Scott Ritter citáty

Scott Ritter foto
0   0

Scott Ritter

Datum narození: 15. červenec 1961

William Scott Ritter byl zbrojním inspektorem OSN v Iráku od roku 1991 do roku 1998. Později kritik zahraniční politiky Spojených států na Blízkém východě. Před invazí do Iráku v březnu 2003 uvedl, že Irák neměl žádné zbraně hromadného ničení. Stal se slavnou osobností pro různá talk show v důsledku svého protiválečného postoje.

Ritter byl narozen do vojenské rodiny v roce 1961 ve městě Gainesvilla na Floridě. V roce 1979 vystudoval Kaiserslautern American High School a později vysokou školu v Lancasteru. V roce 1980 sloužil v americké armádě jako vojín. Pak v květnu 1984 byl povýšen na zpravodajského důstojníka námořní pěchoty Spojených států. Sloužil v této funkci po dobu 12 let. Byl hlavním analytikem pro námořní pěchotu rychlého nasazení týkající se sovětské invaze do Afghánistánu. Ritterova akademická práce byla zaměřená na hnutí odporu v sovětské Střední Asii mezi lety 1920 a 1930. Během vojenské operace Pouštní bouře sloužil jako poradce generála Normana Schwarzkopfa. Ritter později pracoval jako bezpečnostní a vojenský poradce pro Fox News sítě. Byl ve spojení s britskou zahraniční zpravodajskou špionážní agenturou MI6.

Od roku 1991 až do roku 1998 byl zbrojním inspektorem OSN a byl pověřen najít a zničit všechny zbraně hromadného ničení v Iráku. Ritter byl mezi skupinou UNESCO a nedostal dostatečnou podporu pro svou analýzu ze strany USA a Velké Británie, později rezignoval. Po jeho odstoupení z UNESCO, pokračoval jako kritik americké politiky vůči Iráku, zejména s ohledem na problém šíření zbraní hromadného ničení.

V roce 2001 byl dvakrát obviněn z nabízení sexu s nezletilými na internetu. V roce 2010 byl obviněn z podobných incidentů, které vedly k jeho odsouzení. V září 2014 byl podmínečně propuštěn.

Citáty Scott Ritter

„[War] isn't a Nintendo game… There's no hitting reset and coming back to life. If you turn your head around the corner in the streets of Baghdad and take one between the eyes, your brain is gone. Maybe you turn around the corner and you take one in your chest and it'll sever your spinal cord and you can spend the rest of your life in a wheelchair. That's war! Maybe you step on a landmine and there goes your leg, you lose an arm, you lose eyesight. That's war! And we're talking about going to war. There better be a hell of a good reason for this. There better be a reason worthy of the sacrifice we're asking Americans to make. And you know, it's not just going to be Americans dying in this war; we're going to be killing Iraqis, by the thousands. I have to tell you, as a former Marine, I was involved with the worlds most efficient killing machine. We were the best led, best trained, best equipped warriors anybody's ever seen, and we are today. When we go to war we will slaughter those who oppose us, because that's what we do, and we do it better than anyone else. If you get in my way, I will kill you. You try hurt one of my marines, I'm taking you down. And I will continue to go until my government tells me to stop. We are the dogs of war and when we are unleashed there is nothing but hell. That's the reality of war. For God's sake, don't unleash the dogs of war unless there's an absolute necessary to do so.“

—  Scott Ritter
2000, Keynote address, California Institute of Technology November 13, 2002

Help us translate English quotes

Discover interesting quotes and translate them.

Start translating

„I'd like to think that the best bunker buster is a diplomat.“

—  Scott Ritter
2008, Scott Ritter Says Controversial Things About Clinton, Bush, Fox News, the Surge, etc., Interview with the Memphis Flyer, May 8 2008

