All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 2, 2024 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
32:02
Scott Ritter : Ukraine Nearing Its End.
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
Today is Monday, December 2nd, 2024.
Scott Ritter will be here with us in just a minute on how close to the end is Ukraine.
But first this.
We're taught to work hard for 35 to 40 years.
Save your money, then live off your savings.
Unfortunately, there are too many threats undermining the value of our hard-earned dollars.
The Fed's massive money printing machine is shrinking your dollar's value.
Just the cost of groceries is absurd.
Let me be brutally honest.
I think the dollar is on its way to being extinct.
Not just here, but globally.
The BRICS nations, led by Russia and China, threaten to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
Central banks have been shifting away from the dollar and into gold.
And if we go to central bank digital currency, that will not only destroy the dollar, but we will lose our freedom.
We will lose our privacy.
They can track anything we do.
You need to take care of yourself and your family.
So here's what you need to do.
Immerse yourself in knowledge and information.
The writing is on the wall.
Now is the time to consider shifting some of your dollars into gold and silver as your bedrock financial asset.
Call my friends at Lear Capital, the leader in precious metals, investing for over 27 years.
They help me diversify into gold and silver.
They can help you, too.
Call Lear today at 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com.
Scott Ritter, my dear friend, welcome here.
Welcome on the show, as always.
Your time is so...
Before we get to how near to the end is Ukraine and why do the Americans and the West not take President Putin seriously, a couple of questions, if I might, about Israel.
In your view, why did Prime Minister Netanyahu agree to a ceasefire with Hezbollah?
Two reasons.
One, the Israeli military was demanding it.
It appears that the IDF was just exhausted over a year of fighting.
Now they're engaged in a battle in southern Lebanon that they weren't winning.
The Hezbollah was resisting fiercely.
The Israelis were taking casualties.
Morale was collapsing amongst even the most elite units, the Goladi Brigade, the 7th Armored Brigade.
And the Israeli military said, we're facing strategic defeat, hurting ourselves.
We need a ceasefire in the most dangerous front, which is the front with Hezbollah.
And so they got the United States to step in.
And they also were taking advantage of the fact that Hezbollah itself has suffered losses, serious losses, leadership losses.
I mean, I condemn Israel's actions in bombing Beirut wholeheartedly, but the fact of the matter is it worked.
By inflicting losses on the Lebanese population, they put pressure on the Lebanese government, of which Hezbollah is a part, a very important part.
To bring it into this conflict, to bring a ceasefire in play.
And Hezbollah, because it's not just a resistance movement, but it's also a political party, and also knowing that it's been weakened by the fact that their very influential and charismatic leader, Hassan Nasrallah, was dead, Hezbollah couldn't afford to stand up to the will of Lebanon, which would,
But because of the losses and the fact that Lebanon is, you know, suffering economically, suffers from internal political divisions, Hezbollah couldn't afford to undo decades of political success and position itself to be this major player in Lebanese politics and then ignore.
The will of the Lebanese people.
So they took advantage of the fact that Hezbollah was also open to the idea of a ceasefire.
But mainly this is because Israel needed this pause.
They were not in a position to go on in this fight in southern Lebanon.
A former Israeli defense minister who worked with Netanyahu over the weekend Accused him of war crimes and accused the Israeli military of genocide.
Are cracks starting to appear in the publicly united Israeli front?
Yeah, this is Moshe Yalom, former chief of staff and defense minister.
But he also at one time was the head of Amman, Israeli military intelligence.
And that's when I knew him.
I know him personally.
You know, he is not a dove either.
He is hawkish on many of the issues that are out there, but he has taken a look at how Israel has responded to these challenges and Israel has not been up to the task, especially the Israeli military.
And when Moshe Yalon says that Israel is committing war crimes and he is a hawk, that means Israel has gone way overboard beyond Anything that could remotely be tolerated or excused as, you know, well, this is just war.
This means that there are serious breaks because Moshe Yolan was somebody who had worked with Benjamin Netanyahu in the past successfully.
And so he's not somebody that has an axe to grind per se against Netanyahu.
He is just a man of good moral character himself Calls it as he sees it.
And right now, this had to be very difficult for him because, as I said, he is a hawk on many of these issues.
He's not sympathetic, for instance, towards Hezbollah, Hamas, or Iran.
But he recognizes the tactics employed by the Israeli military, the behavior of the Israeli military is more harmful to Israel than anything Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran has done or will do.
This is how Israel gets destroyed from within.
And do you think others are likely to see the genocide the way former General Alon, former defense minister Alon sees it?
Yes, I think this is a growing, there's growing recognition on the part of it.
