"Clearly I responded to your first post here and pointed out (taken from the Wiki page I linked) why his opinion matters." - But you just said he wasn't an expert? Do you or do you not admit that Scott Ritter is absolutely not an expert in the geopolitics of Russia? Nobody here denies that Scott Ritter can identify a missile, that has never been a question that was up for debate.

"Ukraine's NATO bid / Ukrainian neutrality YES that's what it's all about and was stated multiple times." - So you didnt listen to the interview? The justification Putin gives has absolutely nothing to do with NATO encroachment and you would know that if you would have actually listened to it. You literally think that Putins position on the justifications for the invasion Ukraine is a different one than the one he explicitly had this week. I don't know if i should laugh or cry at this point.

I said no one here calls him an expert, feel free to flick through the topic to find out.

NATO encroachment is a fact and cannot be denied and it was pointed out multiple times that this is the reason.

Judge Napolitano's latest roundtable with Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern

Inb4 kremlin state actor allegations lol

explain to me why it matters.

i mean the US government is in bed with Nazi's, literally nazi's. help me understand why Scott Ritter's views on a war, are irrelevant, because he is a sex offender, or why him being a sex offender, who already paid for his crimes (afaik?), is relevant. is this wok-ism, is that what this is ? the priorities here are really hard to understand. also i really dont have an issue calling him an authority on the current conflict as he is following it daily. if thats not an expert, what is ? the amount of hours he is spending on this is insane.

This post was edited by ferdia on Feb 17 2024 12:50pm

So then, just to be clear: You don't think Scott Ritter is an expert. You agree that Scott Ritter is a layman and a state actor? You agree that Scott Ritter has absolutely no experience in Russian geo politics?

That's a totally different subject. Im wondering why you think you know more about Putins intention than Putin himself.

YOU suggested that Scott Ritter cannot comment on Russia/Ukraine because he was convicted of sex offenses.

You've been asked several times to explain yourself. Go ahead and explain it

Biden's been in public life for over 50 years and he's never faced a serious accusation of sexual misconduct, unlike Scott Ritter and Donald Trump.



People convicted of sexual offenses with teenage girls disqualify themselves. Usually people with a certain perspective can draw on many different people to back them up, so why are you stuck citing a convicted sex offender? Kind of weird man.

Also in Tucker Carlson's interview, Putin did not focus on NATO expansion as the reason Russia invaded, but rather explained that the justification has more to do with his revisionist history perspective of how Ukraine is actually a part of imperialist Russia.

The NATO expansion canard comes more from the anti-American right-wing than it does from Russian decision makers.

This post was edited by IceMage on Feb 17 2024 02:57pm

Putting aside that Ukraine has the right to seek NATO membership (and no right to necessarily be admitted), the two are intertwined. Russians (including Navalny) see Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus as three parts of the same people. The urgency to act was that Ukraine was threatening to break away forever. Once it's in NATO, only a war with the West, one Russia cannot win, would pry Ukraine free.

Ukraine wasn't on a real path to join NATO though. The conflict was static in the minds of Westerners, there was no great political movement for Ukraine to join NATO.

Ukraine was breaking away in the sense of moving more towards Western economic ties, and perhaps that was enough for Putin to decide to bring Ukraine back into his vision of a great imperialist Russia, but Ukraine joining NATO is different than that.