Judging Freedom - Is the Tide Turning in the Ukraine Russian War - Scott Ritter

Episode Date: March 30, 2023

Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, March 30, 2023. It's about five minutes after three o'clock in the afternoon here on the east coast of the United States. Scott Ritter returns to our camera. Scott, it's always a pleasure. Fan favorite. Everyone appreciates your accommodating us. Let's start with breaking news. Just about 15 minutes ago, Admiral Kirby, you can tell us if this is credible or not, John Kirby, the spokesperson for the White House National Security Council, announced that Russia is so running short on ammunition that it's seeking to buy it or barter it from North Korea. Credible? And if so, what's the significance?

Not credible at all. This is the same trope that Kirby's been peddling for some time now. This isn't the first time he's gone public with this information. He was trying to sell us on the Russia short of ammunition. They're buying it from Korea about a month ago. And they're resurrecting today because let me tell you what's happening right now, Judge. The Ukrainian army is being crushed, destroyed, annihilated in Bakhmut. 80,000 Ukrainian soldiers are either going to be killed, captured, or wounded or dispersed in the very short future. And the United States can't handle the ramifications of this defeat.

So they are trying to create a distraction. And that's what this is, a distraction. Russia doesn't need North Korean ammunition. John Kirby's smoking dope. And he would, you know, this is a man who's gone before the American people repeatedly. Right, right. You recall the tape that we ran in which he predicted that President Xi would suggest a ceasefire and said the United States would reject it for reasons, of course, that are absurd. But Scott, what does the U.S. gain by putting out this propaganda that is almost could be called garbage. It doesn't have any effect on the battlefield. No, what they're looking for, you know, the United States and Ukraine are in desperation mode right now. What they're looking for is sort of a, you know, go back into history when the Red Army was on the verge of capturing Warsaw back in 1921. There was the miracle of

Vistula where the heavens opened up, the winged hussar came down, and they drove the Red Army away. That's what they're looking for today, the modern-day equivalent of the miracle on the Vistula, for the heavens to open up and something to happen. What they want to happen is what they call the Moscow Maidan. They're trying to generate resentment, fear, anxiety inside Russian society so that it will rise up and bring it into this conflict by overthrowing Vladimir Putin. And so they're doing that by belittling Russian defense industry, by belittling the Russian army, by creating a sense of weakness, an impression of weakness. It's a fact of desperation. This is just proof positive that no one in the National Security Council understands the domestic reality in Russia today, where the Russian public has rallied around their leader in a way any American president would be jealous of. an even less believable liar than Admiral Kirby. And that's a former four-star general, now

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Here he is being interrogated by Senator Roger Wicker, who's in a very low, soft-stated way, pointing out that what the secretary is saying is not believable, gives him a chance to correct himself. And well, you'll see what happens. With regard to your optimism about Ukraine having the upper hand, that is what you told me yesterday. It is. Now, what I was about to say, Senator, is that Ukrainians have inflicted significant casualties on the Russians and they have depleted their inventory of armored vehicles in a way that no one would have ever imagined. And so now we see Russia reaching for T-54s and T-55 tanks because of the level of damage that Ukrainians have inflicted on them. Reaching for those tanks demonstrates

what to you, sir? It demonstrates that their capability is waning. We've continued to witness them be challenged with artillery munitions and other things, and they're reaching out to Iran, to North Korea. Do you believe there's a real chance for significant Ukrainian advancements between now and the beginning of winter? I believe there's a chance, and we're doing everything that we can do to ensure that they have their best opportunity to be successful. Has he just disqualified himself from being any kind of a credible military leader or was he disqualified before this nonsense? I'm not going to denigrate anybody who achieves four-star rank. It's. And so, you know, General Austin, that needs to be respected.

But the transition he's made from serving his country on active duty to serving the military-industrial complex, because remember, before he became Secretary of Defense, he was a Raytheon official. His loyalties are no longer with the Army. His loyalties are to the military industrial complex, and his loyalties are to an administration that put him in this position. He's parroting what they are saying to deceive Congress. He's lying through his teeth, straight up lying. And I'm just telling you right now, Lloyd Austin, I'm calling you a liar. If you want to debate me on it anytime anywhere you name it

front of whatever audience you want you're a liar and you know you're lying um but that's okay he works for a president i just want to remind your audience in july of 2021 before kabul fell president joe biden got on the phone with afghan general uh president uh ashraf ghani and told him to lie to the Afghan people. The Afghan president was saying, it's falling. Taliban's coming in. Biden said, whoa, whoa, whoa, get on, tell them everything's okay, even if it's not true. Biden's about shaping perception. That's what Austin was trying to do there, shape perception. Reality is ready to come up and bite them in the butt. The reality is that the Ukrainians are losing. The Russians are winning.

