Judging Freedom - What is the West Up To in Ukraine? w/Scott Ritter

Episode Date: September 26, 2023

What is the West Up To in Ukraine? w/Scott RitterSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. John DeAndre Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, September 26, 2023. The one and only Scott Ritter returns to our cameras today. Scott, it's a pleasure. Thank you very much for joining us. Thanks for having me. Does the West really think that by its military aid here, its military aid there, its rabid demonization of Russia in general and President Putin in specifics, that it can drive the

Russians to a negotiating table with the Ukrainians? Do they really embrace that view and that strategy? Well, I think we're looking at a West that's sort of schizophrenic on this issue. And what I mean by that is these are people who are playing both to a domestic political audience here at home, and they're also playing to a domestic audience in Russia that doesn't exist, that they wish existed. We have a generation of so-called Russian experts, people like Michael McFaul, Fiona Hill, Angus Stent, and others who know nothing about Russia, the Russian people, the Russian nation, Russian culture. They matured in their beliefs in the 1990s when Russia

was being exploited by the United States, by the West. And so their understanding of Russia is shaped by a weakened Russia, by a Russian people willing, it seemed to do just about anything to go into the good graces of the United States. But Russia has recovered, they move on. And the reason why they did is because of leadership of Vladimir Putin, who is deeply resented by these people. And so when they formulate policies, they formulate policies based upon these misperceptions. And so I think they fooled themselves into believing that they can somehow get the Russian people, Russian businessmen, the same Russian classes that rallied around the West in the 1990s to rally around the West again and put pressure on Putin

like they put pressure on Boris Yeltsin. They're just dead wrong, but that's what they believe. And the other thing is, I think these same people who believe that Vladimir Putin is this vicious, murderous thug dictator is going to win. And therefore, they are putting policies out that play well here at home, so that when defeat does come, they're able to have some political cover to say that, you know, we were the ones looking for peace, we were the ones looking for an off-ramp, etc. So they're deluding themselves here at home, and they're delusional about their analysis of Russia abroad. Is their attitude about Russia today, was it born in the old Soviet Union days at the end of the Soviet Union? Definitely at the end. I mean, look, the old Soviet Union days, we actually feared and respected the Soviets. And so that's one of the reasons why we sat down at the

negotiating table and hammered out treaties that were mutually beneficial, because it was based on mutual respect that was derived from mutual fear. the Soviet Union was on the cusp of absolute failure, Gorbachev began the process of caving into the West, of being weak, showing weakness. And we weren't the friends of the Soviet Union, and we exploited that weakness. And when the Soviet Union collapsed, we continued that attitude with the new Russian Federation under Boris Yeltsin. Do you really think that the Western elites, Fiona Hill, Tony Blinken, Lloyd Austin, Jake Sullivan, are expecting a Russian victory, contrary to everything they say in public? I think it's inevitable. And they see the, they're reading the tea leaves and they know that everything that they've hoped would happen to Russia hasn't happened. There has been no economic collapse. Russia's numbers are just getting better and better. There's been no military defeat. Russia's numbers are just getting better and better. And they've run out of options. There's literally nothing left for them to sanction in Russia. So sanctions have not only failed, but ended up being

just an absolute dead end policy-wise. Militarily, we've got nothing left. And we can make all the noise we want about 31 modified Abrams tanks, about a handful of old F-16s, you know, a small number of the Atacoms missiles, and we can say how much we support the Ukrainians. But we know, Lloyd Austin knows, definitely, General Miley knew, that this isn't going to change the outcome, that the best we could hope for is a frozen conflict. And that's what we're playing for now. We're playing for a tie. We're playing for a draw. The Russians aren't playing for a draw. They're going for the win. That's two different mindsets, two different attitudes. Anybody who's played sports knows the team that's trying to win while the other team's playing for a draw, team that's trying to win tends to win.

Right. Well, what, if anything, will the attackums and the F-16s accomplish? Are they too little, too late? Well, they're definitely too late, and they're definitely too little, but they were never going to change the outcome. I mean, again, the idea that the West is the repository of these magic weapons, the Abrams tank, the F-16, the attack them. It shows a total lack of respect for the Russian military and Russian military technology. For every Abrams we have, they have a T-90 that's just as good or even better. For every F-16 they have, they have, you know, the SU-27, which is just as good, or the SU-34, which is better, or the SU-57, which is better than our F-35. And for the Atacams, it's a 1970s-era weapon that's been upgraded, but they have the Tornado. They have their own equivalents.

