U.S. Planning to Sink Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

[Concerned American]

America shalt not become directly involved in hostilities against Russia.
and
Russia shalt not become directly involved in hostilities against America.

And that should pretty well cover the answer to the question.

It is amazing what a hypocrite you are duck. You keep trying to make this Russia/Ukraine an American thing and while it is common knowledge that the US is providing financing and materiel to the Ukrainians, they have sent no personnel. Canada, however, cannot say that as they are part of the NATO force that IS in Ukraine. Try again, commie.

Canadian special forces operating in Ukraine, New York Times reports

A report published Saturday noted a few dozen commandos from NATO countries, including Canada, had been working inside Ukraine.

ottawacitizen.com

 

[Donald H]

Every fight the US has been in since WW2 was against Russian weapons.

Yes!
And implied to be America against Russia!
I think we've reached agreement on the fact that it's the Ukraine this time that is the US proxy in America's war.

But I would like you to start thinking in terms of this being different in that it's not a US proxy against a Russian proxy.

It's a US proxy directly against Russia.

That makes the conflict completely differing from America's history of wars since the end of WW2.

 

[Donald H]

However, these are not mutually agreed upon rules as you claimed but individually determined policies presently being followed just as there were no mutually agreed upon rules not to attack each other when the USSR provided weapons to North Korea to be used against the US or when the USSR provided weapons to the North Vietnamese to be used against the US. Nor were there any mutually agreed upon rules not to attack each other when the US provided weapons to the Afghanis to be used against the USSR. In all of these cases and in Ukraine, there were no mutually agreed not to attack each other but simply individually determined policies to avoid a direct conflict between the US and Russia/USSR.

(my bolding)
I interpret that as making my point for me in a slightly different way. Or at least I can say that is my point!
n.b., not the USSR of course.

 

[toomuchtime_]

(my bolding)
I interpret that as making my point for me in a slightly different way. Or at least I can say that is my point!

Certainly, you can say it, but it wouldn't be true. Your claim that there are mutually agreed upon rules the US and Russia are following is intended to support the fiction you are touting that this is a war between the US and Russia, but this is a war of Russian imperialist aggression, as Putin has acknowledged in his Peter the Great speech, and the US and other countries are merely providing military aid to Ukraine to fight off the Russian aggression and the only two parties to this Russian war of imperialist aggression are Russia and Ukraine.

 

[para bellum]

I think we've reached agreement

If you happen to agree with something I post, it is purely coincidental. I do not seek agreement with you. It's not something I care about.

The irony of it all is how badly this has backfired on Putin in the strategic sense. NATO was weaker with a strong US President, and his calculus was backwards. He thought a weak US President would weaken NATO, the effect was the exact opposite. He gave NATO it's mission back.

So not only has he exposed to the world that his conventional army is an empty shell, and turned Russia into a client state of China, he has isolated her from the very International institutions he has been begging to join for the past 20 years and doubled his border with NATO in the process.

 

[Donald H]

Your claim that there are mutually agreed upon rules the US and Russia are following is intended to support the fiction you are touting that this is a war between the US and Russia,..................

You've just conceded that point my friend.
But I don't see how you are trying to link that to my position of the US using a proxy country to fight Russia.

You're right about all of America's wars being proxy wars of intent to oppose Russia but you're not addressing the distinction in this war that make it so different.

{b]Russia has no proxy country.[/b]

 

[Donald H]

If you happen to agree with something I post, it is purely coincidental. I do not seek agreement with you. It's not something I care about.

You're being petulant.

The irony of it all is how badly this has backfired on Putin in the strategic sense. NATO was weaker with a strong US President, and his calculus was backwards. He thought a weak US President would weaken NATO, the effect was the exact opposite. He gave NATO it's mission back.

It may have backfired on Putin (Russia) but I don't really think it has. The notion has been reinforced by a US barrage of propaganda that hasn't panned out to be true.

So not only has he exposed to the world that his conventional army is an empty shell, and turned Russia into a client state of China, he has isolated her from the very International institutions he has been begging to join for the past 20 years and doubled his border with NATO in the process.

Your point on being a client state for China needs some explanation.

In fact, Russia hasn't mobilized its army yet and is still playing war within the boundaries agreed upon.
Did you think that either the US or Russia doesn't have the capability to stick a big one down the enemy's throat with impunity?

As in the Pentagon or Red Square?

 

[toomuchtime_]

You've just conceded that point my friend.
But I don't see how you are trying to link that to my position of the US using a proxy country to fight Russia.

You're right about all of America's wars being proxy wars of intent to oppose Russia but you're not addressing the distinction in this war that make it so different.

{b]Russia has no proxy country.[/b]

Your position that this is a war between Russia and the US is a complete fiction just as your claim in your OP that the US is planning a direct attack on Russian ships in the Black Sea is. NATO's purpose has always been to prevent the westward expansion of the Russian/USSR empire and with Putin's imperialist aggression against Ukraine, he has validated and strengthened NATO as never before.

 

[para bellum]

You're being petulant.

No, I am telling you not to put words into my mouth. We do not agree, and I am not seeking agreement with you.

Your point on being a client state for China needs some explanation.

I have already wasted far more pixels on you than you deserve.

Ref Iran's reduction by 10% it's price for oil to China. Use your head. Putin bows to Xi now. Xi snubbed him last month on his invitation to visit Moscow. "Covid, ya know?"

 

[Rigby5]

Have you been into the Molson Canadian today?

America isn't directly at war with Russia.

Supplying a belligerents with weapons IS an ACT OF WAR.
So technically the US already is guilty of illegal acts of war against Russia.

