Posted on 05/27/2023 9:03:50 AM PDT by marcusmaximus
Why would you be so unbalanced that you call someone who wants to defend a country a “warmonger”?
That’s about right. Between Obama and Biden it’s quite a record of alienating friends and emboldening ememies.
Obama sucks. Biden is Jimmy Carter on steroids.
How many wars are you claiming that the United States and Russia have been in against each other?And how did the rest of the world miss them?
The totality of what I said in #37, to which you make believe you respond, was:
I bring your attention to the following Legal Sidebar by the U.S. Congressional Research Service.
All the rest is a quote from a report by the United States Congressional Research Service consisting of a Legal Sidebar entitled, "Sources and Requirements of the Law of Neutrality."
Apparently you have some problem with the Report of the U.S. Government, but you seem incapable of stating what your problem is.
Only the United States government can put the United States in a state of war. It requires an overt act by the U.S. government.
The precise dates, and the precise events, of the start and end of the civil war was addressed by the United States Supreme Court in the case of The Protector, 79 U.S. 700 (1870).
The question, in the present case is, when did the rebellion begin and end? In other words, what space of time must be considered as excepted from the operation of the statute of limitations by the war of the rebellion?[...]
It is necessary, therefore, to refer to some public act of the political departments of the government to fix the dates, and, for obvious reasons, those of the executive department which may be and in fact was, at the commencement of hostilities, obliged to act during the recess of Congress, must be taken.
The proclamation of intended blockade by the President may therefore be assumed as marking the first of these dates, and the proclamation that the war had closed as marking the second. But the war did not begin or close at the same time in all the states. There were two proclamations of intended blockade: the first of the 19th of April, 1861, embracing the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas; the second of the 27th of April, 1861, embracing the States of Virginia and North Carolina; and there were two proclamations declaring that the war had closed, one issued on the 2d of April, 1866, embracing the States of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, and Arkansas, and the other issued on the 20th of August, 1866, embracing the State of Texas.
How many times do you remember the United States government committing an overt act to place itself in a state of war with Russia?
Just because Country A commits some act that Country B can properly consider to be an act of war does not create a state of war. For various reasons, Country B may choose not to engage in a nuclear war over an act not worthy of ending civilization as we know it.
Moscow provided both North Korea and North Vietnam with large amounts of weapons and all that was top of the line too not this current slow drip of older weapons that Ukraine is getting.In addition there were Soviet pilots flying their Migs in Korea and Soviet specialists operating air defense in Vietnam.
Citing trivia is not making a legal point.
Your apparent position is that if you can cite another party as having violated a law, when you violate the law, it is legal.
The United States bombed the former Yugoslavia. Permission to commit any act of aggression against Yugoslavia was not granted by the UN Security Council. What act of aggression had been committed against the United States? What treaty mandated that the United States come to the aid of anyone involved? Who or what authorized the United States to legally drop bombs on the former Yugoslvia? What does it have to do with the International Law of Neutrality and Ukraine?
This sort of information may be cited all day long and it cannot change that the principle of neutrality is of fundamental character and applies in all international armed conflicts. You just do not like what it says.
Also, you may not like that international law does not prohibit the use of nuclear weapons when a nation faces an existential threat.
Should we have a nuclear war between the world's nuclear powers, nobody wins, everybody loses.
Ukraine is not our ally. They are anti-constitutional deep state’s corrupt playground. Stealing money, drugs and little kids from Ukraine by our DS does not make it our ally. Maybe you want some of it but not me.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12040
Congressional Research Service
U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine
Updated February 27, 2023
Excerpt at page 1:
Provision of Defense EquipmentAfter Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014, the Obama Administration provided Ukraine nonlethal security assistance, including body armor, helmets, vehicles, night and thermal vision devices, heavy engineering equipment, advanced radios, patrol boats, rations, tents, counter-mortar radars, uniforms, medical kits, and other related items. In 2017, the Trump Administration announced U.S. readiness to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine.
According to DOD, USAI packages prior to FY2022 provided sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, counter-artillery radars, Mark VI patrol boats, electronic warfare detection and secure communications, satellite imagery and analysis capability, counter-unmanned aerial systems (UAS), air surveillance systems, night vision devices, and equipment to support military medical treatment and combat evacuation procedures.
You and he want to get the USA into WWIII to protect the corrupt Democrat cancer on the USA that is ukraine. Crowdstrike, The Vindmans, Russia-gate, Hunter Biden - its a giant offshore money-laundering operation.
Let's hope that cancer gets excised soon.
So of course you compounded your bad behavior by saying we want to bring about world War 3.
That is absolutely preposterous.
Now, you could argue that you believe world War 3 is going to result from certain policy mistakes. But obviously we don’t “want” World War 3.
Why do the people who hate Ukraine always make emotional left wing accusations against anyone who disagrees with them?
Wars are caused by weakness, and if we have a new world War it will happen because of our weakness.
Just like the current Ukraine war resulted from Biden’s weakness.
In this case, war is caused by arrogance, combined with stupidity.
He warned us not to follow the Bolsheviks of 1920, he warned us about the Boston bombers, he offered us giant water bombers for forest fires out west, he was the first world leader after 9/11 to call Bush. And he didn’t just offer condolences, he gave us free use of former Soviet airbases… no lease, just land and get to work. He gave us use of Russian rail to supply the effort when Pakistan screwed us. He offered to send church restoration experts to rebuild Notre Dame. He rebuilt churches and shrines that our Isis and Syrian rebels blew up.
He offered many hands of friendship.
Ukraine is not a treaty ally, but they did send troops to Iraq so they are at least a friendly country.
Yeah Vlad is the best friend a nation ever had.
Except for being a psychopathic murderer liar who helped Iran build a nuclear weapon, propped up Assad, flattened his neighbors, constantly threatens the West with nuclear attack, invaded Ukraine, harasses our military, joined a military alliance against us, kills people in the West, turned Russia into a dictatorship...
But yeah he tried to be our best buddy we’re just so aggressive he HAD to invade Ukraine. Not.
“our ISIS rebels” yeah, ok.
And you do know your list is absolute bs that every country offers another for publicity, often with no likelihood of being accepted.
Like yeah, Russia was going to rebuild Notre Dame. Sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.