Scott Ritter update
Wednesday 4 October
I remember Scott Ritter from exposing the lie that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (or still some chemicals).
I read up on his bio and can’t decide what to make of it (only a proficient conspiracy theorist might be able to make sense of it, but of course, that would lead to an unproven just so story that more likely than not would be wrong).
Long story short, Ritter is now touring Russia to sell his books. Still curious, I looked at his Twitter feed.
The first tweet was an almost totally unremarkable video summary of the elections in Slovakia, except that he seemed to be gloating at the prospect of “deep fractures in the actual unity of Europe”.[1]
The second tweet was a repost of someone who suggests that, because Ukrainian SS'ers used an emblem largely based on the Ruthenian lion that Ukraine used since the Middle ages and still uses, Ukrainians are using unashamedly a Nazi flag.
Why would he repost that?
Subsequently a longer video, where he answers questions of people calling in or commenting.
In answer to a caller who wanted to know why people are so stupid (she probably meant: why people keep making the same mistakes) he said: “we need more people that are willing to listen and discern than people who are willing to speak and act”.
He argues that Armenia turning away from Russia toward the West (which is news to me, but possible I suppose) is 100% political suicide. Because, “hee Armenia, look at Ukraine, NATO helped Ukraine, that’s your future. If you don’t stick with Russia”. I myself don’t have an opinion on that. Not only do I lack facts, one fact does seem pretty clear: both Russia, the EU, and the US look pretty impotent in relation to Azerbaijan’s and Turkey’s ambitions.
A Dutch(!) viewer asks:
I can’t stop wondering what I would do if I were to be conscripted to fight the Russians. I’m leaning toward saving myself and surrendering to the Russians. I want to survive and take care of my family after the war. What is your opinion?[2]
Ritter:
I know the Russians don’t want to hear this but... [laughs seemingly nervously] ... if I was Ukrainian I’d have to serve, because it is my country.
Another viewer:
Do you think that Zelensky, an actor, was specifically chosen to be president of Ukraine during the provoked Russian invasion because the West knew that Ukraine was going to get slaughtered on the battlefield and need to put forward "convincing" propaganda to maintain support for any length of time? How long in advance was his rise planned?
Ritter:
... agent Zelensky... documentary ... I don’t believe it was because the West knew Ukraine was going to get slaughtered on the battlefield, I think it was because the West wanted a war and Zelensky was the guy to get it. He did so by running an campaign... look, his entire servant of the people TV series was a five year - I believe it was five seasons - psychological operation orchestrated by British intelligence and ... an oligarch... his whole goal was to go to war .... I think the West thought that economic sanctions would bring Russia to its knees... there is no doubt in my mind that the Zelensky plan has been years in the making.
So, that is weird. According to Ritter the West wanted war and thought that the war would end soon via economic sanctions (is there any historical precedent where economic sanctions actually worked? Certainly the sanctions of 2014 were a total failure).
Both those assertions are really weird. I suppose he wants me to watch his documentary to understand why he believes that...
He refers to his article “SCOTT RITTER: No 'End of History' in Ukraine”. It’s funny how everybody reads Fukuyama differently. Apart form the stab at Fukuyama the article tries to be an overview of the history of Ukraine that starts a bit before the Soviet-Union. If I want to know more about that I will read books by real historians.
He says he predicted the collapse of the Ukrainian army and says that it is happening.
He says England has nothing left to give? Where does that come from? (The video was posted 17 hours ago.)
He says Russia wants to plan to 2025 because the Russians still want to destroy the Nazis in Ukraine and to do that they need to occupy more of Ukraine.
He is not a Trump supporter? But he speaks about denazification as if it really needs to happen. (Also weird: every Ukrainian who would resist Russian occupation is a banderite? From Stepan Bandera. I had to look “banderite” up to see what the current status of the term is:
The term has been used by Russian state media against Euromaidan activists to associate a separate Ukrainian national identity with the most radical nationalists.[23][24][22] Today, in Russian propaganda, the word is used to refer to all in Ukraine who back the idea of sovereignty from Russia; Ukrainian nationalist collaboration with Nazi Germany is also emphasized.[19]
Skimming a few other tweets... 2 1/2 hours of my life wasted to find out where Scott Ritter stands. Probably not a good use of my time, though it was interesting to hear how convinced the callers where that their own favorite conspiracy theory was correct.
Ritter didn’t engage with all of it, denied a few points. But seems pretty far out himself nevertheless. He made a few predictions: Ukraine’s army will collapse, Russia will occupy more of Ukraine unless it will surrender.
Certainly not everything Ritter says is wrong. It’s probably two things that make him the wrong person to follow: (1) he is totally overconfident in his interpretation of the facts, while not showing much historical expertise (2) judging by his tweets, he sees evil people everywhere, and evil has to be combated (or at least harshly quote-tweeted or commented on) no matter what (in other words: no nuance to be found).
I remember Ritter as the man who stood up to the liars who started the Iraq war. I don’t know what to think of what he did between then and now. But now he’s not helping.
Notes
- Full quote: “What an interesting time it is. At a time when NATO, the US and the EU speak of unprecedented unity, we’re starting to see deep fractures in the actual unity of Europe.”
- This is somewhat embarrassing to me since I’m Dutch as well and while I’m not a big patriot, I certainly think my country is worth defending. If you think otherwise, why not leave?