There is no shortage of artillery. There is no shortage of tanks. This man is just straight up manufacturing nonsense. What is the significance, if any, long term to the impending Russian victory in Bakhmut? We know it's sort of in a strategic position there, but what happens next? Well, when Ukrainians have 80,000 troops ripped out of their order of battle in a giant hole ripped into their line, it means the collapse of the Iranian defensive position. President Zelensky has warned about this. He says one of the reasons why he's fighting so hard for Bakhmut is that if Bakhmut falls, the Russians will rapidly advance and recapture the totality of the Donbass.

They'll move down, take Zaporizhia, Karasov, consolidate their position in all of the territories that Russia claims as its own. And then most recently he said that then the Ukrainian people will see us as so weak that they will demand that I sit down with the Russians and I negotiate an unacceptable peace treaty to him. Unacceptable means that he has to concede that Russia controls all the territory that Russia claims to his own. That's what's going on here. We're looking at the strategic defeat of Ukraine and with it, the strategic defeat of the United States and NATO. I want the American people to, if you'd allow me, Judge, two quick points. Sure. One, we gave Ukraine $50 billion worth of military equipment. Lloyd Austin's Pentagon has now come back to the United States Congress and said, in order to replace that $50 billion, we need $300 billion. There's something

wrong with that math. Two who mark miley has recently testified the united states congress that when russia wins we're no longer talking about if when russia wins this is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff chiefs of staff when russia wins we are going to have to double our defense budget to offset the russian advantages that will accrue that goes from 880 close to 900 billion dollars which is already way too much 1.8 trillion dollars ladies and gentlemen is what the Pentagon is now saying so when you ask yourself why did we get involved in this war because we've gotten beat on every front and now they're getting ready to destroy us economically by bankrupting us to rebuild a military that didn't need to be diminished the way it was because we went off

and engaged in this irresponsible act of militarism in Ukraine. I want to take you back to the significance of Bakhmut. President Zelensky two days ago gave a rather candid interview on a train with an American journalist. I don't know who she is. I don't recognize her. And they didn't even give us the name of the network for which she works. But he speaks in his English. She speaks in English. Take a listen to what he says about the PR significance, the public relations significance of which side prevails in Bakhmut. Is this part of why you are fighting so hard in Bakhmut? Because a lot of military analysts will say that strategically, it's not that significant because that will be weaker for him he will any victory yes he will

sell this victory he will sell this victory to west to his society to china to iran to all the countries to brazil to latin america countries not to latvia lithuania estonia of course they really understand you know, from details, and they feel this dangerous because they're neighbors. But he will sell it to his society. That was the first step. Now, wait, wait a minute, wait a minute. I will have a decision with Ukraine.

Then another step, another step, another step. Does the Z-Man know what he's talking about? Well, I mean, he's trying to spin it. Herzl, you don't have to sell victory, Zelensky. I mean, if you won every now and then, you know how it was, Mr. Zelensky, when your troops took back Khorasan in Kharkov back in September. There was no selling. People weren't saying, ah, we don't think you really are winning you went there you took your selfie in front of the islam uh statue it was the easiest sales pitch in the world because it was reality based

vladimir putin's about ready to have a reality-based sales pitch called i trust your military and bakhmut and zolinski's panic because he knows that when the russians come out see right now people are still confused they because lloyd austin has surprised the congress about how things are going bad for russia etc so people are confused but when the russians roll through bachmuth when you have 80 000 ukrainian casualties when you have russian tanks advancing there's nothing that can stop them, that's not a sales pitch. That's called winning. Victory sells itself. The only thing he would need to spend is a defeat. I think the Marine Corps is still part of the Navy, isn't it?

They're under the Department of the Navy, yes, sir. Okay, so I'm going to run a clip. This is Nora O'Donnell from CBS News from 60 Minutes interviewing a four-star, Admiral Samuel Paparo. Now we're moving from Ukraine to Taiwan. Admiral Paparo, as you know, you probably know him personally, is, I don't know the rank other than four stars, but he's in charge of the Pacific Fleet. So he's got a humongous sense of responsibility. Here he is. We have a couple of clips. The first one, she asks him about whether he talks to his Chinese counterpart. If the U.S. and Chinese militaries can't communicate over a Chinese spy balloon, then what's going to happen when there's a real crisis in the South China Sea or with Taiwan?