Will we be able to kill more Russians? Absolutely. Is it going to change the outcome? No. So it didn't matter how many Abrams we gave them or how many Atacoms or how many F-16s. This was never going to change the equation. Ukraine was never going to beat Russia. It's obvious that President Zelensky did not hear your analysis of this lack of significance in the arrival of the Abrams and the coming arrival of the F-16s

when he said this. The first American-made Abrams tanks are already in Ukraine. We are preparing them to reinforce our actions against the occupiers, and it will be a significant reinforcement. We are also working to get all the other weapons capabilities we need. This includes F-16s. We are preparing pilots and infrastructure. The best thing for us is to be able to produce air defense and other advanced weapons. This is the only way to guarantee Ukraine's security.

I'm going to guess that you're of the view that that was stated just for domestic political consumption. Well, first of all, I think he's learned a couple lessons from his Vilnius summit disaster this past summer, where he was perceived by many, rightfully so, to be, you know, not being gracious enough for everything that everybody's doing. I mean, gracious is hard when you've suffered so many casualties and all you're asking people to do is pony up some equipment and everybody seems to be hesitant about that. But he paid a political price for that. So now I think he's trying to put a positive spin on this. But how do you spin 31 tanks? I mean, you can spend that number any way you want, Judge,

and it's still just 31 tanks, and it's not going to have any impact on this battlefield. The way this war is being waged right now, the day of massed armored formations is finished. That's an invitation to open annihilation. The tanks are put out in penny packets of two, three tanks at a time, and the Russians have the answer to that. They've been blowing them up two, three tanks at a time. And the Russians have the answer to that. They've been blowing them up two, three tanks at a time. The Abrams will not have any impact on that, I guarantee. And I have to double check this quote, because I don't know if it's a hoax meme, because it just sounds so stupid.

But there was a report going out about Lloyd Austin asking, telling the Russians, don't hunt down the Abrams like you did the leopard, you know, play by the rules. It seems stupid. I'm thinking it could be a fake, but it just shows the, what he doesn't understand is if you introduce Abrams tanks, the Russians will make killing the Abrams tank the number one propaganda ploy because there's nothing better to show the Russian people and the world than a burning American tank. And how stupid are we to give them 31 opportunities to do that? How effective or lack of effective will these attack them be?

And what are they? Well, the attack them, we've given the Ukrainians the HIMARS system, the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, and that allows them to reach out and touch the Russians at ranges of 45, 90 miles. And it's been a good system, just so everybody realizes the day that HIMARS was introduced, the Minister of Defense of Ukraine put out a tweet calling it a game changer. It's over now for the Russians. It's absolutely over. We got the HIMARS. We're going to win. Yeah, where are we now? The HIMARS has

been nullified by the Russians. It can still kill Russians, but most of the HIMARS that are launched get shot down. The other ones get jammed and the other ones get destroyed. So it wasn't a game changer. The ATAKIMS is the same thing. It's a longer range version. It fires one missile instead of the pod of, I think, six. It has 300 mile range. I think the one that we're giving them, though, has a cluster warhead that actually reduces the range by almost 50%. I think it's about 145 miles, but still long range, accurate. The first couple of times they fire it, the Russians are going to have a learning curve. They're going to kill some Russians. There's no doubt about that. But then the Russians, they'll have collected all the technical data. They'll get the information they need on the guidance.

They'll perfect their electronic warfare. And that's the end of the attack. It's over. That's just the way modern warfare works uh this is again a 1970s era missile that's been upgraded in the early 2000s mid 2000 2010 era um it's not new the russians know a lot about it it will take nobody's price and there's not enough of them i mean we you know it we fired i think around 60 of them during the Gulf War desert storm, and then we fired more during the Operation Iraqi Freedom. The main use of these was to suppress enemy air defense. So we used these to fire into the Iraqi lines to knock out their air defense so that our air could penetrate deeper.

But we needed a lot of these missiles to do that. My understanding is we're not giving the Ukrainians that many of these missiles. So even if they prove to be effective, they're going to run out of missiles before the Russians run out of targets. We have a clip of Admiral Kirby unhappy with a question put to him on Ukraine progress. This is uh on ukraine uh progress this is from nbc um it's a little long but i i'd like you to watch this and share your thoughts with us how do you based on the information you're getting how do you think the counter-offensive is going and are the ukrainians closer to victory than they were six months ago based on this letter from. Vance, can you just answer some of these questions? Do you think that Ukrainians are any closer to victory than they were six

months ago? Is the counteroffensive any more effective? Well, it's a shame that the senator didn't take advantage of the opportunity to listen to President Zelensky himself today, who I am absolutely certain was updating members of Congress about progress on the battlefield. But let me take a shot at it. The truth is that the Ukrainian armed forces, particularly in the South,

