Ivo Skoric on Sun, 14 May 2000 07:54:05 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> The Big Air War In Kosovo Was Costly Scandal - Daily News |
Pentagon's JOINT Vision 2010 is the just and natural follow-up to the Operation Allied Force (OAF) 1999. So, I am not surprised they are talking about destruction of moving targets from high altitude based on their fictional past experience. They must be smoking something decent to create such a deep denial in which they live - counting the blow-up model tanks as real ones... ivo ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- http://www.centraleurope.com/frames/frames.php3?id=159114&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailynews.com%2F2000-05-12%FNews_and_Views%2FOpinion%2Fa-66324.asp "We were bombing Yugo plants, wineries, anything to raise the pain to the people. Our military was incapable of dealing with the Yugoslav military, so it attacked the civilian structure." New York Daily News Friday, May 12, 2000 The Big Air War in Kosovo Was Costly Scandal WASHINGTON After 78 days of around-the-clock NATO air strikes and 38,000 combat sorties by the latest in Western military aircraft, Serbia withdrew from its Kosovo province a year ago, and the West proclaimed a groundbreaking victory. Precision warfare had conquered a country with no casualties to ourselves. The Pentagon has now totaled up the damage it inflicted on the Serb Army. It is 14 tanks for sure, plus 12 self-propelled artillery pieces. That's what was actually found on the ground when NATO troops entered Kosovo. Daily News staff writer Richard Sisk, who entered with the first Marine units and drove freely around the battered province, found one destroyed tank. Capt. Dan Sullivan, commander of Marines in eastern Kosovo, said at the time, "We haven't seen them either." During the Kosovo war, NATO claimed that 110 Serb tanks had been killed by the onslaught of high-tech, precision-guided weapons. NATO also claimed to have destroyed 153 armored personnel carriers. Only 12 wrecked APCs were found. This week, the Air Force claimed on the basis of pilot videos and surveillance photographs that, in fact, it killed 93 Serb tanks and that the missing wrecks probably were towed away. But there is no positive evidence of such a massive removal. In fact, when the Serb Army withdrew from Kosovo, it looked pretty much intact. This scandal — no, that's not too strong a word — was first reported by Newsweek and amplified by a newsletter called Inside the Pentagon. It is a scandal because the entire military establishment pretended that high-tech, highly expensive, precision-guided, 21st century weapons had brought Serbia to its knees. In fact, the really crippling damage to Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic's little tyranny — the old-fashioned destruction of civilian power plants and bridges — could have been performed by World War II-era B-17 bombers. "We knew how to do that kind of bombing in the '30s," says defense analyst Chuck Spinney, a longtime critic of Pentagon boondoggles. "This was a World War II-type bombing, though more accurate. We were bombing Yugo plants, wineries, anything to raise the pain of the people. Our military was incapable of dealing with the Serbian military, so it attacked the civilian structure." Spinney and others believe Serbia surrendered primarily because Russia, its main sponsor, pulled the plug and the West softened its initial demands. But bombing Serb power plants and Danube River bridges caused the real military pain. British Gen. Michael Jackson, the NATO commander in Kosovo, agreed this week that NATO had exaggerated its kill claims. "It is a matter of record that the actual damage in Kosovo was rather less than the estimated damage," he told a British parliamentary committee. "Certainly, when we entered Kosovo, we did not have to clear away hundreds of burned-out tank hulls." Kosovo has been cited as laboratory proof that the Pentagon's new generation of supercostly high-tech weapons can win a war neatly and precisely with minimal casualties. In fact, it showed that these new weapons could not hit the mobile targets — tanks and artillery pieces — assigned. Pilots risked their lives flying through misty valleys over Kosovo in search of tanks and armored columns. They claimed hits at nearly 2,000 aim points. The provable military damage they inflicted was minimal. Why hype the results? To justify the spending of untold billions on the next generation of high-tech weapons that promise us more casualty-free, surgically antiseptic war. The Pentagon's Joint Vision 2010, a brochure that outlines strategy for future warfare, depicts Stealth aircraft high over a battlefield neatly destroying enemy tanks. "You won't find anything in JV-2010 about bombing cities," Spinney notes. But that's what worked. __________________________________________________ # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net