Shooting Down A Mystical F-35

Ritter's critique, and a summary of arguments for and against

[I hope you had a chuckle at the graphic. Sometimes life gets too serious. I obviously have great respect for these commentators. Doesn’t mean I have to agree with them.]

Published: 2024-04-23

Updated 2024-04-25: Pepe Escobar’s interview with Anja K and L Johnson is added, as is Larry’s comment upon it. See Update for commentary.

---

Ritter’s Critique

Scott Ritter's dismissal of the scenario released by Pepe Escobar from his sources follows the pattern of McGovern and Johnson. No attack on Escobar's credibility as a journalist was issued. Rather, technical aspects of the scenario were challenged. Ritter's rejection was based on his knowledge of military capabilities, or put it brutally, his knowledge the US product catalogue. His analysis cast doubt and provided some insight.

In framing his critique of the plausibility of Escobar's sources' scenario, Scott Ritter offered the journalist a soft landing via a case of "lost in translation" from sources. He introduced his dissection of the scenario with a crash and burn:

There is no aspect of [the scenario] which stands up to technical scrutiny.

His rebuttal began with the choice of plane (delivery platform). He stated that although lacking in stealth capability the F-15E, which the IDF has, would be far simpler to use, rather than have to fit the weapon into the limited size weapons bays of the F-35. This one would have to do to maintain the stealth property of the F-35. This informed the audience that Ritter was thinking of a specific weapon, or the size of a type of weapon.

Ritter described a nuclear EMP weapon as an anti-satellite weapon. It is traditionally launched by its carrier in vertical flight high in the atmosphere, providing speed and release above dense air as assistance to the weapon's propulsion systems. He described the weapon as of little value, as it would be so distant from the surface that the EMP would be weak when it reached its ground target. (Physics: All wave/shock systems suffer the degradation of the inverse square of distance from energy release point.) He also questioned a Russian aeroplane's access to the US controlled air space, as had Johnson, concluding his first response that "Pepe's been taken to the cleaners on this one."

In answering the follow-up question Ritter stated that the weapon would had to have been fully assembled at launch, by which he meant the nuclear component set within the weapon. This is a consequence of the type of delivery mechanism (F-35 or F-15E). He then spoke of the risk of the loss of this nuclear material. In the event of an accident, or shootdown, this fissile material would then likely be collected by people or groups who are extremely hostile to Israel.

"It didn't happen. I'll bet a pay cheque on that" was Ritter's conclusion.

Responses

As insane as the Zionists' continued genocide of Palestinians in Gaza shows them to be, military decisions with the use of nuclear material must surely involve some risk calculation. Ritter's argument of the loss of control of the fissile material and it falling under control of hostile forces is a good counter argument to the scenario, assuming rational Zionists.

The argument by "technical implausibility" is based on Ritter's, one must presume extensive, knowledge of the current US weapons catalogue. That nuclear EMP weapons exist is made known. As are their intended targets, satellites. This does not discount one being chosen to be used in an entirely different method, dropped low in the atmosphere over Iran. Yes, its trigger mechanism may need to be adjusted to a pressure sensor rather than its default. This is surely not insurmountable for a technically sophisticated military organization. Ritter's point counts against a conventional use of an existing EMP weapon.

In hindsight, the lack of a nuclear EMP device to be used low in the atmosphere may have been behind Larry Johnson's informant's use of the phrase "spinning up". The phrase may have meant the research and commissioning for a new configuration of an EMP weapon for lower altitude use.

Summary: Arguments Against and Counters

The first argument against the scenario was by Larry Johnson; "Russians in US airspace". This is countered by the deconfliction hotline and hypothetical US consent.

Israel wouldn't use a nuclear weapon because their enemies may get it. This assumes rational Zionists, which currently seems a questionable assumption.

Israel would only use a weapon in the matter for which it was intended. This does raise technical challenges though it seems reasonable to assume that the IDF's technical personnel may be able to surmount these.

The F-35 was the wrong type of delivery platform for the type of EMP weapons known to exist. This assumes that an F-35 was used, as described in the scenario. The F-15E which Ritter suggested must have some aspects which, although losing stealth, provide improvements: speed, altitude, under wing weapons attachment sites or other. The argument is good for discounting the F-35 delivery mechanism, if a weapon's bay was used.

Johnson and Ritter's present two "lack of recovery operation" type arguments. For now, the lack of public evidence seems the best argument against the scenario. One weakness is that we've only had a while to potentially learn of this.

A counter could be offered in Larry Johnson's style by offering a moment in US film history. The film is "Red October" in which a US general informs a torpedo operator that "This did not happen" as he manually detonates the weapon early. This is echoed in actual history between the US and Israel. The history of the Israeli attempted sinking of the USS Liberty involved a US general visiting the personnel recovered from the Liberty. He warned them to never speak of what happened. The crew where then, to borrow a JFK phrase, "splintered into a 1000 pieces and scattered to the wind". It took decades for the survivors to regroup, begin to tell their stories and for books to be written detailing their experiences and informing the US public of the murderous, Israeli duplicity.

Three experienced, former members of the US intelligence community who have consistently expressed opinions against mainstream narratives have all expressed serious doubt about the scenario of which Pepe Escobar has stated his sources informed him. These doubts are well formed though not conclusive.

We are left to ponder. No conclusions can be reached.

Meanwhile ...

Escobar has offered an "update" on the "mystery" soon, amid his "crazy schedule". He did not mention an article.

Update

Escobar stands by his statements. He has repeat confirmations for 3 sources, an initial and two follow up. The follow ups are intel agencies of Asian nations. A message by the initial source was that they expected a leak.

Escobar's suggestion is that what was provided to him was a deliberate partial story, to shape the narrative so that when the leak occurred the story was partialy understood and could be better controlled. He acknowledged that he could be being played, by some combination, but stressed that this is against the ethos, the mentality of these cultures.

Pepe stated that his first source said that "there is a pact of silence" on the serious "EMP" event.

I detect fear. Something very serious happened. The story given to him was an emergency response to a potential leak.

Johnson's intuition is good. He returned to the "Probe(?)", as I put it, by Israel. It was not a response at all. The event made no sense. It remains an anomoly.

Johnson's summary (of the interview)

Here are the updated facts — Pepe has confirmed the story with three separate sources. So let me explain what this means. Pepe Escobar is not a liar or a fabricator. He is not someone seeking notoriety nor publicity. …

The real question is why the sources are sharing this story. …

I am certain about one thing — the news accounts about Israel’s failed attack on Iran last Thursday does not make sense. We do not have a good account of what happened. …

or support this work via Buy Me A Coffee or Patreon.

Sources

Escobar, Russia & Israel: Averting a Nuclear EMP Attack on Iran, YesXorNo, 2024-04-22

🎧 Averting a Nuclear EMP Attack on Iran -- Extended, YesXorNo, 2024-04-22

Scott Ritter: Ukraine Collapsing In Plain Sight., Ritter with Napolitano, Judging Freedom, 2024-04-22

• The two questions on the topic, and Ritter’s responses begin at 00:11:02 and last until 00:14:24.

Please see the earlier article for the responses by and videos of Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson.

Pepe escobar and larry johnson about the war against the brics., Ania K interviews Escobar and Johnson, Through my eyes, 2024-04-23

• discussion on the topic of this article is from 00:43:28 to 01:05:20

Culture

Billy Joel - New York State of Mind (Audio), from his 1976 album Turnstiles, uploaded 2013-03-22

---

Copyleft: CC0