Fact checking CLICKBAIT - NOT in world war - Pentagon see NO RUSSIAN PREPARATIONS to use nukes - NO REASON to change USA's posture - air raids in Kyiv normal - Nordic booklets updates not about nukes
To get a first idea of this article just look at the graphics and read the section titles, then you can read any section of special interest to go into it in more depth
It is okay nothing to worry about at all. The amount of clickbait right now is just extraordinary but it is just journalists optimizing their articles for clicks and views, none of it is real.
The amount of CLICKBAIT is over the top right now. This means the TITLE LIES. The content also often lies. Journalists do this JUST FOR CLICKS AND VIEWS, they are trained to optimize their articles and titles to get as many people clicking on them as possible. Which they see as white lies justified to get people interested in what they say or write.
Sadly, the truth often gets metaphorically pushed into the back seats of the article when they do that. The truth is usually still there but often not in the title or graphic for the article or even the first paragraph.
I think they are completely oblivious to the effect on people's mental health of their white lies on such a serious topic. For instance in the last several days of media hysteria I haven’t seen any news story on the BBC website or in the TV news saying the simple truth that the Pentagon see no signs of Putin preparing to use nukes and that we are NOT in a world war.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC:
Is the Pentagon concerned about nukes or changed alert level?
A. We see NO signs of Putin preparing to use nukes and have NOT CHANGED OUR ALERT LEVEL.
Has world war III began?
No. This is just the US as one of 50 or so countries supporting Ukraine’s defence capabilities.
[my short summary for autistic or panicking readers]
Graphic shows title section for “No signs Russia is preparing to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, Pentagon says” (story in the Kyiv Independent) and transcript of Pentagon press briefing saying the same thing.
Neither Russia nor the US has even changed their nuclear posture.
Q: And then I guess I want to ask also, since we're still unclear on whether or not the policy has changed. On the non-nuclear — the change on Russia's stance on the nuclear — what was it, the nuclear doctrine. Under these changes, they're saying that a large attack by a non-nuclear state that's backed by a nuclear state, which would be the United States, that would be treated as a joint assault on Russia. How concerning is that to the Pentagon? And have you changed your posture?
DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY SINGH: So, we aren't surprised by Russia's update to its nuclear doctrine. It's something that they've been signaling that they intend to update over the last several weeks. It's the same irresponsible rhetoric that we've seen before and that we've seen frankly for the past two years. So, it's something that we're going to continue to monitor, but we don't have any indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon within Ukraine. And we don't see any changes that need to be made to our own nuclear posture as well.
…
Q: Additionally, given the joint US and NATO escalation of attacks, with Ukraine against Russia, and with China and North Korea joining Russia to form an alliance against the West, would not you say that World War III has begun?
DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY SINGH: I would not say that. That is not the characterization that this building assesses. And you've seen us take measures to deescalate tensions and to — I'm sorry, I'm just speaking like broadly around the world. But when it comes to Ukraine, the commitment of this administration from the very beginning of this war was to help Ukraine take back its sovereign territory.
A decision by another country to invade its sovereign neighbor cannot go unchecked, and that's why you've seen not just the United States, but 50 or so countries all around the world come together and support Ukraine through the Ukraine Defense Contact Group. So, this is a global effort to support Ukraine, but I certainly would not characterize it as that. Joseph.
. Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh Holds a Press Briefing, Nov 19, 2024
Nordic pamphlets are a COINCIDENCE - NOT ABOUT NUKES - NOT IN RESPONSE TO BIDEN'S DECISION
These booklets were announced on the 17th November the same day as Biden's decision was leaked - but were long in preparation, already in print on the day of the announcement and in the post.
The Swedish booklet is just an update of the one last published 6 years ago in response to the Ukraine invasion 2 years ago.
Finland has also updated its booklet. They emailed their citizens in the summer saying they need to have water, food and medicine needed for 3 days of crisis - this is about ALL crises and there is a section on a military conflict.
It is NOT about nuclear attacks which need specific instructions on fallout.
QUOTE STARTS
On Monday, millions of Swedes will start receiving copies of a pamphlet advising the population how to prepare and cope in the event of war or another unexpected crisis.
“In case of crisis or war” has been updated from six years ago, external because of what the government in Stockholm calls the worsening security situation, by which it means Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The booklet is also twice the size.