We'll hope that they'll answer the phone. Else, we'll do our very best assessment based on the things that they say in open source and based on their behavior to divine their intentions and will act accordingly. Doesn't that make the situation even more dangerous if U.S. and Chinese militaries are not talking? Yes. Okay, before you give us your views on the substance of what he said, should an active duty four-star with tens of thousands of troops under his command and billions of dollars worth of ships under his command be giving an interview to a national news organization on camera like that?

I respect Admiral Papero enough to say that he didn't do that interview without getting it cleared with this uh with Pentagon first look he is he is the uh combat combatant commander of one of the most important theaters of operations in the United States that's Pacific theater he's this is a big deal he's a big man he has a lot of power a lot of influence um and he knows that he would have been picked for that job if he was somebody who was just bumbling along. He's not the kind of guy that's going to go out and get an interview of this high profile without first clearing it with Pentagon and indeed the White House, the National Security Council. Every message he gave during this presentation was a message that the White House wanted him to impart on the American public and the Chinese. This was an act of diplomacy that took place here. He's sending the signal to the Chinese, communicating basically his unease at the fact that they're not communicating and trying to

let them know that there is some consequences for this failure to communicate. Is it believable that there's no back-channel communications going on between an admiral of this rank and his counterpart in the Chinese Navy? He's in Guam. The interview takes place in Guam, so he's way out there. His headquarters is in Hawaii, actually. Pretty nice headquarters. But so he's just visiting Guam right now. It's not the position of the admiral to have back channel communications. That's beyond his remit. I believe there are back channel communications that are probably made run by William Burns, the CIA director, probably operated out of the National Security Council, maybe from the White House itself, that there are back channel community,

at least attempts to do so. But China's dismissive of the United States altogether. Biden can't get Xi to answer the phone. So if the President of the United States can't get the Chinese leader to answer the phone, don't be surprised that the commander of the Pacific Fleet can't get his counterpart to answer the phone. Hopefully, there's something going on akin to what we saw in the Cuban Missile Crisis where John F. Kennedy had a back channel opened up with Nikita Khrushchev that was kept out of the limelight. The fact that you and I

don't know about it hopefully means that it's happening. It's happening successfully. Here he is discussing his belief that the United States Navy will neutralize the Chinese Navy if the Chinese Navy threatens Taiwan. Is it your hope that the power of the U.S. Navy, the forced posture of the U.S. Navy will deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan? It's not my hope, it's my duty in conjunction with

allies and partners, to deliver intolerable costs to anybody that would upend the order in violation of the nation's security or in violation of the nation's interests. The saying, which is, si pacem para velo, which is, if you want peace, prepare for war. That, of course, goes back to George Washington, who said it in English rather than in Latin, if you want peace to prepare for war. So again, before you analyze exactly what he said, if the President of the United States tells him to attack the Chinese Navy and keep them X miles away from Taiwan, he has no choice but to do that right yes sir that he's a military combatant commander he obeys the lawful orders given to him by the civilian competent civilian authority that even if the orders are absurd and suicidal he has no choice oh no once the order is given you execute he has a duty and responsibility however prior to that order being given make sure that his commanders know that the order is suicidal that he can't carry out the

order uh etc but here's the problem while he may be and hopefully he is communicating this behind the scenes to the pentagon and to the white house to say you guys need to stop writing checks with mouths the fleet can't cash um his duty though is to portray strength that's his duty so that's what he's doing right there and i'll tell you the fact that he's having this conversation right now is proof positive that he's as weak as you can be the strong people don't have to have this kind of posture what is the what is the force balance if I'm using the right word, Scott, between the American Navy and the South China Sea and the Chinese Navy? Remember, we're operating off of what I call legacy force structure. That's what General Berger, the commander of the Marine Corps, called the old Marine amphibious way of doing business.

Legacy, waiting for World War II. The modern weaponry today, standoff missiles don't allow this to happen. The Navy has not adapted. The Navy continues to live around the carrier battle group. You saw on his chest, he's a naval aviator. He's a man who made his career landing and taking off. He is maverick. And so, you know, this is a guy who believed in this legacy structure. And so, you know, he's probably the wrong guy to be in this position right now because he actually probably thinks the carrier battle groups do of power projection in an incredible way. The reality is every single one of his aircraft carriers is going to be visiting J.B. Jones' locker. That means a lot of them will see if we go to war against China. So back to my question, the Chinese Navy is stronger than ours in that part of the world.

I wouldn't say the Chinese Navy. This isn't going to be a Navy on Navy engagement. It's not going to be the modern day manifestation of the Battle of Trafalgar or Coral Sea or Midway. Okay, the Chinese will use missiles to destroy our naval equipment before it gets anywhere near Taiwan. 100%. Here he is again about how prepared, and I guess he has to say this is what you're telling us, but here he is again on how prepared his navy is. So are Chinese warships now operating closer to Taiwan after Nancy Pelosi's visit? Yes.