are making steady progress. Now, is it as far or as fast as they want to go, coming out of Zaporizhia towards the coast of the Sea of Azov? No. And they'd be the first to tell you that. I'm sure President Zelensky shared that perspective. The Russians had months to dig entrenchments,

what we call defense in depth. They have literally put up tens of thousands of mines and minefields all across that southern expanse to try to slow the Ukrainians down. And it has certainly had an effect on them. But they are making progress. And one of the reasons they're making progress, first of all, it's obviously because of their skill and bravery and the fact that they're allocating resources to this advance, but is

because of the tools, the training and the technology that the United States and our allies and partners have lent them, have given them, have provided them to be able to make that progress. How risky is that when he knows no progress is being made to claim that there is progress and to take credit for progress that doesn't exist? Again, I mean, he's a PR spokesperson. His job is to spin information. He is spinning like never seen spinning take place before.

The Ukrainian soldiers themselves will tell you that they don't have the training necessary for this task. You know, we're talking about weeks of basic training, a few more weeks of advanced training with the equipment, the tactics, things that would take American forces a year and a half, two years to master. We're asking the Ukrainians to master in a matter of two and a half months. They simply can't do. I mean, every word that Admiral Kirby said there was a lie, just a straight out lie. And if he said it under oath, he could be prosecuted for perjury.

And that would be interesting now because I'd like to see Congress take that quote, call him before a committee and ask him to repeat that statement under oath and back it up with facts. You know, again, you're a spokesperson. Before you say something, you should have a data set to draw upon to say this is why I'm saying what I'm saying. Instead, you just straight up lied to the American public.

I'll just say, I don't care if you're a liar. I know you're a liar. Everybody who watches this program knows you're a liar. It's okay. I hope Congress holds you to account for the lies that you've told because you've cost Ukrainians their lives. You're a murderer. Here he is again on, is there an exit strategy? And can the Ukrainians possibly induce, I'm using his words now, President Putin to sit down with them and negotiate.

Listen to this. What's the strategy? What's the exit plan here for the U.S.? Well, again, I'm not exactly clear what the senator is referring to. Normally, when you talk about exit strategy, you're talking about getting American troops out of a war zone, that kind of thing. It's important to remember that we don't have American troops in Ukraine. We want to help them succeed on the battlefield so that if and when President Zelensky and only President Zelensky can determine when it's time to sit down with President Putin, that he can sit down and have a diplomatic dialogue with the wind at his back and with some strength. That would be the diplomatic dialogue that President Zelensky expressly rejected in March of 22. Not just that, he got the Ukrainian parliament to pass a law that prohibits any negotiations with Russians. So again, Kirby

is just factually off base, making stuff up. But the fact of the matter is this war ends not when Zelensky makes any decision. The only decision Zelensky has to make is to sign the documents of unconditional surrender, because that's the only way this war ends. Russia will defeat Ukraine so decisively. And when that happens, Russia will give the Ukrainians an opportunity to do what the Japanese did on board the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay on September 2nd, 1945, and that's to sign documents of unconditional surrender. Do you think that Putin will soon have enough of this and escalate and end it in a couple of weeks? Or does he not need to do that, Scott? Militarily now, I'm prevailing on your military and strategic experience, as well as your knowledge of the cultures and the geography.

Look, from a purely military standpoint, I think this war is, first of all, the Russians are winning. They're achieving the strategic defeat of the Ukrainian forces as we speak. Almost everybody's admitting this except John Kirby. But war is an extension of politics by other means. It's going to be a political victory, not a military victory. And I think Vladimir Putin and the Russian leadership is taking a look at the stage and realizing that, you know, the political collapse of Ukraine might come sooner rather than later. You know, there was an interesting interview that Volodymyr Zelensky's wife gave this week when she talked about the upcoming

presidential elections. She pretty much insinuated that Zelensky may not run, that he recognizes that his day as president is over. She left the door open for that, but this wasn't, normally a candidate's wife is, we're in for the second term, baby. We're going to double down on success. Things are going great. We know the people are behind us. And she's like, I'm not sure the Ukrainian people are behind us anymore. I'm not sure that my husband is the right person for this job anymore.

Sound like a defeated person to me. And I think that's the reality that Russia, Russia has never put a calendar up there. They've always said that they're objective driven. And at the end of the day, only the Russians can determine when the objectives have been met. And given the fact that the Russians aren't in the business of generating unnecessary Russian casualties, sometimes it's best just to let the enemy do what they're doing when what they're doing sees what you want them to do. So the Ukrainians are in the process of political collapse. Why not let them collapse? Why put troops at risk? If it's purely military, they could put their pedal to the metal and end this thing in a matter of weeks. But that would cost them tens of thousands of lives.

