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

[CrusaderFrank]

Now that has to be obvious 'confidence' instilling propaganda!

Everybody should be questioning why they feel it's necessary!

That doesn't make much sense, but of course it's not meant to do anything other than disrupt the rational part of the conversation.

Go back to sleep

 

[Rigby5]

I'm not confident that Russia can be successful in the Ukraine. Russia is fighting a superior combined force. And that's why I insist that the rubber will most likely have to hit the road with a nuclear response.

The war is absolutely critical to America in that it's meant to eliminate Russia in alliance with China. This is America's first step in taking on China for world supremacy.

I think Russia can easily prevail in the Ukraine, by cutting off weapons supplies.
And if necessary, oil, food, etc.
That would require the Black Sea fleet however, and that is why the US will then have to attack the Black Sea fleet, in order keep supply lines open to the Ukraine.

 

[Baron]

Who's Schwab?

Russia has the capability of taking out an American aircraft carrier without blinking an eye.

Schwab is boss of Biden, Putin, Scholz and almost anyone who claims to be a president.
Before your empty babbling show how Putin can stop bombing of Russia

 

[Donald H]

The US is also interested in other modern Russian recent advances, like anti tank and aircraft missiles, tanks like the Armada, etc., which the US has still never seen in operation. And Russia will only commit to these latest weapons if they are losing badly enough on the older weapons they are using now.
So the US is committing a huge risk of nuclear war, just to gain some intelligence data.

I'll bow to your greater military knowledge.
Essentially, I've known at least that Russia is holding superior weapons technology.

But certainly not to the degree of cancelling out the MAD threat to Russia. Just that America is eliminated 10 to 15 minutes early.

 

[Rigby5]

Who's Schwab?

Russia has the capability of taking out an American aircraft carrier without blinking an eye. America is very aware of what it would take for Russia to make a big move of that sort.

Screw the 'confidence' instilling propaganda, it's time to face up to the realities that are developing.

{... Schwab - slang. n. one who finds satisfaction in spoiling the fun of others with no clear motive; an extremely uncool person. ...}

 

[Donald H]

I think Russia can easily prevail in the Ukraine, by cutting off weapons supplies.
And if necessary, oil, food, etc.
That would require the Black Sea fleet however, and that is why the US will then have to attack the Black Sea fleet, in order keep supply lines open to the Ukraine.

For me there are too many wild cards to consider.

But the one big factor is America's insistence of not losing the war. IMHO, this is the culmination of all America's wars.

Our opponents here in this discussion understand that.

 

[Donald H]

Before your empty babbling show how Putin can stop bombing of Russia

Putin can stop the bombing of Russia. And vice versa on America of course.

We can get down to the short strokes whenever you folks choose to talk about it.

 

[Rigby5]

Schwab is boss of Biden, Putin, Scholz and almost anyone who claims to be a president.
Before your empty babbling show how Putin can stop bombing of Russia

Obviously Putin can not stop Russia from being bombed if it gets to nukes.
But since Russia has a 10 to 1 superiority in nukes, and also is fairly nuke proof in its decentralized planning, then Russia would survive a nuclear war, while the US would not.
The US would lose all of its microprocessor controlled equipment, like all cellphones, computers, cars, robotics, traffic lights, power generating, etc.
In contrast, Russia resisted going to the smaller die size for chips, so is fairly immune to EMF pulses of nuclear weapons.

 

[Donald H]

{... Schwab - slang. n. one who finds satisfaction in spoiling the fun of others with no clear motive; an extremely uncool person. ...}

Thanks Rigby! Never heard of the guy.

 

[ESay]

The significant treaties are between the Ukraine and Russia, from when Gorbachev granted the Ukraine independence

What are you babbling about, idiot? It was not Gorbachev who granted independence to anyone. The Soviet Union ceased to exist on 8 December 1991 when Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich in Belovezhskaja Puscha signed an agreement that respectively Russia, Ukraine and Belarus leave the Soviet Union and form the Commonwealth of Sovereign States.

 

[Rigby5]

I'll bow to your greater military knowledge.
Essentially, I've known at least that Russia is holding superior weapons technology.

But certainly not to the degree of cancelling out the MAD threat to Russia. Just that America is eliminated 10 to 15 minutes early.

Oh I do not know enough to be able to tell how well Russia could survive MAD.
The point is simply they have no choice.
If the only options are MAD now vs MAD after the Ukraine has close range NATO nukes pointed at Russia, then clearly MAD now is the better option.

 

[Rigby5]

For me there are too many wild cards to consider.

But the one big factor is America's insistence of not losing the war. IMHO, this is the culmination of all America's wars.

Our opponents here in this discussion understand that.

But the US usually loses most wars, because the US takes the wrong side.
Like the Moro Rebellion in the Philippines.
We won for 90 years, but the Filipinos hated us for the backstabbing, and eventually kicked us out.
Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., are other examples.

