Apr 4, 2022, 06:58 PM - Edit history (1)

shootouts and all manner of calamities, and the camera crew that went to Guyana to cover the Jim Jones freak show, and then barely got out of there alive after they were fired upon at the little airport there, while trying to board their plane.

Steve Sung was a sound guy who worked in the Burbank bureau when I was there. He was one of the lucky ones - being “merely” wounded. In the same nightmare moment, California Congressman Leo Ryan, Don Harris, and cameraman Bob Brown were killed. I remember the interview wherein he recalled being shot in the arm and seeing part of his flesh torn almost off. Like “a piece of meat” he called it, just dangling there. He described how he’d yanked it off because it was in the way.

Sung was usually partnered with producer Bob Flick in the field. Flick had quite the personality and was fun to be around. When I saw him back at the bureau afterwards, he looked like a changed man, and not for the better.

You don’t get over something like that - easily, or EVER.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/30-years-later-jonestowns-horror-endures/

[SergeStorms]

48. I remember that. What a sick and twisted....

man Jim Jones was. That was the only thing on the news for a solid week.

Trump has the same personality and his cult members would do the exact same thing if he ordered them to. They'll deny it until their dying day, but saying they're a cult is not hyperbole.

You were pretty close to that sordid affair, but far enough removed to not be part of it anyway. Still, knowing people that were actually there had to touch you in a way that makes you more acutely aware of the true evil it takes to do something like that. (shivers going down my spine). I'd imagine Mr. Flick had nightmares about that for the rest of his life.

Thanks for sharing that with me. Take care.

[calimary]

63. All I could think of was how close they both came.

I didn't know or work with the reporters who died. But the usually charming and personable local NBC anchorwoman was visibly glum and joyless for weeks. She and Bob Brown had been a thing, and evidently it was the real thing. Broke her heart.

[cksmithy]

14. Zelensky

is the right person for this time in Ukraine. He is courageous and so are all the men who are surrounding and protecting him. In other photos of this moment, there are men, soldiers, with and without helmets protecting their president. Looking out for snipers,etc. Very brave, no bone spurs.

[sky_masterson]

17. Heavy is the head that wears the crown.

I watched the first episode of his TV show yesterday and I was taken by grief at the city,people, life of everything in Ukraine from how it was to how it is now.

[intrepidity]

83. I also watched the first episode,

haven't had the strength to watch more yet--just too painful. That one hour of TV viewing massively magnified my perception of this war, more than any current news coverage. It made it very personal. I want to continue watching, but cannot yet.

[FakeNoose]

19. This man is sincerely grieving, his heart is breaking

Putin is a butcher and a monster.

It's not enough to just be one of the good guys. Sometimes the good guys have to fight like hell to protect their loved ones from the bad guys. That's what NATO is all about - mutual protection from the bad guys of this world.

[AngryOldDem]

20. My respect and admiration for him know no bounds.

This is a true leader.

[colorado_ufo]

21. Exhaustion, lack of sleep, not enough food.

Worry about his family. A huge country on his shoulders. A burden that he cannot put down.

[calimary]

24. Just shows the measure of the man.

It’s a burden he won’t put down.

[summer_in_TX]

28. His face reflects horror, deep grief that these

human beings have been treated without regard for their sacred worth but rather as if they were trash, and the rage of righteous anger for the atrocities.

Heartbreaking. I wept just in reading it all in his face.

On a smaller scale I felt that particular combination of horror, grief, and outrage on learning of the cruel death of James Byrd, who was tied to the back of a pickup and dragged to his death in Jasper, TX.

[Cha]

26. 🤷‍♂️💖🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️💖

💙💛

[marie999]

27. Ukraine cannot be allowed to lose, even if it means sending NATO troops in.

Last edited Mon Apr 4, 2022, 05:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Right about now would be a good time. And if it starts WWIII, then Putin was going to start it soon anyway. Maybe sending in NATO troops now would get one of Putin's people to kill him.

[ShazzieB]

32. Is there a typo on your subject line?

Did you mean to say "Ukraine can't be allowed to lose"?Because I'm pretty sure that's how all of us are feeling about this. 🌻🇺🇦 🌻🇺🇦 🌻🇺🇦 🌻🇺🇦🌻

[marie999]

34. Yes, I just fixed it, thank you.

[ShazzieB]

39. My pleasure! 😊

I certainly agree with the sentiments you expressed.

[wnylib]

55. If NATO troops enter Ukraine, causing WWIII,

you won't need to worry about Ukraine winning or losing. There will be no Ukraine. Or Russia, US, UK, France, etc.

So I guess that's one solution. A few moments of pushback in exchange for the devastation of the world.

[Calculating]

66. Again with this fear mongering

The Russians are cruel barbarians, but they aren't suicidal. They aren't going to release the nukes over Ukraine. It's time to call their bluff.

[wnylib]

72. It's not Russians releasing nukes over Ukraine

that would be the problem.

If we fight Russia directly, the risk is that they will retaliate with the release of nukes on the US and NATO nations. The Russian nuclear subs on our shores and the shores of the UK and Europe could release several first strikes at once, wiping out DC, NYC, and LA in the US, Paris and London in Europe, etc.

One or more of those nations could retaliate in kind.

The initial explosions would eliminate national capitals of major nations and kill several million people. The radioactive fallout from that much nuclear power would take care of life in the northern hemisphere, followed eventually by illness and some loss of life in the southern hemisphere as radiation was carried on trade winds.

