scott ritter now scott, before we got cut off earlier, we were talking about germany's response. do you think there's any world in which germany did not see this coming or was not aware of this possibility surrounding these revelations? given all of the statements that we heard from the biden administration regarding the north stream pipelines and what they said was going to happen to that. no, there's just no way any responsible national leader a could have been taken by surprise. the. i mean, joe biden, all but said i'm going to blow up your pipeline, victoria newland. all but said yes, we're going to blow up your pipeline. and then when the pipeline was blown up, germany pretend says that none of this history had occurred in the and were unwilling to do a thorough investigation, probably out of fear of what they'd find. now when it comes to the response again from the entire european union, we haven't heard much from them yet. do you expect them to take these allegations seriously and to have any kind of a response in the future? or i think you're taking these allegations very

scott ritter. thank you so much for staying with us to talk about that. so you can see a rose by any other name. i forget it at the end of the day, close regime, change intervention, whatever you want to call it, the end result is the same d, stabilizing of that country, blood death, violets. you get the picture. crews are inherently undemocratic, yet the hender minds who aid in this, this sort of political destabilization purport to be spreading democracy. ironic that's going to do it for this weeks episode of modus operandi the show that dig deep into foreign policy. i'm your host manila chan. thank you for tuning in. we'll see you again next week to figure out the ammo in. ah oh. in the year of 1954, the united states of america engaged in warfare against the people of vietnam. the white house supported the corrupt puppet government of southern vietnam. in 1965 americans began their invasion following the aim to defeat the forces of vietnamese patriots. the pentagon was confident that the victory would be on the american side, due to its military super

scott ritter is joining us again. scott, thanks for sticking around. still want to talk about so in the 20th century, a post mortem of places like iran, 1953. she lay 1973, bolivia, 1980 iraq, 2001 libya 2011. and i believe future historians will refer to ukraine in 2014 as an example. all had so called us intervention in lieu of the term coo or regime change operation. what's been the result of us intervention for some of these places? well, 1st thing is, none of these places emerged better after the u. s. intervention than they were before us intervention. everything the united states touches when it comes to this kind of activity where there's a dies. there's not a single example where the united states went in and touched the country and said, i'm intervening to achieve a change in regimes and everything came up, smell of roses. it doesn't work that we look at libya under gadhafi priorities, and i must sit here is singing the praises gadhafi. i'm not going to pretend to use some sort of wonderful democratic leader and all this done. so he was gadha

are a scott ritter and don't go anywhere. there's a ton more to unpack here, coming up next, can we blame qu on mark zuckerberg? we'll examine the role of social media in modern day cruise. we're going to discuss it when we return that type, the em out will be right back. i ah ah, to come to russian state to never outside us on the north landscape with within the 55 with us be the one else holes with we will ban in the european union, the kremlin media machine, the state on russia today. and archie spoke back to even our video agency, roughly all brand on youtube. and it says with for mark zuckerberg could some of the 21st century coups be blamed on facebook. right? like i'm not trying to be sued for a liable or slander, so i won't lay these issues squarely at his feet, but nowadays regime change operations happen right before our very eyes on social media. scott ritter is joining us again. scott, thanks for sticking around. i'll still lot to talk about. so in the 20th century, a post mortem of places like iran, 1953. she lay

scott ritter was present to evaluate the reality of the weapons of mass destruction . he gave r t an exclusive interview on what he witnessed. watch it next. thanks brittany, and we'll see you back at the top of the hour. ah ah ah . to what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms. race is often very dramatic, development only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult. time. time to sit down and talk at this hour. american and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grant with we will bring to the food and medicine in supplies and fleet with ah, when i 1st joined the united nation special commission in september of 1991. i wasn't brought in as an inspector. i was brought in to help create an intelligence organization that would assist the special commission and evaluating the accuracy of the iraqi declarations about what weapons of mass destruction they had . and if the

if you it is something i'm sure we will return to scott ritter, former us marine corps intelligence offer. sorry, live on the program. well on is our lot for ny, from the r t newsroom. but keep close because next we're delving into the, our times strained a times beneficial relationship between the world war 2 allied leader. stay with us for that. it's right ahead. ah ah ah ah ah, churchhouse goal was to preserve the british empire. the united states wanted an open world there which american dollar could penetrate, which american trade would have access everywhere and to markets and to labor had 2 resources around the globe. so they had very different kinds of.

