The Latest Russian Spring Offensive.

Scott Ritter

June 17, 2023 | 11 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

11 Comments / 11 Comments

  1. @Michael

    On #3, you might be on the mark

    Yes, that was my conclusion as well, but I thought it presumptuous to not let you clarify the matter before commenting further on this topic. In fact, whereas the passion which fuels your conjecture on this point appears quite compelling, I have to admit that it is not terribly convincing, or not to me in any event. Consequently, I remain unconvinced that the Russians purposefully destroyed their own dam as you have suggested.

    As to my mention of Nord Stream, it was only to emphasize the reckless behavior representative of the Ukrainians and her masters, which was also initially determined by the NYT citing American experts that Russia blew up her own pipeline just as they are now doing to explain that Russia blew up her own dam. The absurd lengths to which it is imagine the Russians will go to gain a good photo op to impress who knows who is itself quite silly, and still remains unconvincing, or so it seems to me, in any event.

  2. I posted this link on ChitChat, but it will almost certainly get pushed aside and die there:

    Pay close attention to what Rebekah Koffler is saying — to whit, that the “Ukraine Special Operation” is not a local operation (for instance, of Putin “de-Nazifying and de-militarizing” Ukraine). It is right now, as I type, morphing into WWIII.

    As I have noted since February, 2022, Putin is not fighting against Zelenskyy. He is fighting against NATO; and NATO has been taking steps to provide “whatever it takes” to ensure that Ukraine is not defeated by Russia. Putin, meanwhile, who essentially IS “Russia”, has proved to be an absolute madman, who will stop at nothing to cling to power.

    1. He has purusued indiscriminate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine, an act that has won him indictment by the ICC for genocide.

    2. He, in all likelihood, ordered the mining and destruction of the Kakhovka Dam. This has put the world’s largest nuclear facility in peril, threatened famine for the Ukraine and for much of the world, which depends on Ukrainian grain, cut off Crimea from much of its water, and facilitated a cholera outbreak among its own troops below the dam.

    3. His troops have committed the usual war crimes — torturing and castrating prisoners, raping women, kidnapping children, etc.; and his inner circle openly brags about these things.

    4. He has forced his own troops to go to the front, scantily armed and virtually untrained, to serve as canon fodder; and assigned special “border” units for the express purpose of shooting to kill Russian soldiers who try to retreat.

    5. He has repeatedly threatened the use of not only deadly cyberwarfare, but unprovoked attack with nuclear weapons.

    All this, to maintain his personal power.

    Biden and Xi, of course, the other two “Arch-Psychopaths” steering the world’s direction, are Putin’s peers in every respect. There has not been a Mexican standoff like this in the world since WWII; and that didn’t end until one of the gunslingers (Hitler) lie dead on the ground, and Japan suffered the loss of two cities to what are now called “tactical nuclear weapons” (the kind Putin promises to use against Ukraine and NATO).

    This is a good time to contemplate eternity. cf. John 3:16

  3. Hello, Peloni.

    I find that people who prefer to use insults to augment their argument, do so due so because either it is their regular manner to be abusive, or an insecurity in the argument they have made, or they possess an over invested passion in believing that they must be right.

    Let’s see… In that one sentence, you have called me

    1. someone who “prefers” to insult
    2. either regularly abusive or insecure

    (two insults to me, in response to one perceived toward you), or

    3. passionate in believing that they must be right.

    On #3, you might be on the mark, because I see no value, to God or men, to go about without human passion and without believing I am right in what I do. I hope you are motivated by the same values.

    nor due I possess the means by which to test the veracity of the claim being made that it ‘must’ have been an inside job.

    Amazing, Peloni! The dam collapsed into itself, clear down to the base. This doesn’t happen from a HIMARS attack, nor a navy seal operation. Just look at any highway or rail escarpment, and see how deep the holes need to be drilled to blast off a chunk of rock; and the steel-reinforced concrete “rock” of a dam is massive!

    Look at the cross-section. The only reasonable way to take out something like that is to pack the passageway with explosives — which the Russians have had plenty of time and reason to do, in planning for just such an occasion as this.

    OK. I’ll accept your plea of ignorance in these matters. Enough about the dam! The point of my posting was about how often Ritter and MacGregor have heralded phenomenal Russian success over this past year, only to end up with egg on their faces. This has nothing to do with demolition, dams or the New York Times — a publication which I never bother to read.

    This also has nothing to do with Nord Stream, which just about everyone has known was not a Russian operation. What this DOES have to do with, is your supposed gullibility in trusting the word of Putin’s operatives, agents of a man who has fought against Israel for decades — both as Russian President and as a KGB officer — and who openly trades major weapons with Iran.

  4. @Michael

    I think you have lost your mind…And to think I used to think you were smart!

    I find that people who prefer to use insults to augment their argument, do so due so because either it is their regular manner to be abusive, or an insecurity in the argument they have made, or they possess an over invested passion in believing that they must be right.