„I'll say this about nuclear weapons. You know I'm not sitting on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I'm not in on the planning. I'll take it at face value that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff successfully eliminated nuclear weapons in the first phase of the operation.But keep in mind this. That the Bush Administration has built a new generation of nuclear weapons that we call 'usable nukes.' And they have a nuclear posture now, which permits the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons in a non-nuclear environment, if the Commander in Chief deems U. S. forces to be in significant risk.If we start bombing Iran, I'm telling you right now, it's not going to work. We're not going to achieve decapitation, regime change, all that. What will happen is the Iranians will respond, and we will feel the pain instantaneously, which will prompt the Bush administration to phase two, which will have to be boots on the ground. And we will put boots on the ground, we will surge a couple of divisions in, probably through Azerbaijan, down the Caspian Sea coast, in an effort to push the regime over. And when they don't push over, we now have 40,000 troops trapped. We have now reached the definition of significant numbers of U. S. troops in harm's way, and there is no reserve to pull them out! There's no more cavalry to come riding to the rescue. And at that point in time, my concern is that we will use nuclear weapons to break the backbone of Iranian resistance, and it may not work.But what it will do is this: it will unleash the nuclear genie. And so for all those Americans out there tonight who say, 'You know what - taking on Iran is a good thing.' I just told you if we take on Iran, we're gonna use nuclear weapons. And if we use nuclear weapons, the genie ain't going back in the bottle, until an American city is taken out by an Islamic weapon in retaliation. So, tell me, you want to go to war with Iran. Pick your city. Pick your city. Tell me which one you want gone. Seattle? L. A.? Boston? New York? Miami. Pick one. Cause at least one's going. And that's something we should all think about before we march down this path of insanity that George Bush has us headed on.</p“

—  Scott Ritter
2006, October 16, 2006

„One of the big problems is — and here goes the grenade — Israel. The second you mention the word "Israel," the nation Israel, the concept Israel, many in the American press become very defensive. We’re not allowed to be highly critical of the state of Israel. And the other thing we’re not allowed to do is discuss the notion that Israel and the notion of Israeli interests may in fact be dictating what America is doing, that what we’re doing in the Middle East may not be to the benefit of America’s national security, but to Israel’s national security. But, see, we don’t want to talk about that, because one of the great success stories out there is the pro-Israeli lobby that has successfully enabled themselves to blend the two together, so that when we speak of Israeli interests, they say, "No, we’re speaking of American interests."It’s interesting that AIPAC and other elements of the Israeli Lobby don’t have to register as agents of a foreign government. It would be nice if they did, because then we’d know when they’re advocating on behalf of Israel or they’re advocating on behalf of the United States of America.I would challenge The New York Times to sit down and do a critical story on Israel, on the role of Israel’s influence, the role that Israel plays in influencing American foreign policy. There’s nothing wrong with Israel trying to influence American foreign policy. Let me make that clear. The British seek to influence our foreign policy. The French seek to influence our foreign policy. The Saudis seek to influence our foreign policy. The difference is, when they do this and they bring American citizens into play, these Americans, once they take the money of a foreign government and they advocate on behalf of that foreign government, they register themselves as an agent of that government, so we know where they’re coming from. That’s all I ask the Israelis to do. Let us know where you’re coming from, because stop confusing the American public that Israel’s interests are necessarily America’s interests.I have to tell you right now, Israel has a viable, valid concern about Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. If I were an Israeli, I would be extremely concerned about Hezbollah, and I would want to do everything possible to nullify that organization. As an American, I will tell you, Hezbollah does not threaten the national security of the United States of America one iota. So we should not be talking about using American military forces to deal with the Hezbollah issue. That is an Israeli problem. And yet, you’ll see The New York Times, The Washington Post and other media outlets confusing the issue. They want us to believe that Hezbollah is an American problem. It isn’t, ladies and gentleman. Hezbollah was created three years after Israel invaded Lebanon, not three years after the United States invaded Lebanon. And Hezbollah’s sole purpose was to liberate southern Lebanon from Israeli occupation. I’m not here to condone or sing high praises in virtue for Hezbollah. But I’m here to tell you right now, Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization that threatens the security of the United States of America.“

—  Scott Ritter
2006, October 16, 2006

Dnešní výročí
Johannes Mario Simmel foto
Johannes Mario Simmel28
rakouský spisovatel 1924 - 2009
Paul Arden foto
Paul Arden5
spisovatel 1940 - 2008
Henry Ford foto
Henry Ford36
americký průmyslník 1863 - 1947
Jaroslav Durych foto
Jaroslav Durych7
český básník, dramatik, esejista, lékař, náboženský spisova… 1886 - 1962
Dalších 65 dnešních výročí