Neighbouring Finland has also just published its own fresh advice online on “preparing for incidents and crises”.
And Norwegians have also recently received a pamphlet, external urging them to be prepared to manage on their own for a week in the event of extreme weather, war and other threats.
During the summer, Denmark's emergency management agency, external said it was emailing Danish adults details on the water, food and medicine they would need to get through a crisis for three days.
In a detailed section on military conflict, the Finnish digital brochure, external explains how the government and president would respond in the event of an armed attack, stressing that Finland’s authorities are “well prepared for self defence”.
“We have sent out 2.2 million paper copies, one for each household in Norway,” said Tore Kamfjord, who is responsible for the campaign of self-preparedness at the Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection (DSB).
. Sweden, Finland and Norway release new advice on surviving war
This is what we’d see if there really was a world war risk:
.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
You do NOT see these instructions on the news because there IS NO REAL WORLD WAR RISK
We were ALL sent this in the cold war.
NOBODY is sent it today.
Our governments do NOT assess ANY risk of a world war.
These instructions would save millions of lives in a nuclear war.
If you are outside the epicenter and stay away from the heavy dust that falls from the sky you don't get radiation sickness.
Radioactivity is mostly gone in 2 days, most of what's left in weeks.
When I was a child we all read this and knew what to do.
Now almost nobody knows except older people because we DON'T NEED TO KNOW.
Because there is NO LONGER ANY REAL RISK OF A NUCLEAR WAR.
It's bluffs, clickbait, sensationalism and exaggerations.
Graphic from: Protect and survive : this booklet tells you how to make your home and your family as safe as possible under nuclear attack
This would likely run on the TV every night and a booklet through your door if there was a real risk of a world war.
For more on this see my
Kyiv has air raid sirens every day as for the Blitz in London in WW2 but with better air defences
There are sirens in Kiv EVERY DAY now as far as I know. The Russians have gradually increased the pace of attacks mainly by using their mass produced Shahed drones These are low cost and easy to make and they have factories in Russia making them as fast as they can and then firing them Ukraine and they fire dozens a day now. It's similar to the Blitz in WW2 except that Ukraine has far better air defences but in terms of having to go to shelter regularly for sirens it is just like the WW2 blitz in London for them.
Embassies closed down likely because of risk of hypersonic missiles which give only minutes or even seconds of warning before the explosion and can’t be heard in advance
Ukrainians normally would go to shelters when they hear the air-raid sirens. However there is very little warning for hypersonic missiles, which hit before you can hear them and they can hit only a few seconds after the air raid siren starts, unlike the Shahed drones that have lots of warning.
Almost all hypersonic missiles now get shot down by Patriot air defences. But some still get through.
This is an example of an attack where the explosions came just seconds after the air raid sirens started.
. Missiles hit Kyiv seconds after air raid alert, leaving people no time to shelter
Ukrainians don’t want to live in the underground shelters all their life, so they go about normal life, and they rush to shelter if there is an air raid siren.
This protects them from the more common Shahed drones, but they know they are taking a risk that in the rare case of a hypersonic missile most of which get shot down, they may be hit before they can evacuate or on their way to the shelter.
This has been the reality of life in Ukraine since winter 2022-3. If you lived in Ukraine you would get used to it. This is just an accident can happen to you much like a traffic accident. Though you can reduce the risk by rushing to shelter as soon as you hear the sirens just as you reduce the risk of a traffic accident by looking both ways before you cross a road.
Hypersonic missiles travel several times faster than the speed of sound. That means they get to the target before the sound from them does.
They also have very little radar warning time especially since they can change direction mid flight to some extent.
The Khinzal flies at Mach 10 at its fastest which means it travels 200 km in a minute.
They fire them from hundreds of kilometers away, often over 1000 km away, but they can still get from their launch site to the target in only minutes leaving not much time for warnings and evacuation. At Mach 10 it is 5 minutes to travel 1000 km, it will be a little more as they don’t travel at Mach 10 all the way but it is very little warning time even if detected immediately when they are launched.
BBC FALSE clickbait - said Putin’s invasion was an emotional decision and nukes would be too - NONSENSE - we now know his peace talks with Macron etc were a charade and he likely decided nearly a year earlier
For those who haen’t read my fact check this is one very clear example of clickbait, the video segment for the prime time slot in the BBC news, which ran probably with every news program on 19th November FALSELY said that Putin’s invasion was an emotional decision and that he would use nukes for emotional reasons too. This is NONSENSE.
