Doug notes:
"...because strategically, the time for inserting ground troops was now.
Right this minute! Load up the planes with paratroopers! Given that our
stated war aims were to protect Kosovars..."
It was only a "stated war aim" Doug, you shouldn't believe White House
press releases, the real US and NATO intentions are economic and political
and the humanitarian angle is only an angle. Yes it was a strategic
necessity to have something other than the bombing of empty military
targets, but unfortunately the absense of ground troops and the ban on
strategic non-military targets (utilities, industry) were political
decisions.
"...we weren't even willing to fly our planes low enough to retard his troop..."
Yes, the Serbs are well armed and are dug into nearly every Kosovo
villiage, and they have anti-aircraft capabilities. Whoever takes on the
Serbs is going to suffer losses. And yes Doug, NATO are more interested in
their losses than they are about the Kosovor people. Thats why the 24 super
helicopter (now 21) were heralded so much in advance - you didn't believe
the press releases about them going into action did you - against a
hailstorm of light, medium and heavy anti-aircraft fire; but have no fears,
they will fly up a quite valley on an ineffective high altitude mission at
least once to prove a point, and to give the press people a couple of good
shots to show how US equipment is "invinsible".
"...obviously nobody among the NATO planners - even reckoned among his
options: his launching of an all-out attack on Kosovo the moment the bombs
started falling."
Wrong, the press releases about a quick victory and Milosevic coming to his
senses soon, were actually only press releases. NATO obviously new they had
a shit-hole on their hands, thats why they continue to fly high altitude
sorties, because flying low continues to be dangerous.
Doug, you keep trying to prove NATO and the US do not have good intentions.
Who is your audience, who does not know this? For not even the NATO
generals believe their own press releases. So NATO is bad. NATO is bad. So
if NATO is bad, what then? What is the point of proving hyprocricy in this
western alliance?
The question remains: what stops Milosevic? And given that Milosevic
"cleansed" Kosovo while sitting at the negotiation table, what next? What
is your answer for the Kosovo people, because I do not see a solution
coming from proving the US is a warmongering superpower?
Tony
"...because strategically, the time for inserting ground troops was now.
Right this minute! Load up the planes with paratroopers! Given that our
stated war aims were to protect Kosovars..."
It was only a "stated war aim" Doug, you shouldn't believe White House
press releases, the real US and NATO intentions are economic and political
and the humanitarian angle is only an angle. Yes it was a strategic
necessity to have something other than the bombing of empty military
targets, but unfortunately the absense of ground troops and the ban on
strategic non-military targets (utilities, industry) were political
decisions.
"...we weren't even willing to fly our planes low enough to retard his troop..."
Yes, the Serbs are well armed and are dug into nearly every Kosovo
villiage, and they have anti-aircraft capabilities. Whoever takes on the
Serbs is going to suffer losses. And yes Doug, NATO are more interested in
their losses than they are about the Kosovor people. Thats why the 24 super
helicopter (now 21) were heralded so much in advance - you didn't believe
the press releases about them going into action did you - against a
hailstorm of light, medium and heavy anti-aircraft fire; but have no fears,
they will fly up a quite valley on an ineffective high altitude mission at
least once to prove a point, and to give the press people a couple of good
shots to show how US equipment is "invinsible".
"...obviously nobody among the NATO planners - even reckoned among his
options: his launching of an all-out attack on Kosovo the moment the bombs
started falling."
Wrong, the press releases about a quick victory and Milosevic coming to his
senses soon, were actually only press releases. NATO obviously new they had
a shit-hole on their hands, thats why they continue to fly high altitude
sorties, because flying low continues to be dangerous.
Doug, you keep trying to prove NATO and the US do not have good intentions.
Who is your audience, who does not know this? For not even the NATO
generals believe their own press releases. So NATO is bad. NATO is bad. So
if NATO is bad, what then? What is the point of proving hyprocricy in this
western alliance?
The question remains: what stops Milosevic? And given that Milosevic
"cleansed" Kosovo while sitting at the negotiation table, what next? What
is your answer for the Kosovo people, because I do not see a solution
coming from proving the US is a warmongering superpower?
Tony