[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
War, War, War See other War, War, War Articles Title: Scott Ritter's Switcheroo: "Why I Radically Changed My Overall Assessment" On Sunday, the foreign policy blogs were abuzz with the news that Scott Ritter had done an about-face in his assessment of the war. It appears that the ex-Marine had examined recent developments in Ukraine and concluded that its going to be much harder for Russia to win than he had originally thought.. Naturally, the news of Ritters reversal sent shockwaves across the internet, especially among the people who follow events in Ukraine closely and who greatly admire his even-handed analysis. Some of these people clearly felt betrayed by Ritters comments and blasted him as a concern troll which refers to a person who feigns sympathy while actually feeling the opposite. This is a terrible way to treat a guy whos devoted so much of his time to informing people about an issue of which they might know very little without his research. Besides, Ritter is no hypocrite. Quite the contrary. Its fair to say, however, that Ritter has probably been the most outspoken proponent of the Russia is winning theory, a hypothesis that runs counter to everything we read in the legacy media or see on the cable news channels. Unfortunately, Ritters views on the matter have changed dramatically, and thats due almost entirely to developments on the ground. As Ritter candidly admits, The military aid the west is providing to Ukraine is changing the dynamic and if Russia doesnt find a way to address this meaningfully
the conflict will never end. Thats quite a turnaround from a statement he made just weeks earlier that, Russia is winning the war, and winning it decisively. So, what changed? What are the so-called developments that led to Ritters volte-face? Here are a few excerpts from the interview that triggered the fracas. Ritter was joined by Ray McGovern and host Garland Nixon on Saturday Morning Live. (The quotes are copied from video. I accept blame for any mistakes.) Scott Ritter (start at 47:50 minute mark) The thing that frustrates me
is that, it was my assessment that it would be very hard for Ukraine to absorb this new equipment and material (Material the additional lethal weapons that have recently been shipped to Ukraine) but the howitzers are already operating against Russia. (And) They are having an effect in the Kharkov region. Not all 90 of them, but they have several batteries in place that are being used. How did this happen? And this is why I have radically changed my overall assessment, because I had been operating on the assumption that Russia would be able to interdict the vast majority of this equipment, but Russia has shown itself unable or unwilling to do this and as a result the Ukrainians are having meaningful impact on the battlefield. Not in the areas of main contention, like the Donbass, but on the periphery. This is why Russia has carried out tactical withdrawals north of Kharkov, because in order to match Ukraines best capabilities, Russia would have to divert resources from its main effort which Russia has decided not to do. So, they are re-configuring the battlefield. (trading land in different areas)
(Saturday Morning Live with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern, You Tube) Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Ada (#0)
Honest people will change their assessments if the data calls for it. It does no good to cater predictions to emotional desires. I respect Ritter for taking that path. But fortunes in war change. In Korea, US troops were pushed back to a small section of what is now South Korea before reinforcements reversed things. In monitoring RT news, while propaganda is something both sides will do, it's what they don't report that is telling, and RT hasn't reported much in the way of battlefield success of late. For a time Ukraine didn't either. But if Russia does start losing badly.... if.... then it raises the prospect of Russia turning to more deadly weapons, such at tactical nukes, if they have them. The problem for Russia is Ukraine is full of ethnic Russians who are Ukraine citizens.
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest |
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|