There is a huge amount of analysis now of Putin’s invasion and everyone agrees of those who look at it in detail. He is a carefully calculating man who, though he surely does have emotions doesn’t act on them in an impulsive or rash way. He never does anything until he is 100% sure it will work.
We now know that the invasion of Ukraine was planned long in advance probably as early as March 2021. He seemed to make a sudden decision simply because all the peace negotiations were just a charade to ensure the invasion was a surprise as much as possible.
He only invaded Ukraine because he thought he had a sure-fire 100% certain way to
establish an air bridge to Hostomel airport on day 1,
take over the government in Kyiv on day 2, and
take over all of Ukraine by using the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian military together with his own military by day 10.
He worked on this plan for nearly a year before invading.
This is a very careful calculating man who was misled by false information from his spies and didn’t believe Western media when they described a free democratic Ukraine which he thought, based on false reports of his spies, was a suppressed people led by a nazi Jew of all things who would welcome liberation by Russia.
See my: BLOG:
Also for more about clickbait, see:
No Putin CAN’T win with nukes - that is only a way to LOSE fast
Nukes are nowhere near as powerful as you likely imagine them to be.
For example, Russia CAN'T "take out" the UK. Even if Russia launched all its nukes at us which is absurd it would still LOSE not win that war.
No country has ever had first strike capability - no country has ever had ANYTHING like enough nukes to win a war with nukes. Even not taking account of the nuclear subs that can't be hit anyway because they are undetectable at sea.
It makes NO SENSE for Russia if feels it is losing to Ukraine to get NATO involved in the fight too!
If Russia starts to lose then Putin's mind will turn to peace negotiations.
In the short term these missiles will make life a bit safer for civilians and soldiers in Ukraine. It will have NO EFFECT on us.
More on this later in this blog post.
Putin’s claim that UK or US soldiers have to fire the missiles rather than the Ukrainians was just a “Pants on fire” lie - they wouldn’t be able to sell their missiles to a single country if they had to do the firing of them themselves
Putin just lied with his claim that the UK and US missiles can only be fired with US or UK help.
He has a gift there of words, to get people to believe what he says bypassing ordinary critical thinking which they would realize if they just stopped and calmly reflected a few minutes on what he said. Actually the US HiMARS is especially easy to use, just enter coords on a keypad. It’s far easier to use than the ex Soviet era equipment that Ukrainians are used to.
Also the ATACMS and Stormshadow only need the coordinates accurate to a meter or so not centimeters. Commercial satellite imagery at the same resolution of Google Maps is more than adequate. And Ukraine has full-time use of their own commercial satellite which they bought with a Ukrainian fund raiser in 2022 and called the “People’s Satellite” and also slots of observation when other satellites in the network go over Ukraine.
I go into details here:
These lies were published by the Western media without any fact checking. It’s a bit strange.
E.g. BBC verify will verify what UK politicians say, what US presidential candidates say, what Israel and the Palestinians say about Gaza Strip but they never seem to fact-check Putin. I don’t know why that is.
As a result many people I help believe this lie, which if you stop and think about it can’t be true. There is no way that the US or the UK could sell these weapons to other countries like Singapore or the UAE etc if they had to fire the weapons for their customers. That makes literally no sense whatsoever but Putin is so good at propaganda that he is able to convince people of this very absurd thing.
All this fuss about the ATACMS is just yet another Putin bluff
The bizarre thing is that the Ukrainians are already using many other missiles to hit targets in Russia - their own drones and missiles - but also the GLMRS which is fired from the same launcher as HIMARS and the HARM anti-radar missile which they have been firing at target in Russia since 2022. The GLMRS are used at pretty much the same targets as ATACMS over shorter range of 80 km instead of 300 km.
As someone who follows the war closely to help scared people - the military experts I follow are just bewildered Biden even made any distinction. The ATACMS will be used only against military targets similarly to the shorter range missiles they already are using to hit targets in Russia. This will just make the Ukrainians a little safer and put a few spokes in the wheels of Russia’s “war machine” for the invasion
[“spoke in the wheel” is an expression meaning mess it up and make their war machine less effective
“war machine” refers to the factories, the tanks, command posts, everything that is working together to try to invade Ukraine].