First of all, the Israelis are compelled to look at what's going on right now.
Are isolated internationally like they've never been.
And they're not used to this.
They're not used to this kind of international isolation.
And so that isolation, combined with the effects of this isolation, the economic devastation, lack of tourism, is forcing people to reexamine their beliefs and where they are and how they got there.
I think more and more Israelis are realizing that this is not a good path for them beyond.
I don't know how many Israeli generals now, I've heard a former politician, say that Israel has fatally wounded itself.
Fatally means dead, Judge.
When you have Israeli generals say, no, no, we're on a path of extinction as a nation, as a people.
Not because the world wants to kill us, but because we're killing ourselves.
We're doing it to ourselves.
I think there's a growing recognition amongst many Israelis that, hey, we're on a very dangerous path, and if we don't change what we're doing, that could very well be the outcome that comes our way.
So I think more and more you're seeing Israelis realize that something is dreadfully wrong with the way that Israel interfaces with the world and Israel interfaces with itself today.
Just about an hour ago, President-elect Trump announced.
I'm reading this now.
It's from a Florida newspaper.
Issued a grave and loud warning to militants in the Middle East holding hostages, saying if they're not released by January 20th, 2025, they'll be hell to pay.
What the hell is he talking about?
Well, I'd like to believe that he's talking about the Israelis holding tens of thousands of Palestinians hostage and torturing them.
Because the Israelis are militants after all.
This is a radical government, Zionist government that's committed genocide against the Gazan people and has imprisoned tens of thousands of Palestinians.
I'd like to believe that he's talking about holding them to account, that there will be hell to pay, but he's not.
He's talking about the United States willing to go to war because Hamas continues to hold roughly a hundred Israelis hostage, prisoner.
I don't support hostage-taking, and I don't classify, you know, even though many of these people that are held are military people, that they're not prisoners of war, because to be prisoners of war, you have to be treated as a prisoner of war.
They'll be treated as hostages.
They're being held as hostages, as leverage, and I'm against it.
And I'd like to see them released.
But, you know, nothing happens in a vacuum.
One of the things that Hamas has said is, we'll release our hostages when you release your hostages in Israel.
It refuses to do that.
But more importantly, what more hell does Trump think he can bring to bear on the Palestinian people?
I mean, the Israelis have already dropped almost all the 2,000-pound bombs in our inventory.
We're going to drop more?
We're going to make that rubble shake a little bit more?
Hezbollah has been bombed to hell and back by Israel using American planes and American bombs.
We're going to make it shake a little bit more?
The Hootie have absorbed the air power that we have to deliver, and they keep resisting.
I don't think Trump understands that, one, he was elected on a platform of peace.
He's supposed to be the guy that never got us into a big war the first term, and he was going to keep us out of a big war.
And yet he's promising to get us involved in one of the most complicated regions on the planet to make, you know, hell is going to be paid.
With what?
Peacefully?
No.
He's talking about going to war.
In a region where war has never solved any of these issues.
This is about the most ignorant statement a man could make.
And it's a shame he's making it because it runs against the grain of everything he claimed to stand for when he ran for office.
What is Israel doing in the middle of the Syrian civil war, Scott?
As I said before, Judge, Israel is desperate right now.
They got their butts handed to them by the And right now, they saw a situation where the perception was that Syria was fruit for the picking, that if you did this right, you could knock Syria out of the equation, take Assad out of the equation,
thereby break up the linkage between Iran Syria and Hezbollah that had Iranian weapons flowing in Hezbollah was felt to be you know And Iran was clearly not seeking any broader conflict.
And so the feeling was that this action could play.
And I think this is an important question because what it says is everybody's talking about Turkey calling the shots.
Israel called the shots.
Turkey had an operation that was planned to take place in March.
This was the Turkish plan.
Israel said, no, we have to act now because by March there's a new president.
He may come in and shake things up.
All these pieces aren't going to play.
We need to go now.
And it was Israel that wants us.
Remember, Israel was involved in the pagers going off amongst the Syrian military.
They planned it.
They executed the timing.
They're clearly involved.
Israel's been behind Turkish intelligence.
Almost everything they've done, what they've been doing in Azerbaijan, what they've been doing in Kurdistan, and what they've been doing in northern Syria.
Israel is the hidden hand here.
And Israel wanted this offensive.
They were hoping that the offensive would be very successful.
It appears it has stalled, which is why in a moment when Israel asked for a ceasefire with Lebanon or with Hezbollah because they're exhausted, suddenly, this shows how desperate they are, they're talking about opening up a southern front against Syria.