    In fact, I did read the article and I even saw the lovely photos as well. I however do not have access to the plans of the compound nor due I possess the means by which to test the veracity of the claim being made that it ‘must’ have been an inside job. I do know that the NYT does not do journalism as it is a propaganda outfit which solely writes reports to support the national narrative in support of the American administrative state, something which I would expect you to be well aware. This doesn’t mean that when they write that water is wet, something which is easily arguable or appreciable, I would doubt it, but it does mean when they provide expert witnesses testifying about something which can not be judged without an expertise, such as it must have been an explosion within the dam, I wouldn’t routinely assume that the NYT actually provided the due diligence to ask the hard questions nor to inquire from independent experts while making this single report. Nor would I routinely assume that any report they make is in any way necessarily representative of the thruth even of what limited investigation which they might have made. It does appear, however, that you do place enough trust in their reporting at least to accept this report as accurate. Good to note.

    In any event, I would only ask you why you believe what you are reading from this American propagandist site which is using American ‘experts’ to assure its wildly limited reader base that the ‘good guys’ who blew up Nord Stream didn’t also blow up the Karkhova dam.

  5. Peloni, I think you have lost your mind. Did you even read the NYT article? You don’t even have to know how to read — look at the pictures!

    The dam was destroyed from below, which could only happen from an explosion INSIDE the dam — which was entirely controlled by the Russians.

    And to think I used to think you were smart!

  6. @Michael

    almost immediately debunked lies

    Yet you are citing the NYT as the basis for your conclusion their statements about the dam was actually debunked, while fully awar that the NYT has actually won prizes for publishing immediately debunked lies. I would suggest it is time for a reality check, using something other than the NYT to describe what reality might be.

  7. Hi, Ted

    For some reason, Ritter, MacGregor and others have been publishing almost immediately debunked lies in Russia’s favor in this war. Yet another example is the piece in NY Times, describing in detail how Russia almost certainly destroyed the Kakhovka Dam (despite denials, as I recall, by Ritter & MacGregor):

    Some of my favorite commentators, such as Steve Bannon and Raheem Kassam, are eager to jump at false reports and comments coming from the pro-Russian propagandists, having to later backpedal on them. Even before the shooting began in Feb. 2022, Steve and Raheem vehemently opposed American involvement in a war that they insisted was “not in America’s interests”. Not many wars have been in the interests of the American people; but once the shooting starts, and the US and its allies (like NATO, Taiwan and Israel) get enmeshed in them, we have to choose sides; and the Russians, Chinese and Iranians are ALWAYS on the side opposing us.

    World politics is dominated today by the three great leaders: Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. All three are narcissistic psychopaths with a megalomanaical streak; and all three will stop at nothing to hang on to power. The parallel with HItler, Stalin and Tojo is unnerving.

  8. Russia has lost 2/3 of its tanks

    Russia’s Tank Losses in Ukraine Surpass 2,000 – OSINT Report
    May 31, 2023
    Military Media Center / Ukrainian Ministry of Defense

    Russia’s tank losses during its invasion of neighboring Ukraine surpassed 2,000 this week, according to the latest data from Oryx, an open-source intelligence analysis website.

    According to Oryx’s report, 1,238 of these tanks were destroyed in combat, 106 damaged, 113 abandoned on the battlefield and 544 captured by Ukraine.

    However, the real number of Russia’s tank losses could be up to 20% higher as Oryx’s analysis is based on open-source visual evidence, according to Jakub Janovsky, a contributor to the tally.

    The public tally maintained by Ukraine’s defense ministry currently estimates Russia’s tank losses on the battlefield at 3,802, while the U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies said in April that the count could range anywhere between 1,845 and 3,511.

    Oryx’s count reached the 1,000 mark in early September 2022, when the largest share of losses was attributed to Russia’s attempted seizure of Kyiv in the first weeks of the war.
    Tank Losses in Ukraine Raise Strategic Questions for Russia
    Read more

    “It doesn’t appear at all that those huge material losses affected Russia’s strategic thinking,” Janovsky told The Moscow Times on Wednesday.

    “Russia was already aware that it has problems, but decided to continue with the annexation of four Ukrainian regions in September,” he said.

    Since then, Ukraine’s successful counteroffensive in Kharkiv and Russia’s attempted offensive near Vuhledar generated some of the highest numbers of tank losses for Russia, according to Janovsky.

    Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine with around 3,000 operational tanks and used predominantly modern equipment at the start of the war.

    But as its tank losses have mounted, the share of “reactivated” older models engaged on the battlefield has been growing every month and is estimated to have reached 50%, the analyst said.

    “The share…could shift again quickly depending on Russia’s ability to move equipment from storage and reactivate it,” said Janovsky.

    “Based on available information Russia can reactivate [around] 50 or maybe up to 100 tanks per month and make around 10 or 20.”


    Russian Defense Minister Says More Tanks Needed in Ukraine

    By AFP
    3 hours ago