we asked scott ritter what was behind power claims at the un security council. the full night chief un weapons inspector, is who iraq believes washington never had any intention to let the experts do that job as a rock disarmament was apparently, the last thing the u. s. one said, i was brought in to help create an intelligence organization that would assist the special commission and evaluating the accuracy of the iraqi declarations about what weapons of mass destruction they had. you see, i thought that the mission of the special commission was to disarm. i rec, and am, and we worked in a very assiduous manner to carry out that mission. but it turned out that the disarmament of iraq was the last thing the united states wanted. the united states was going to go to war with iraq regardless. regardless, it doesn't matter what the truth was. so i addressed the iraqi parliament. i gave a speech up there wasn't pre screened. and as a speech, a said, if you don't let weapons inspectors back in your country will be destroyed. you have to let them back in without any p

we had a guest on recently scott ritter and he is a former un weapons inspector and he likes to continue to use the phrase military math. so all the p, all the blankenburg and all of victoria new and shakes, tell them they can say whatever they want, but they don't talk in terms of military math. again, this is why it's becoming so very dangerous. alexander and st. petersburg go ahead . i think the main issue isn't so much a panicking, it's probably more that the leads in nato and in washington, d. c. at least some portion of them are beginning to realize that this war isn't going to, at the very least go as easily as they thought and that worst for them. they won't achieve any of their objectives. so i think that there is, of course, to be a leads who are looking at their strategy and realizing, finally after about a year that they're not going to get what they want. so what they're instead trying to do it seems, as was mentioned just now about these chinese balloons, there's balloons everywhere over the us, all of a sudden and it's suddenly become a huge national crisis that they all h

and i think they are panicking because they realize scott ritter, who was in our conference once said that the white house is writing checks it, it cannot cash. and that's what we're seeing happen. i don't know what the end game is. as you said, there's a pivot toward china. can we cut our bus kicked by russia? so let's take on china. that sounds like a good idea. the military destro complex, however, is quite happy about this and they're happy to continue with the gravy train. you know, i know you said earlier on the previous appearance on cross talk about the the after effect was when the on the complet comes to an end. we have so many refugees right now. failed stayed in ukraine and those problems are not going to go away. very, for very long, depending on the outcome of the complex ukraine may have the lowest, you know, lowest interest for people who invest in, i mean, the long term future of ukraine. whatever size of it is is bleak atrial yes, but we also have to look at this from the demographic point of view and economic point of view that a g d, p of poland is increasing becau

scott ritter said racks capability to have weapons of mass destruction had been eliminated. by december of 1998, it's no wonder writer, saw paolo's, accusations against baghdad, as relying only on circumstantial evidence. pal just keeps hitting you with circumstantial evidence and he confuses people and he lied. he lied to people. he misled people. fabricating evidence, lying killing, hundreds of thousands of people. another stark reminder of the lengths washington is willing to go to the success of its foreign policy agenda is at stake. or 20 years on we asked scott ritter what was behind paul's claims at the un security council. the former chief un weapons is but it's a to iraq lose a washington never had any intention to let the exposed to the jobs the xerox disarmament was. apparently the last thing us wanted i was brought in to help create an intelligence organization that would assist the special commission in a valuating, the accuracy of the iraqi declarations about what weapons of mass destruction they had. you see, i thought that the, the mission of the special comm

scott ritter, who gave our teen exclusive interview on what he witnessed. watch it shortly. after a quick break, we'll see you back at the top of the hour. ah ah. riskier considering confused with some sort of baltimore go north or buell with white glove, you know, who do mumbles with.

i hope not everyone has heard of such a thinker as retired us marine corps officer scott ritter before. he didn't really suspect either. that he suddenly wakes up as a weighty analyst, but then he gave an interview in which for some reason he said he didn’t even sing. he said that russian president putin is very patient. and that's it. in general, but in order for you to think that the phrase successfully fell into someone's eyes and became world news, the most striking thing is that even the leading russian media shared in their publications such a mega-statement of a retired officer. moskovsky komsomolets placed in the top news does not bother anyone, even that the interview is an old cattle and gave a youtube channel called a naturalist capitalist. this is what everything, yes, is just an illustration of the media madness in which we find ourselves when common sense becomes a rare natural phenomenon. and when pussy wright refuse to sing on the same stage with anna netrebko and not on the same stage, you see, it's easy to succumb to chaos. lately, i can’t sleep straight, everything h

often to blame for the former us marine corps intelligence officer, turned un weapons inspector, scott ritter. shed some light on the issue. all right, let's get into the m o me . i said tomato, you say tomato. i say coo, the u. s. government says regime change when one party or group assumes power by force, that usually leads to a lot of bloodshed, whatever the word game that's known, the world over as a crude, a top. but in the age of social media sensitivity and kindness in recent years.