 

[Donald H]

No, I am telling you not to put words into my mouth. We do not agree, and I am not seeking agreement with you.

I have already wasted far more pixels on you than you deserve.

Ref Iran's reduction by 10% it's price for oil to China. Use your head. Putin bows to Xi now. Xi snubbed him last month on his invitation to visit Moscow. "Covid, ya know?"

A polite discussion is required. Start becoming an arrogant American pr--k then you're off my radar.

 

[para bellum]

Supplying a belligerents with weapons IS an ACT OF WAR.

Flat out false.

 

[Rigby5]

It is amazing what a hypocrite you are duck. You keep trying to make this Russia/Ukraine an American thing and while it is common knowledge that the US is providing financing and materiel to the Ukrainians, they have sent no personnel. Canada, however, cannot say that as they are part of the NATO force that IS in Ukraine. Try again, commie.

Canadian special forces operating in Ukraine, New York Times reports

A report published Saturday noted a few dozen commandos from NATO countries, including Canada, had been working inside Ukraine.

ottawacitizen.com

I disagree.
The Ukraine is using only US weapons, and the US is illegally giving billion in these weapons, so then the US IS AT WAR with Russia.
And in fact, the US illegally bribed and conspired to take over the Ukraine since 2006, and did take over the Ukraine with the 2014 military coup.
The US does have personnel in the Ukraine illegally training for and using US weapons.
It is also illegal for NATO forces to be in the Ukraine, since the Ukraine is not a NATO member, and the Ukraine signed treaties to never have any ties with NATO, in 1992.

 

[para bellum]

A polite discussion is required. Start becoming an arrogant American pr--k then you're off my radar.

I'm not on your radar dickhead, you're on mine.

I got your range and bearing, my course is steady.

 

[Rigby5]

Flat out false.

Go read the UN charter the US ratified in 1945.
It is illegal to engage in the use of force and to supply weapons to those who are engaged in an armed conflict.
The Ukraine violated their treaties with Russia by stealing oil, murdering ethnic Russians, and trying to join NATO.
It is the Ukraine that is guilty, so then the US is complicit by supplying them with weapons, illegally.

It is also foolish, because since Russia can NEVER allow the Ukraine to join NATO, all the US is doing is risking a nuclear attack, for no reason.
The US can not save the Ukraine any more.
The Ukraine crossed the line and there is no turning back, except surrender.

 

[Donald H]

Your position that this is a war between Russia and the US is a complete fiction just as your claim in your OP that the US is planning a direct attack on Russian ships in the Black Sea is.

My OP was meant to serve the purpose of promoting a fuller discussion on the war and it was chosen for it's obviously being an attractive expression of America's ability to win the war against Russia quickly and easily.
I found an appropriate link that serves my purpose. Whether it's true or not is of little concern to me, as it relates to this thread.

But of course is implies a full scale nuclear war is possible/probable.

 

[Rigby5]

No, I am telling you not to put words into my mouth. We do not agree, and I am not seeking agreement with you.

I have already wasted far more pixels on you than you deserve.

Ref Iran's reduction by 10% it's price for oil to China. Use your head. Putin bows to Xi now. Xi snubbed him last month on his invitation to visit Moscow. "Covid, ya know?"

India, China, Turkey, and Germany are buying all the oil Russia wants to sell.

 

[Rigby5]

Your position that this is a war between Russia and the US is a complete fiction just as your claim in your OP that the US is planning a direct attack on Russian ships in the Black Sea is. NATO's purpose has always been to prevent the westward expansion of the Russian/USSR empire and with Putin's imperialist aggression against Ukraine, he has validated and strengthened NATO as never before.

That is silly because Russia is the least "imperialist aggressor" in the world.
When they helped China, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, etc., they got NOTHING out of it.
Russia has never been a colonial imperialist, like all the NATO countries obviously have been.
NATO is not at all a "defensive" organization, but a conspiracy of colonial imperialists.
France, England, and the US have the worst history of gobal aggression, slavery, illegal conquest, etc.

If it is not obvious why NATO is the "bad guys", just go back to how the Allies started WWI by assassination and invasion, and started WWII by illegal confiscations of German holdings with the Treaty of Versailles.
The Allies actually won WWI by committing the illegal war crime of economic blockade of civilian food.

 

[Donald H]

India, China, Turkey, and Germany are buying all the oil Russia wants to sell.

And fwiw, America is trying to respond to that with a price cap or more similar sanctions to prevent it from happening.

 

[para bellum]

The Ukraine is using only US weapons, and the US is illegally giving billion in these weapons, so then the US IS AT WAR with Russia.

This war is mostly fought with old Soviet stockpiles. There is some upgraded equipment included, and a tiny smattering of US weapons. A sizeable portion of what the US has supplied isn't even US origin.

And in fact, the US illegally bribed and conspired to take over the Ukraine since 2006, and did take over the Ukraine with the 2014 military coup.

No, the Obama administration ran a color revolution in 2014, there was no military action from the US.

That administration was defeated by a landslide in 2019.

The US does have personnel in the Ukraine illegally training for and using US weapons.
It is also illegal for NATO forces to be in the Ukraine, since the Ukraine is not a NATO member, and the Ukraine signed treaties to never have any ties with NATO, in 1992.

It is not illegal for the US, or any other NATO member to go into Ukraine, and train Ukrainian soldiers, or equip them, or fight alongside them against the Russian invasion.

Ukraine signed no such treaty in 1992, and Russia abrogated all prior agreements in February regardless. And all nations have an inviolable right of self-defense no matter what treaties they have signed, and that is recognized in the UN charter.