Draw reinforcements away because they can't afford to have this gambit fail.
If this gambit fails, it's going to solidify the Hezbollah-Syria-Iranian axis backed by Russia.
They're never going to break it.
Can they afford to take on the Russians?
Can Turkey afford to do that?
What will become of Turkey's application to join BRICS?
Well, right now I'd say that that application, if it isn't in the trash can, it's been put into the bottom drawer.
Russia's not going to entertain any Turkish membership in BRICS yet.
Turkey's going to have to repair a lot of relations.
You know, Russia is a very capable nation.
they can walk and they can chew gum but they are tied down right now to in ukraine it's not a miscalculation um that russia Today, they're involved in a major conflict in Europe, not just against Ukraine, but against NATO, the United States, one that could lead to nuclear war.
And so, while Russia, you know, is not, you know, I won't say they're distracted, meaning that they are not capable of responding.
Clearly, they can respond.
They won't have the resources on hand to respond as decisively as maybe they would like, and I think that's one of the calculations that Israel and Turkey took into account when greenlighting this attack, is that Russia, in their belief, wouldn't be able to respond decisively.
I think we've seen the Russian Air Force prove otherwise.
Is the West and Ukraine finally fearful of Russia because of Oreshnik, or did they not perceive It's lethality.
Tough question, Judge.
First of all, let's put it this way.
They fear the Russian army.
Ukraine knows what's happening on the battlefield right now.
They're desperate.
And this desperation has led the Biden administration to carry out an act of desperation, which is to literally trigger a nuclear war with Russia by greenlighting the use of attacking missiles against Russian soil.
This is why Russia fired the Oreshnik.
But before that, you had Dmitry Peskov say, look, we have a new nuclear doctrine that we just published, and you've already crossed the red line.
If we wanted to nuke you, we could do it right now legally because you've done what our doctrine says you're not allowed to do.
So please stop doing it.
Oreshnik was fired in order to compel the United States to withdraw its permission.
You know, when you look at Vladimir Putin talk about a Russian, he can barely hide his Cheshire cat smile.
He's so pleased with what this is, and the military is so cocky and all this.
But then you take a look at the posturing of Ukraine in the West and whether this is deliberate or it's reflective of maybe the weapon wasn't as impressive as the Russians claim it would be, but they haven't stopped.
They've continued the attack and strikes, which has led Russia to say, well, we may have to We have them.
We're ready to fire them.
This is an escalation, a dangerous escalation.
And you have to wonder, you know, is the West deceiving itself?
Meaning, maybe Oreschnik is very effective, but the Biden administration has gambled on, you know, tying this conflict up into so many knots that Trump can't untie it when he comes into office.
And key to this is continued, you know, use of Atacum's missiles.
It's a very dangerous situation, though, one that I think that the Biden administration is grossly miscalculating on, because whatever a Russian did or didn't do, the fact is the Russians fired an intermediate-range missile in combat for the first time in history, and Russia is prepared to continue firing these, and this is a very dangerous escalation, especially if they start selecting targets outside of the borders of Ukraine.
Comments from President Putin to which you referred.
It's pretty brief, but about as crystal clear as it could be.
Last night, we carried out a comprehensive strike using 90 missiles of similar classes and 100 drones.
17 targets were hit.
These were military facilities, defense industry facilities and their support systems.
I repeat once again, on our part, these strikes took place in response to the continuous strikes on Russian territory by American ATAKIMS missiles.
As I have said many times, there will always be a response from us.
I repeat, these attacks took place in response to the use of American missiles to attack inside Russia, and we will always respond.
Doesn't the State Department, doesn't the West Wing, forget about Joe Biden, does Donald Trump get this?
We may talk about a few, but this is why I'm holding an event on December 7th.
Because we need Congress to be mobilized and get it.
We need Donald Trump to be mobilized and get it.
We have to stop this madness.
What Putin did there is, rather than hitting Ukraine with Oreshnik again, he came in and he took out critical infrastructure, including energy production facilities.
This attack, it's not me saying this, this is every analyst.
A minimum of 5 million Ukrainians will be fleeing Ukraine very shortly because they can't survive, because there is no heat and there will be no heat.
They're going to flee to Europe.
This is a refugee crisis that's taking place.
If Putin carries out a similar attack of this nature using the weapons that he just described, you know, the calibers, the Kenzals and things, it's gone.
There'll be another 5 million.
That's 10 million.
That's almost half of the available population of Ukraine today being compelled to flee because they can't survive in Ukraine over the winter.
That's what this stupid gambit towards attack is done.
The people who claim we want to help, we're compelling to flee for their lives into a Europe that's not prepared to take them.
