• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Scott Ritter: On A Highway To Hell (American Nuclear Policy)

RiffRaff

Deputy Director
Staff member
Donator
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Location
Indiana, US

Nuclear weapons offer an illusion of security. By allowing the U.S. nuclear posture to shift from deterrence to employment, there will be a scenario where the U.S. will use nuclear weapons. And then it’s lights out.

This article is highly critical of Joe Biden's role in American nuclear policy, but it's not necessarily wrong.
 
That article was essentially a "we need to get rid of nuclear weapons" piece couched in some psuedo-intellectualism. It ignores realities that the Chinese don't care about limiting their nuclear arsenal and essentially demands that the US should disarm because "nuclear weapons bad".
Spot on, I almost laughed in bits where you could tell he was trying to sound smart but failing miserably.
I'm avoiding Ad hominem because despite him being a despicable human, I'm desperately trying to avoid a logical fallacy, but just read his wikipedia page

This man is deluded, it shocks me that at one point he was a UN weapons inspector.
 
I agree with some of his presuppositions regarding nuclear doctrine and its trajectory as well as Chinas build up.
But his criticisms are only laid at the feet of US doctrine and inconsistencies it might have. But in doing so he ignores Russia and Chinas near identical approach to nuclear doctrine.

In short his observation regarding the inherent dangers in any nation’s nuclear doctrine might be correct.
He seems to only lay the blame for this on the US. This was clear when he began with the arms industry for jobs trope. This is a favorite anti capitalist attack levied at the US. Yet completely ignores the same enrichment motive of Russian and Chinese industrialist. They might not be motivated solely by financial empowerment they are certainly motivated by political power and capital. Remember capital is just financial power. It’s still just power just like political power in a closed state. Irregardless of economic system.

For this I deem him personally an enemy apologist whose sole purpose is to disrupt and cause division in the US electorate and foreign policies.

That is why I generally don’t regard Ritter as a viable commentator on any international issue. He might be correct sometimes but he is not an honest observer of all nations involved.

I might not like US foreign policy and actions sometimes. But it cannot be criticized in the vacuum outside other nations actions.

Just like the dirty deeds and actions taken during the Cold War that shocked many Americans. They were made in response to actions of the Soviets and Mao’s China.
 
I agree with some of his presuppositions regarding nuclear doctrine and its trajectory as well as Chinas build up.
But his criticisms are only laid at the feet of US doctrine and inconsistencies it might have. But in doing so he ignores Russia and Chinas near identical approach to nuclear doctrine.

In short his observation regarding the inherent dangers in any nation’s nuclear doctrine might be correct.
He seems to only lay the blame for this on the US. This was clear when he began with the arms industry for jobs trope. This is a favorite anti capitalist attack levied at the US. Yet completely ignores the same enrichment motive of Russian and Chinese industrialist. They might not be motivated solely by financial empowerment they are certainly motivated by political power and capital. Remember capital is just financial power. It’s still just power just like political power in a closed state. Irregardless of economic system.

For this I deem him personally an enemy apologist whose sole purpose is to disrupt and cause division in the US electorate and foreign policies.

That is why I generally don’t regard Ritter as a viable commentator on any international issue. He might be correct sometimes but he is not an honest observer of all nations involved.

I might not like US foreign policy and actions sometimes. But it cannot be criticized in the vacuum outside other nations actions.

Just like the dirty deeds and actions taken during the Cold War that shocked many Americans. They were made in response to actions of the Soviets and Mao’s China.
IMO You are very much correct on every point in your post! The cold war was not fought in a vacuum and was at times very much hot.

It may be called a “low intensity” conflict but dead is dead. Just as any soldier if they have ever been in a low intensity firefight.

p.s. Ritter is like a broken clock.

IMO His observations are usually right, but his conclusions are almost always anti-American.

YMMV
 
From what I've heard and seen of Ritter on X it's interesting that he wrote a piece that's not in bad faith through and through and his actual opinion even though it devolved into "US bad, all others good"
 
More like a p o s, as a person anyways.
I don’t know him although he was a contemporary, so A: don’t want to know him B: avoiding attacking him personally especially when countering most of his arguments is like clubbing baby seals.
 
Back
Top Bottom