And I think Putin and his guys are looking at saying, why don't we just let the Ukrainians collapse on their own volition? And that's what's happening. Gary, do we have the clip of President Zelensky in the Canadian Parliament and the Nazi being applauded? All right. This is really one of the it's a rabbit hole. It's a side event. But this is really one of the strangest things. I'd like your comments on it. And then we're going to run what's even stranger, which is President Trudeau's response to it. So this is the Canadian Parliament. I don't know if you've seen this, Scott. President Zelensky is being interrupted with many standing ovations.

To see President Zelensky, you have to see him in the very earliest parts of this clip, all the way to the left. Then the camera pans to the balcony where this former SS guy is getting his standing ovation. Watch this. His speech received at least a dozen standing ovations. There was also one for this man, a 98-year-old Ukrainian-Canadian who fought for Ukrainian independence against the Russians during the Second World War. How bizarre is that, that the Canadian Parliament, Canada, a member of the Five Eyes, E-Y-E-S, freely shares intelligence with the United States, Australia, Great Britain, and New Zealand.

The parliamentarians themselves, with apparent unanimityity on Yom Kippur are lauding a former member of the Nazi SS. And we need to remember that the unit this man belonged to, the 14th Galatian division of the Waffen SS, is responsible for some horrific war crimes, the slaughter of tens of thousands of Jews, the murder of hundreds of thousands of Poles and Russians. These aren't good guys. But the entire division at the end of the Second World War surrendered to the British. And because the United States and Britain had bought into the Bandarists as an opposition force against the Soviets, instead of turning them over to the Soviets, they allowed this division to be deported out of Europe to Canada, where tens of thousands of Waffen SS murderous stormtroopers, including this man, I know he's 98, and we should feel some sympathy

for the elderly, but murder is murder. There's no statute of limitations. And those fists that he held up were fists that held a rifle that pull the trigger that killed Jewish women and children and old men. He's a murdering sack of manure. And they applauded him. And here's the thing. The Canadians can't say we didn't know. They knew darn well what they're doing. They know who he is because Canada has fostered the 14th Galatian Division, builds monuments in their honor. They've been doing that for decades. Here's, again, this gets even more bizarre. Here's President Trudeau's response. Now, the response, as I've seen it, consists of his admonition to the parliament and apology for it, and then blaming it on the Russians. Obviously, it's extremely upsetting that this happened. The speaker has acknowledged his mistake and has apologized. But this is something that is deeply embarrassing to the Parliament of Canada and, by extension,

to all Canadians. I think particularly of Jewish MPs and all members of the Jewish community across the country who are celebrating or commemorating Yom Kippur today. I think it's going to be really important that all of us push back against Russian propaganda, Russian disinformation, and continue our steadfast and unequivocal support for Ukraine. Push back against Russian disinformation. Hey, baby, you guys did this. Yeah, I spoke before the Canadian Parliament before I was called before to be a witness in one of their hearings. And the paperwork that has to be filled out to get in through security, to be brought in, is extensive. It's even more so when

you're going up when you have a head of state there, when you have a Justin Trudeau, you have a Zelensky. There is extensive background checks. This man was vetted before he got there. The camera knew where to pan. This was all, this was a scripted moment approved by everybody in part. Justin Trudeau is lying through his teeth. He knew about this because it was cleared through his office. This is this is disgusting and everywhere. And it just shows the depravity of the man. And frankly speaking, the depravity of the nation that allows its elected official, its senior most elected official, stand before the nation and lie the way he did. And then, of course, blame it on Putin. I mean, I woke up this morning and I could come up with

any number of things that happened. You know, I forgot to plug in the toaster, so I had a cold bagel. That's Putin's fault. I didn't plug in the toaster because of Putin. My dog tripped me. That's Putin's fault. He put the dog there. I mean, how stupid do you have to believe, sit there and say, the fact that we willingly and knowingly, with malice of forethought, lauded a Nazi veteran on Yom Kippur in the parliament before a leader of a nation that embraces the Nazi ideology and its Russian propaganda. Wow. On and on and on this goes. Scott, thank you very much. Thanks for a great and passionate analysis. As always, look forward to seeing you again soon. Thank you. All the best. Well, you can't make this stuff up more as we get it, my dear friends. Thank you for watching. Thank you for your comments. Thank you for bringing us over that 200,000 mark a week or so ago. Our goal is 250,000 subscriptions by Christmas time. Like,

subscribe, ask for the notification, tell your friends, tell your colleagues, your co-workers, your family members. at Judging Freedom. These guys are looking out for your liberty.