So they're going to suffer no matter what happens.
And this is before Putin says, okay, well now we're going to bring in I don't think Biden is being advised wisely.
And we've talked about this before.
There is a lack of Russian area expertise in the White House, in the National Security Council, in the CIA, in the State Department.
They don't have genuine Russian experts anymore.
They have Putin whispers, Putin haters, people who just go Putin, Putin, Putin, Putin, everything.
They don't understand Russia.
Therefore, they're not in a position to understand what motivates Russia and what defines Russia and how Russia is going to behave.
Instead, they've bought into this simplistic notion.
That Russia's bluffing and that they will use ATACMS missiles regardless of the consequence because ultimately Russia won't use nuclear weapons.
You know, this is a very dangerous thing.
The intelligence community, the United States Intelligence, the CIA has come out and issued a series of assessments that always come to the same thing.
Russia won't use nuclear weapons.
But this is the same Russia house that gave us Russian collusion in 2016, which was a lie.
It's the same.
Does this crowd that advises and effectively makes American foreign policy agree with Admiral Buchanan that a nuclear war can be waged and won?
Are they utterly delusional when it comes to the power of nuclear weapons?
Well, remember, this is the administration back in 2021, and I think also early in 2022.
No, 2021.
They came together, the permanent five of the Security Council, and reiterated a posture that began under Ronald Reagan, that nuclear wars can't be won, therefore they should never be fought, that that is the fundamental principle.
And indeed, Buchanan said this when he gave his remarks to CSIS last week.
He said, you know, we understand that nuclear wars can't be won, therefore they should never be fought.
But then he turns around and says, but we're prepared to have a nuclear exchange with Russia where we prevail.
Where we win.
I mean, the disconnect there is unreal.
But this is what the policy requires him to say.
This is why, ladies and gentlemen, we have to get rid of nuclear weapons.
Because the posture, the policy, says we have to be prepared to use nuclear weapons to achieve an outcome favorable to the United States.
But if we start off by saying, no matter what we do, we're going to lose, how can there be a favorable outcome?
Why are we planning nuclear war that we can't win, but we're going to claim we're going to win, but we're going to lose and everybody's going to die?
Nuclear weapons are insane, ladies and gentlemen, and we need to get rid of them.
You mentioned earlier a cold winter in Ukraine.
How degraded is the military?
How degraded is Ukraine society?
How much longer can it last?
Well, the military is falling apart as we speak.
I mean, this is the long-awaited collapse, and it's happening in accelerated fashion.
Ukraine is starting to surrender in numbers that haven't been seen since the beginning of the war.
The conditions on the battlefield, even Ukrainian generals say it's unacceptable.
We can't treat our wounded.
We can't evacuate our wounded.
We can't rotate people out.
The troops on the front line are exhausted.
They're dying or surrendering or retreating.
60,000 deserters so far this year.
60,000 deserters.
So the military, they're running out of men.
They're running out of equipment.
They're running out of stamina.
They're running out of everything.
And eventually, it's just going to be total collapse and rapid withdrawal.
Societally, as I just said, 90% of the Ukrainian non-nuclear energy production is eliminated, not going to be repaired.
It's gone.
Whatever was left got hit.
That means that 5 million Ukrainians are going to join the refugee path and their potential for 5 million more.
The society is disappearing, literally erasing itself because life in Ukraine is unsustainable, unsurvivable.
Which leads to political consequences.
The Ukrainian president Zelensky right now, a recent poll, over 60% of the population said if there was a new election, they don't want him running.
This guy went from being a very popular president, wartime president, to being a president where 60% of the population is fed up with him.
That's a bad number for Zelensky.
Now he's moving into an impossible situation where he knows now he has to find a solution.
I mean, now he's saying, okay, we'll give up, temporarily give up control of our territories, whereas before he said he'll never consider that.
Well, he has no choice.
His policies are unrealistic, not going to happen, but you see the direction he's going.
He's starting to concede to reality because the reality is Ukraine is finished.
Tell us about your gathering on this Saturday.
Well, I mean, this is not a trivial situation we find ourselves in.
Many people I've talked to, American and Russian alike, say that the situation we're in today is more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis.
And one of the reasons is there just is no talking between Russia and the United States, no diplomatic interaction.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved by diplomacy.
Right now, there is no diplomacy.
So something has to be done or there will be a nuclear war.
I'll say it one more time.
Something has to be done or there will be a nuclear war.
And I've, you know, in reviewing it, the simplest thing is to get the United States to stop firing ATACAM's missiles.