For Trump voters - some of the people calling on Biden to give this permission most vocally are Mike Johnson, Republican speaker of the House and Mitch McConnel, former Republican leader of the Senate.
And their new nuclear doctrine is just sabre rattling. I need to update this post. They seem to have made the new doctrine so vague that it could mean almost anything, but the intent is to protect Russia from a critical threat to its sovereignty still. The only reason for making it so confusing and vague seems to be to help Putin to bluff more easily not to actually use nukes which makes no sense.
Short explanation of why we can be SURE that Putin is NOT going to attack the far more powerful NATO
The reason he won't carry through with his bluffs is because this will NOT give him an advantage over Ukraine, it will give Ukraine an advantage over Putin because its allies will immediately give it whatever it asks for and for that matter he will have not just Ukraine to fight but NATO to fight as well.
And the reason he bluffed is to try to stop Ukraine's allies from giving them the 1980s technology ATACMS.
They have far far better equipment they have NOT sent to Ukraine. Such as the F-35s.
Russia’s equivalent, the Su-57 is not nearly as stealthy and they don’t yet dare risk it over Ukraine.
Imagine how hard it would be to defend against supersonic potatoes. That is what the Russians would see in their radars if they were fighting a NATO country with F-35s
.
When you look for one of these F-35s on radar …
This is what you see: [large potato]
Russian radar operator (imagined): “What is that on the radar? A supersonic potato?”
Billie Flyn, F-35 test pilot on what it would do in Ukraine.
It would go in and kill every surface-to-air missile threat that was out there, and neutralize all the threats on the ground, and achieve air dominance because it would kill all the air-to-air assets also. Remember: we see them, they don’t see us. It’s like playing football, when one team’s invisible, and the other team is not….
Background photos: rightmost potato from: Potato var. Linda HC1 and F-35 at Edwards
The 4th generation F-35 has a radar cross section of 0.005 square meters or about 7 cm by 7 cm, 2.8 inches by 2.8 inches similar to a large potato. It's like trying to detect supersonic potatoes in flight. The Mig-29 has a cross section of 3 square meters so about the size of a normal door. The F-16c is between the two, 1.2, smaller than a door.
Figures from here: Radar Cross Section (RCS)
Right now Ukrainian soldiers have control of Sudzha, a Russian city in Kurk oblast near the Ukrainian border which they seized in order to stop Russia from invading Ukraine across the Sumy border. Russia has been trying to push the Ukrainians out of Kursk oblast since August with no success.
Ukraine has been hitting targets in Russia over 1000 miles from Ukraine and even as far as the Arctic circle wiht slow propellor driven drones that travel about the speed of a fast car. Russia can't shoot these down, because a lot of its air defences are all clustered in Ukraine now.
Russia has removed most of its soldiers from the border with NATO along Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to fight in the war. There is little there now except police patrols.
There isn't even one modern tank left in Moscow. Russia moved them all into Ukraine and lost many of the tanks of the tank army they had to protect Moscow.
Russia is so short of soldiers they have recruited soldiers from Norht Korea who are not used to Russian weapons, don't speak Russian and need translators and who are not loyal to Putin, only loyal to Kim Jong Un.
If Putin wanted to attack Finland on the ground, say, he would have to get more soldiers from North Korea to do it for him as he hasn't got enough soldiers for the Ukraine war.
Putin can't win a war with nukes, nobody has ever been able to do that, the nukes aren't nearly powerful enough for that.
NATO has the capability to sink all the ships in ther Black Sea with their tomahawk cruise missiles whichthey use against the Houthi rebels in Yemen. We now know that Russia's air defences can't stop cruise missiles like that. Ukraine has already sunk 1/3 of the Black Sea fleet.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC - A “no navy” country Ukraine sunk the flagship of the Russian fleet, the Moskva, in 2022 with two sea skimming Neptune drones. From then on Russia’s Black Sea Fleet was pretty much out of the war - they never ventured near the Ukrainian shores and then were forced out of Crimea as well in 2023.
I don’t think many in the West realize quite how devastating it would be to Putin to lose his Black Sea fleet. This is why Ukraine sees the Tomahawk cruise missiles as a big lever it could use in negotiations with Putin.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
Russia’s Black Sea Fleet is of huge national pride to the Russians. Ukraine has already sunk its flagship and a third of its ships with the ATACMS, stormshadows and its own native Neptune but most have retreated out of reach to the far side of the Black Sea.