And if China invades Taiwan, what will the U.S. Navy do? It's a decision of the President of the United States and a decision of the Congress. It's our duty to be ready for that. But the bulk of the United States Navy will be deployed rapidly to the Western Pacific to come to the aid of Taiwan if the order comes to aid Taiwan in thwarting that invasion. Is the U.S. Navy ready? We're ready, yes. I'll never admit to being ready enough. No. Will the U.S. Navy make it to the Western Pacific in light of the air onslaught that will visit be visited upon them? No. But what the admiral is going to find out is what General Cavoli found out in the commander of U.S. forces in Europe. Before General Cavoli, it was Ben Hodges. He was the commander there. Ben Hodges was cocky he said the same he was this version of the admiral we're prepared to do this our duty to

be prepared we're ready for it but he couldn't imagine the open scale of the violence that's taking place you know cavoli's there he's seen it he says we're not ready for what's going on ukraine admiral pro tip if i were your intelligence officer i would tell you the following every single one of your ships is going to be sunk because you cannot imagine the level of violence that's going to be inflicted on your fleet if you try to impose legacy-style operations dating back to the Second World War on a modern threat model. All right, here's the CNO, the chief naval officer, Admiral Mike Gilday, acknowledging that we can't keep up with the Chinese. But he's talking about ships, which may not be an accurate measure because you told us those ships are going to be destroyed by missiles. But it's a couple of questions. It's a Q&A. It's a different environment.

The same questioner, Nora O'Donnell from CBS. Take a listen, Scott. Admiral Mike Gilday at the Pentagon. He is the chief of naval operations and is responsible for building, maintaining and equipping the entire U.S. Navy. Is the Navy in crisis? No, the Navy is not in crisis. The Navy is out on point every single day. Is it being outpaced by China? No. Toshi Yoshihara of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments may know more than any scholar in the West about China's Navy. Why is China able to build more warships more quickly than the U.S.? China has clearly invested in this defense industrial infrastructure to produce these ships, which allows them to produce multiple ships simultaneously, essentially outbuilding many of the Western navies combined. After the Cold War ended, the shipbuilding

industry consolidated, and many of the yards where ships were both built and maintained closed down. What do you see when you see China's shipbuilding program? It's very robust. Do we have enough shipyards? No. I wish that we had more commercial shipyards. Over my career, we've gone from more than 30 shipyards down to about seven that we rely upon on a day-to-day basis to build ships. Shipyards, something we should be concerned about? And is he being truthful? He's being truthful about the shipyards. I should be concerned about and is he being truthful are you being truthful about the shipyards um i'm not going to accuse any admiral of straight up lying um they believe what they believe and in their position sometimes they have to posture and that's a that's you know

you have to exude confidence you're not a leader if you get in front of a camera and you say things that make the men and women under you go wow we, we begin to doubt this. So he has to exude confidence, but he has to be realistic. One thing that Norris should have asked is how many miles his fleets will have to sail to get to Taiwan and what kind of ships that requires to have a blue water navy and how many miles the Chinese have to sail to get to Taiwan. Taiwan's in their backyard, completely different kind of Navy, different kind of ships, et cetera. That's the game changer right there. We have to move forever to get to Taiwan. It's right there in their backyard. They're going to kick our butts.

Is anybody in Joe Biden's orbit, CIA, National Security Council, the Pentagon, even the political people that he's closest to, going to make the argument that you've just made and give him the lesson you've just given us. It doesn't matter how many ships you own or send there. You're sending them to their graves. Look, I'll tell you this. The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Berger,. He had courage, moral courage, and he's transforming the Marine Corps to meet the modern needs. The Navy, on the other hand, can't. Why? Again, look what was on his ship. He's a surface warfare officer. He's made his life in the Navy with the ships. He can't divorce himself from that. Same thing as the pilot, the modern day Maverick.

He can't divorce himself from that. And so as a result, these guys, when they go forward, it's not that they're lying, but they're projecting an artificially enhanced sense of capability that somebody who can step back and evaluate things says, guys, that isn't going to work. You're all going to die. And that's the sad fact. The Navy will be sunk if they try to sail to the assistance of Taiwan. Scott Ritter, so grateful for your comments and for your analysis.

Thank you very much, my dear friend. Thanks for having me on, sir. If you like what you've seen, like and subscribe. More as we get it. Although there's nobody quite like Ritter. More as we get it. Judge there's nobody quite like Ritter. Morris, we get it. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.