And so in order to do this, we have to put pressure on Congress to take action, whether it's a hearing, whether it's, you know, a demand under the War Powers Act or something.
And we have to get Trump.
He's mobilized.
He ran on a policy to avoid war, avoid nuclear war, and yet he's silent, largely silent right now.
We need his voice out there.
So there's going to be three panels.
The first panel is We were going to do an outdoor event, but the weather conspired against us and it was tough to get permits.
And I don't want to have 27 degree temperatures and 30 people waving a bander when I have all these great speakers doing.
So instead, we rented the National Press Club.
We'll have three panels.
The first panel, Larry Wilkerson, Theodore Postal, Mel Goodman, CIA analyst.
We're going to talk about the dangers of nuclear war and just how real this threat is.
We'll focus on how we put pressure on Congress.
Leading up to this, I'll be going to Congress on the 5th to meet with members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to talk about what can be done to get the Foreign Affairs Committee to put pressure on the Biden administration to stop the attack.
And so we'll be talking, we'll have a panel to discuss the constitutionality of what Biden's doing and what Congress can do.
And then the third panel is going to be focused on what kind, The role that Trump should play, you know, how do we put pressure on Trump?
How do we mobilize MAGA to speak out to Trump to get him to commit to no more attackums?
I think if we can find a way to tell the Russians, look, even if we can't get Biden to stop the attackums, if Trump would come out and say, we're not going to do attackums attacks when I'm president, the Russians might say, okay, then we're going to ride this out.
You know, we're not going to escalate with the Reschnik and stuff.
But if Trump remains silent, or worse, as what has happened, his national security advisor comes on TV and says, I've spoken with Jake Sullivan, and there's no distance between the Biden administration and us on what's going on.
Well, that tells the Russians, then, that what Biden's doing is going to continue on under Trump, and that means the Russians need to take action now rather than later.
This held-to-pay comment that he made just two hours ago.
That reminds me of the comment made by Sebastian Gorka last week, for which he was roundly and soundly criticized that if the Russians don't come to the negotiating table with us and with President Zelensky, the aid we've given Ukraine will look like peanuts compared to the aid we will give it next round.
I don't know where these guys get these ideas from.
They're as delusional as the people they're about to replace.
And Keith Kellogg's even worse.
He's a man who knows nothing about Russia, and yet he's throwing out irrational, fanciful notions of a freeze of the combat lines, including leaving Ukrainian troops in Kursk.
What part of that will never happen does he not understand?
Russia's not losing this war, and that's what Donald Trump needs to understand.
He needs to have people who brief him that say Russia not only is winning this war, but has won this war.
There's nothing we can do short of a nuclear war that kills everybody to stop that outcome.
So all you'll do is make matters worse by going down these ridiculous policies as outlined by Gorka, Waltz, and Kellogg.
You actually need to bring somebody in who can talk sense to you about what needs to be done to stabilize relations with Russia.
And a key aspect of that is arms control.
You know, not once has Trump talked about arms control.
Not once has Trump taken responsibility for getting out of the INF Treaty that enabled Russia to build the Arashnik missile at all.
And there's a following event on December 8th at the Busboys and Poets.
And I'm going to be doing a discussion and a book signing of my book, Disarm at the Time of Perestroika.
This is my memoir and history of the INF Treaty, of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, of how we at one time succeeded in getting rid of these weapons.
And I also postulate as a template of hope on what we could do in the future to resolve the situation we find ourselves in.
And Larry Wilkerson will be moderating this and leading the discussion.
And it's free.
It starts at 7 p.m.
And I think it's an important discussion we have to be having in relationship to all this.
You know, stopping the attack of this missile just stops the immediate pressure for nuclear war.
But long term, we're going to need arms control.
We're going to need disarmament.
And right now, nobody's even talking about that.
Let me say that I have happily participated in several events with you.
And they are terrifically informative and challenging.
And the speakers, all of whom I know and admire, are courageous to the hilt.
Scott, best of luck to you.
Thank you very much for joining us today.
Deeply appreciate it, as always.
Thanks for having me.
Of course.
Coming up tomorrow at 8 in the morning, Ambassador Charles Freeman.
At 9 in the morning, Professor Jeffrey Sachs.
You ready for this at 12 noon?
From Pink Floyd, the great peace activist, Roger Waters.
At 2 o 'clock, Matt Ho.
At 3 o 'clock, Karen Kwiatkowski.
I can't wait to interact with Roger Waters and, of course, the others as well.
Thank you for watching.
Remember to like and subscribe.
We're oh so close to that 500,000 subscribers.
I think we're going to hit it before Christmas.
Thanks to you.
▲
Export Selection