scott ritter concluded. baghdad does not possess weapons of mass destruction, his testimony in 1998. caused a scandal in congress, the united states raged the most, then senator. joe biden. the argument was that once the ritter is paid less than the us politicians, then it is they who should decide whether to fight or not, they decide. should a country start a war, is it difficult? solution that's why they get paid a lot of bucks, they get millions, and you didn't ritter silenced the police fabricated a criminal case. efti and washington have excellent booty, so before the invasion, the country was exhausted with harsh sanctions. they caused a humanitarian catastrophe, hundreds of thousands of children died, but in the states they said they did not see this as a problem more children died than in hiroshima was it worth it, i think it was a very difficult choice, but the price paid is worth dragging cancer into a military conflict to impose harsh sanctions, and then attack such a scheme, the united states app

on top of that, the u. n's, former chief weapons inspector to iraq, scott ritter said iraq's capability to have weapons of mass destruction had been eliminated by december of 1998. it's no wonder writer saw paolo's, accusations against baghdad as relying only on circumstantial evidence. powell just keeps hitting you with circumstantial evidence and he confuses people and he lied. he lied to people. he misled people. fabricating evidence, lying killing, hundreds of thousands of people. another stark reminder of the lengths washington is willing to go to the success of its foreign policy agenda is at stake. and 20 years after the us invasion of iraq, we asked thought, read or what was be a kind powers claim at the un security council. the former chief un weapons inspector to rock says washington never had any intention to let the experts do their job as iraq's disarmament was. the last thing the u. s. wanted, in reality, has brought in to help create an intelligence organization that would assist the special commission and evaluating the accuracy of the iraqi declarations about what weapo

a former un weapons inspector scott ritter believes the claim of having any oversight on the money being sent to ukraine is only used to play kate the american taxpayer. i had to laugh when he said, you know, dealing with ukrainian corruption is at the top of the list notes at the bottom of the list. because if it was at the top of the list, you would never have given you train any money because you can't account for it. but the fact of the matter is, there's little doubt that 6070 percent of the financial resources that the united states provided to ukraine has disappeared, isn't getting to the intended target has been, you know, sequestered by, of the innumerable corrupt hands that are reaching out to to be padded by american dollars in on the military side. um, you know, again, noticed the, the non answers so, you know, where we're investigating, we don't have an answer. if you've been on top of this from the very beginning, you'd have an answer. there are no answers because we're not on the top of it. and the reason why we're not on the top of it is because we wouldn't be able to do

s. abrams tank deliveries could take months. former us marine corps intelligence officer, scott ritter, analyze as the possible influence of new weapons on the battlefield. depends on the quantities in the timing right now. what it, what appears is that these tanks and these aircraft are not going to be a sufficient and quantity and the, the way they're going to be committed will be piecemeal. so 14 here, 10 here. 14 here. um, if that's the case, they'll have 0 impact on the battlefield. but if you crane is able to rapidly acquire these tanks and they arrive at the same time, together with your trained personnel, then the outcome will be a massive escalation of the fighting them. you know, russia has made it clear that if the west provides these tanks and these aircraft that russia will be compelled to respond and it won't just be more tanks and more air.

has attempted to shape the media narrative, according to former us marine corps intel officers, scott ritter and fact on the latest episode of auth fees. the modus operandi, he says, the u. s. establishment use, there's other ways to describe the ousting of the democratically elected government . so they can justify its full fledged support. watch the full episode of nazi dot com. otherwise for our short clip of what's in store. it's a 4 letter word. it's a dirty word. there's a lot of negative connotation attached to it. many us supported crews in the past of produce the leadership of that that has been embarrassing to the united states. it's also something that tries in the face of international law cou implies that we are actively supporting a military junta to forcefully take over from a government oftentimes a democratically elected government. we don't want to encourage that in more, so we speak a regime change in the case of my don and in the ukraine in 2014, we speak of a revolution regime change where the people ousted the pro russian victory on a co, which we don't admit that it wa