Before assuming that Russia would not be crazy enough to do something like that, consider a US plan that was developed by the Joint Chiefs and CIA in the 1950s under Eisenhower. The plan was to take out the Soviet Union with a first strike before they could retaliate. At that time, our nuclear weapons were advanced over the Soviet Union's and we had more of them than they did. The calculation was that we could strategically take out Soviet cities and nuclear storage/launch sites in a first strike, crippling their chances of retaliating. We might lose a city or two, but would win.

The calculation was that the US could maintain nuclear superiority over the Soviets until 1963 so the first strike would need to be done before that. Obviously, it did not happen. Kennedy, not Nixon, won the election of 1960.

If Russia has confidence in its current nuclear subs, what's to say they do not have the same idea that the US had in the 1950s?

[intrepidity]

84. This may sound naive

but I dont think its as simple as you describe.

First, Russia has always had a no-first-strike doctrine. Second, there isn't just a single red button Putin has to push.Their whole nuclear schema is built to be as a response to a first-strike. That was the point of MAD.

It isn't clear to me whether they could even technically launch a first-strike. Same goes for us.

The only times we've apparently ever gotten to the brink was when the system broke down and it "appeared" a launch had been made from the other side. Even then, there were enough intermediate steps--even if only one person with critical thinking skills--to prevent a launch.

I'd imagine since then, even *more* fail safes have been built into the system. The only reason to not do so is if one *wanted* to have first-strike ability. And according to MAD, well, that's madness.

Granted, Putin is evil and reckless, but is he *that* kind of "mad"? If he is, then there really is only one solution.

[wnylib]

86. Yes, it is naive to believe that Russia has never

considered or drawn up plans for a first strike. If the US once did, you can be certain that Russia has.

Of course launching nukes is not a simple procedure and there are fail safe systems established. That does not preclude a deliberate plan. In the US plan, the idea was to first ratchet up tensions between the US and Russia (Soviet Union at that time). The best timing had even been calculated for 1963.

The near accidental launch that was avoided by a sharp thinking Russian is not the only time that we came close to nuclear war. October, 1962 was just as close and not by accident. The power struggle between Kennedy and the US military throughout the Cuban Missile Crisis was intense. The military so firmly believed in the US nuclear superiority over the Soviets that, although they knew there would be retaliation, they thougtt that it was a retaliation we would survive as long as we made a first, massive strike. While Kennedy was working on a diplomatic solution, the military were undercutting it with their own actions that ratcheted things up more. The seriousness of the problem is detailed in this article:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/08/jfk-vs-the-military/309496/

For a movie, the film Thirteen Days (about the Cuban Missile Crisis) depicts that power struggle between Kennedy and the US military very well. I recommend it. Such scenes in the film as the enitire nation glued to TV and radio while Kennedy spoke, are not movie melodrama. That's exactly how I remember it. Other film events are also quite accurate.

(As for a no first strike policy on nukes, for 200+ years, the US also had a policy of not initiating a conventional war through invasion of another nation - until Bush II made a "preemptive" invasion of Iraq.)

If Russia believes in the superiority of its nuclear subs (which are already in position around the world) to prevent a significant retaliation by making first strikes, the possibility exists of Putin doing it.

Challenging Putin on it is not a gamble to take lightly or recklessly.

[marie999]

71. General Wesley Clark (retired) says that Putin won't stop with Ukraine.

So when he attacks a NATO country are we to say that is just a small country so we won't do anything that might start WWIII?

[wnylib]

73. No need to ask that question.

Biden has already said that we will fight in such a case. It's in the NATO agreement. It's the reason why we have beefed up NATO troops in Europe.

Russia might still resort to nukes at that point. But we will be obligated by the NATO agreement to follow through.

I am not privy to US and NATO security plans. It is possible that there is something in place in case Russia advances on a NATO nation, which would be a direct declaration of war on all NATO members.

[OverBurn]

60. Nobody wants them to lose, but. So fuck it? Let's have the whole world lose?

Nobody wins a nuclear war. We're stuck between a rock and a rock. No good solutions.

The Russians have to take Putin out, only quick end to this I can see.

[Calculating]

67. The Russians love Putin apparently

I'm not suggesting regime change or trying to invade Russia, but Russian forces in Ukraine need to be annihilated.

[2naSalit]

30. I have seen that look before...

On the faces of other leaders in the past. It is so hard to witness the pain they endure having the weight of responsibility for the well being of a nation when the gates of hell are at the door.

I pray for a rapid end to the madness and pain for Ukraine.

[Emile]

36. By the look on his face, he'll never get over what he witnessed. My dad

had that look when he was in the VA hospital after WW2.

[Stuart G]

50. This horrific look was very common I suspect after the "Civil War"...and as has been said..

other wars. Like WWII...Just like you said about your dad in the VA hospital.

[Stinky The Clown]

51. Because this is what leaders do

[Stuart G]

52. The look on his face defines this quote from Civil War General William Tecum Sherman..."War is hell"

William Tecumseh Sherman > Quotes. “It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.”

Look carefully at the picture on original post. Zalinsky has seen it all.

[calimary]

85. That face really does say it all.

Horror, grief, deep distress, shocking disbelief, anguish.

Just kinda breaks your heart.