Ukrainians do not like the US at all, but simply hate Russians and are using us.
We are not gaining anything by helping Kyiv steal oil and murder ethnic Russians.
We are even more multi ethnic than Russia, so Kyiv would like to destroy us as well.

 

[Rigby5]

Putin can stop the bombing of Russia. And vice versa on America of course.

We can get down to the short strokes whenever you folks choose to talk about it.

Putin has nothing to do with it.
It is totally up to the US.
We either stop arming the Ukraine, or the missiles will have to be launched.

 

[Donald H]

Putin has nothing to do with it.
It is totally up to the US.
We either stop arming the Ukraine, or the missiles will have to be launched.

And it's not Putin's, it's Russia's resolve.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I'm not confident that Russia can be successful in the Ukraine. Russia is fighting a superior combined force. And that's why I insist that the rubber will most likely have to hit the road with a nuclear response.

The war is absolutely critical to America in that it's meant to eliminate Russia in alliance with China. This is America's first step in taking on China for world supremacy.

There is no rational basis for thinking Russia will start a nuclear war with the West and using small battlefield nukes in Ukraine would not end the war in Russia's favor.

Russia is a very small player, or perhaps no player at all, in the issues in contention between the US and China. As long as Russia stays within its borders, the US has no important interests at stake with Russia.

 

[whoisit]

Sounds like typical planning to me. It would be prudent to make many kinds of contingency plans since were are fighting another proxy war with Russia that could very well escalate to a full WWIII complete with nukes.
Apparently, they feel taking out their Black Sea Fleet is a nice consolation prize as the world is torn apart by nukes & most of the population is dead.
Our meat puppet UNiparty leaders will get us into an actual shooting war with Russia before long

Guess the destruction of America isn't coming along fast enough for them.

 

[Donald H]

There is no rational basis for thinking Russia will start a nuclear war with the West and using small battlefield nukes in Ukraine would not end the war in Russia's favor.

The complete annihilation of every Ukrainian won't end the war. Not even nuclear contamination of the whole country.

Russia is a very small player, or perhaps no player at all, in the issues in contention between the US and China. As long as Russia stays within its borders, the US has no important interests at stake with Russia.

I believe that Russia will stay within its borders and has never intended to not since the fall of the Soviet Union and even before.

Neither does China. The US will be taken down from world supremacy by relatively peaceful economic means.

Russia, sans nuclear weapons is a small player as compared to the US as a military opponent.

Russia is huge when world resources are the consideration, and of course that which motivates America's aggression.

China, Russia, Brazil, India, and the Brics are the world's future IMO.

Let's leave the armchair war to the kids o.k?

 

[Rigby5]

What are you babbling about, idiot? It was not Gorbachev who granted independence to anyone. The Soviet Union ceased to exist on 8 December 1991 when Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich in Belovezhskaja Puscha signed an agreement that respectively Russia, Ukraine and Belarus leave the Soviet Union and form the Commonwealth of Sovereign States.

Wrong.
Yeltsin was the president of Russia, and since he had no power at all in the Soviet Union, then had NOTHING at all to do with the liberation of the Ukraine.
That was done totally and completely by Gorbachev.
No Soviet state could leave the USSR without the permission of Gorbachev.
And the main criteria was that no state was allowed to leave unless they agreed to NEVER join an alliance hostile to Russia.
The Belavezha Accords were unilateral and illegal.
Yeltsin met with Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk and Belarusian President Stanislav Shushkevich, and they had no authority to do anything.

 

[para bellum]

If the only options are MAD now vs MAD after the Ukraine has close range NATO nukes pointed at Russia, then clearly MAD now is the better option.

The saving grace of MAD is that the people who are actually responsible know this is nonsense. MAD just means MAD. No one wins.

It's the P5 that have the most to lose if the nuclear taboo is broken. It would assure nuclear proliferation and take away MAD. This has been tested, and in every case the P5 nation chooses to lose the small war and preserve the nuclear taboo.

 

[ESay]

Wrong.
Yeltsin was the president of Russia, and since he had no power at all in the Soviet Union, then had NOTHING at all to do with the liberation of the Ukraine.
That was done totally and completely by Gorbachev.
No Soviet state could leave the USSR without the permission of Gorbachev.
And the main criteria was that no state was allowed to leave unless they agreed to NEVER join an alliance hostile to Russia.
The Belavezha Accords were unilateral and illegal.
Yeltsin met with Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk and Belarusian President Stanislav Shushkevich, and they had no authority to do anything.

I repeat it again, because you are obviously slow. Gorbachev didn't give any permission to anyone. The Soviet Union broke apart. And Gorbachev later in December admitted this fact and formally left the post of the president of the USSR.

Read some history books and stop embarrass yourself.