tell us, scott ritter or the latest episode of ortiz or the modus operandi. he says the u. s . establishment used as other ways to describe the ousting of the democratically elected government, so that it can justify its full fledged support. you can watch a full episode on r t dot com for our quick preview. it's a 4 letter word, it's a dirty word. there's a lot of negative connotation attached to it. many us supported crews in the past of produce the leadership of that has been embarrassing to the united states. it's also something that tries in the face of a international law cou implies that we are actively supporting a military junta to forcefully take over from a government oftentimes a democratically elected government. we don't want to encourage that anymore, so we speak a regime change in the case of my don and in the ukraine in 2014, we speak of a revolution, a regime change where the people ousted the pro russian. you know, victory on a co which we don't admit that it was a coup d'etat carried out by ultra training. osh ultra nationalists, so funded and supported

all, it is possible for a person to have german subtitles in an interview with armaments expert scott ritterg the northern streams. he is asked by one of the bloggers of the official german media that they are not interested in raising sore questions and the authorities of the country washington did not begin to devote berlin to their plans with bombs. story. hershe points out that the us recognized that if the northern stream works for the us it will be much more difficult to wage a proxy war against russia germany simply will not agree to participate and cut off yourself from this cheap source of energy. the united states found a solution, and did not blow up the gas pipeline. an alternative for germany is gas, american liquefied and very expensive, but there is nowhere to go and vice-chancellor khabik in front of cameras in washington does not require explanations, according to the situation with the northern streams, he pretends they are satisfied with everything in a short time. we have built three new lng storage terminal filled with prices are declining. although they are still too hi

chief inspector scott-ritter concluded that baghdad does not have weapons of mass destruction testimonythey caused a scandal in congress, the united states raged the most, then still a senator. joe biden argued that once the ritter is paid less than us politicians , then it is they who decide whether to fight or not, they decide. whether a country should start a war is a difficult decision. that's why they get paid a lot of bucks. they get millions, and you silenced no ritter. such a case of cancer is a lot of oil, and he was an excellent prey for washington, therefore, before the invasion, the country was exhausted by tough sanctions. they caused a humanitarian catastrophe, hundreds of thousands of children died, but in the states they said that they did not see this as a problem . children died more than in hiroshima . was it worth it, if i think it was a very difficult choice, but the price paid is worth it? military conflict to carry out severe sanctions, and then attack such a scheme, the united states is constantly applying economic sanctions. then there is the demonization of the

bearing for intelligence officer, scott ritter, analyzes the possible influence. the new weapons on the battlefield depends on the quantities in the timing right now. what it, what appears is that these tanks and these aircraft are not going to be a sufficient and quantity. and the, the way they're going to be committed will be piece meal. so 14 here, 10 here. 14 here. um, if that's the case, they'll have 0 impact on the battlefield. but if you crane is able to rapidly acquire these tanks and they arrive at the same time, together with a, you know, trained personnel, then the outcome will be a massive escalation of the fighting. um, you know, russia has made it clear that if the west provides these tanks and these aircraft that russia will be compelled to respond and it won't just be more tanks and more aircraft, or, i don't think russia's talking about nuclear or weapons. but there are significant conventional weapons that russia has yet to employ. ah, and i, i think we'll see an escalation in the fighting and more dead ukrainians. more did and displaced ukrainia

blame for the former us marine corps intelligence officer, turned to you and weapons inspector scott ritter. shed some light on the issue. all right, let's get into the m o. ah . i said tomato, you say tomato. i say cool, the u. s. government says regime change when one party or group assumes power by force that usually leads to a lot of bloodshed.

but we still need to work on this form a us marine corps intelligence officer, scott ritter phase. ukraine has turned into a massive black hole for western taxpayer money. i personally believe that anything will help turn the tide of the conflict in ukraine's favor anything that flows and ukraine will, of course, of help bolster ukraine's defenses. but it will only delay what i believe is an inevitable russian victory. it won't allow, right ukraine to turn the tables the bolstering of nato's a capabilities a is going to be correctly expensive. nato is shown so little more than a paper tiger. at this point time, but, but it's also unnecessary because it, russia doesn't have an intent to expand this conflict beyond ukraine. nato wants to portray russia as an aggressive, malign, a neighbor. but the reality is, all russia's looking for is a way to have made o respect, rushes legitimate, national security interests, spheres of influence, and to find a new european security framework that respects both russian and european interests . so any money that's spent to miss misinterpretation of realit