If Ukaine had the Tomahawk cruise missile it could sink the entire fleet - gone from the Black Sea for the first time since it began in 1783
A major lever for negotiations with Russia from a position of strength.
Black Sea Fleet - just before the start of the Crimean war of 1853-6
Graphic: Ivan Aivazovsky. Black Sea Fleet in the Bay of Theodosia, Crimea, just before the Crimean War
They would have control over the Russian air space by the next day with their F-35s. The objective of almost the entire world, China and India included would be to make sure Russia never uses its nukes again. There is no way that China or India could endorse Russia if it used a nuke in response to Ukrainians attacking military targets in Russia with US-supplied weapons.
It also has numerous drones of different models even modified microlights which can travel for hours across Russia and hit targets 1000 miles away under autopilot and dropping small explosives, for some reason the Russian air defences can’t seem to stop microlights.
This is about how Ukraine is using modified microlights as long range attack drones. Ukraine appears to deploy modified A-22 ultralights as suicide UAVs
TEXT ON GRAPHIC: Russia's air defences are so degraded that Ukraine is able to fly microlights through them without getting shot down.
Replace pilot and passenger by explosives and remote control, and you have a drone that can evade the Russian air defences and bomb a Russian oil refinery 1000s of kilometres from Ukaraine.
Yet Russia claims FALSELY it can "escalate" and win a war against not just Ukraine but NATO as well. Just bluffs and bulls**t.
Graphic shows the A-22 microlight - a small Ukrainian civilian microlight plane with just enough payload for the pilot plus one passenger. Aeroprakt A-22 Foxbat . Replace pilot and passenger by explosives and remote control and you have a drone that can evade the Russian air defences and head off and bomb a refinery deep in Russia.
He has always been very slow to respond to surprises in the war because of his need for 100% certainty. He is a spy not a military man, not a man of action. It took him 2 months to work out how to respond to the ukrainians after they took Sudzha in Kursk oblast which is partly why they got so entrenched there.
It is impossible that Putin would assess that he has a 100% risk free way of defeating NATO.
Instead he would assess his chances as 0% and near certainty that his people would no longer support him if he did something as stupid as to use nukes - and then lose his entire Black Sea fleet and they have F-35 fighter jets patroling the Russian air space to prevent them launching any more nukes.
He would likely be killed in a coup or imprisoned and delivered to the International Criminal Court after something like that as the only way to rehabilitate Russia to the rest of the world.
He is NOT going to do this.
See also my
Putin won’t do anything as he is very risk averse
Putin only invaded Ukraine because he thought he had a 100% risk free plan to take over Kyiv in 3 days and all of Ukraine in 2 weeks.
As an example we now know that NATO could easily sink Russia's entire Black Sea Fleet in a few hours. with a few dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from as far away as the Mediterranean. More on that below.
This is real life, not a movie. This is to help you understand that they are real people. Though they are ruthless and seem not to care much about the lives of their soldiers, they are very risk-averse themselves.
This is how the Institute for the Study of War puts it:
TWEET “Putin is a very risk averse individual. He is extremely calculated, and he oftentimes really prefers not to make urgent, rash political decisions that would specifically impact the health of his regime,” said ISW’s Russia deputy team lead @ KatStepanenko
You can see it in his concern for personal health too
.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
Putin is VERY RISK AVERSE.
- this may be an example
- during the COVID pandemic he used extreme distancing with some world leaders
- at the time the recommendation was 2 meters
Although Putin often orders his soldiers to take great risks
he takes an extraordinary level of care over his own
safety and those he cares about.
When Putin ordered the invsion of Ukraine he believed FALSELY he had a risk free way to take over Kyiv in 3 days and all of Ukraine in 2 weeks.
Background graphic: Putin and Macron meeting on February 7, 2022
See Vladmir Putin’s meeting table - Wikipedia
Putin has grandchildren and a girlfriend. He wouldn't want his children and grandchildren to grow up in a devastated world
.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC:
Putin wants a good future for himself, his children and grandchildren
Putin's generals want a good future too. Nobody wants a world war.
Putin wouldn't want his children and grandchildren to grow up in a devastated world.
For more on this see my:
So given that Putin is so risk averse - why did he attack Ukraine? Because he thought it was ZERO RISK.
He was so sure of his plan he never told his generals about it in advance.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
Putin is "A VERY RISK AVERSE INDIVIDUAL" (ISW).
So why did he invade Ukraine? He thought it was ZERO RISK.
He planned to
- take Hostomel airport on day 1.
- land tanks and take over Kyiv government next day.
- take over Ukraine in 2 weeks.
Then this happened.Debris from destroyed Russian helicopters
Putin had no plan B.Putin was so sure of this plan devised by spied he kept it secret
There is NO WAY Putin could think using nukes is ZERO RISK no matter what his spies say.
Photo of the damaged airport from: Occupiers fail to secure their foothold in the attack on Kyiv
See:
There is NO WAY that Putin could think that using a nuke would be risk free. It doesn’t matter what the spies might tell him he is not going to believe that.
So he won’t do it.
Indeed he would have to lose his ability to reason to use nukes against NATO.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC:
Is this is my general?
Is this a flowerpot?
This is how insane Putin would have to be to actually use nukes.
His generals would need to be deluded in the same way, not able to reason coherently or distinguish imagination from reality.
Putin knows what nukes are.
Flowerpot from: "Meillandine" Rose in clay pot
General Valery Gerasimov from: Valery Gerasimov official photo
See:
He is capable of coherent rational thought and understands that nobody can win in a nuclear war.
He has nukes as a deterrent
How nuclear deterrents work. One of Queen Elizabeth’s bodyguards. His job was to keep her safe. NOT to go around starting fights with people around her, which would make her very unsafe A nuclear deterrent is like a bodyguard He kept her safe by just standing there and doing nothing, alert to any trouble
Photo by Irish321 on Wikimedia commons. I can’t find the original photo as the url doesn’t seem to work but they are credited here: How The Queen left a Head of State lost for words as By Irish321 at English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0, User talk:MisterProper - Wikimedia CommonsArrows added by Business Insider Professional bodyguards reveal how to stay safe while traveling
. How nuclear deterrents work - like a bodyguard - their job is to prevent fights
As for NATO leaders, then to use a nuke in peace time goes against the law of armed conduct and would be a major war crime. A US general who received such an order from the president would be required to refuse the order and have no hesitation in doing so.
For more on all this see my draft here:
Special note for anyone who is helping scared people with fact-checking right now.
Debunkers please be patient with scared people.
Please especially at this time do NOT attack them for being scared and listen to their concerns and debunk patiently - as our more vulnerable members navigate this difficult time for them. If you can't do that please leave it to others who can reply with sympathy and empathy.
From things people have said to me in private messages and from some of the posts in our Doomday Debunked group, I think it is near certain that some people who don't have access to our fact-checking help sadly have committed suicide based on this totally FALSE clickbait that is everywhere right now.
If you are suicidal get help and if you know someone suicidal then do talk to them and help them
Professionals say that if anyone is suicidal, anyone else can help them as, for instance, friends or family would help someone who is suicidal. Above all they need someone to talk to, who will listen to them.
Tell them about the various forms of help available - psychologists, suicide help lines - and that in an emergency if they feel suicidal they can go to the nearest emergency room at a hospital and they have a duty to protect you.
It IS okay to let them talk about their suicidal thoughts - this doesn't make them more likely to kill themselves.
Reminder to anyone seriously suicidal:
If you are seriously suicidal do get help! We are here to help you as best we can, in the way friends are advised to do to help someone suicidal - but there is no way we are any substitute for professional help.
Here are some thoughts that help some people who are suicidal - I shared a list of thoughts like this and asked suicidal members which they found most useful.
- Suicide is for ever - your entire future.
- It doesn't solve anything, it only makes things worse for the people you leave behind.
- Soon, this will all be a memory.
Also if you feel you are at risk of taking your own life, this is as much of a medical emergency as a heart attack and you can go to your nearest emergency response room and ask to be helped and they are obligated to help you, assess your situation. If you are at high risk you get monitored and get emergency treatment usually for a few days until the suicidal thoughts reduce enough so that you are safe again.
This is an article I did to help suicidal members and members supporting other members who feel suicidal or say they are going to commit suicide, based on summarizing some of the professional advice on what to do.