posted
This fits well with my earlier discussion on the American media.
A few weeks ago, the British Observer came out with a story on the NATO bombing of the US embassy. With sources going as high as four star NATO Generals, they reported that the Chinese embassy was bombed on purpose. It was acting as a communications post for the FRY Army. Moreover, it was monitoring American missiles, likely to plan their own defence against them. Thus, it was bombed.
Throughout Europe this has created a major debate amongst political circles. However, it is hardly, if ever, mentioned in the US press. The only time it has been mentioned was a Washington Post story which reiterated the government's position and did not raise any of the evidence brought about by the Observer piece.
Now, whether or not you believe the Observer, should not the American people at least be given the other side of the story so they can make their own intelligent decision? Is it not the right in a democracy for the people to examine these stories and determine which provides the correct evidence? Or is the word of the New York Times, Washington Post and USA Today automatically so much superior to the Observer, Guardian and Politiken that it is pointless? (chauvanism, anyone?)
Incidentally, the AP, Rueters and AFP have all sent out dispatches reporting on the Observer's story. Likewise, the Times of London, the Globe and Mail, Le Figaro, Corriere Della Sera, the Sydney Morning Herald, the Irish Times, the Times of India and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung have all reported on the story. (just so as to preemptively strike the contention that these are not respectable papers, let me remind you that just last year the New York Times itself called the FAZ, which ran the Observer story on their front page, as "Germany's most prestigious newspaper")
Likewise, to preempt the contention that this is not a well sourced report, let us consider some of the souces
A European NATO military officer, serving within an operation capacity at the four-star level. A European NATO Staff Officer, serving within the defense intelligence office at the two-star level. A "high-ranking" former US intelligence officer. A "mid-ranking" current US military officer, connected to the Balkans. A NATO flight controller based in Naples. A NATO intelligence officer monitoring Yugoslav radio broadcasts. A US NIMA official (who would be the least credible, as he would be indignant).
Incidentally, Gerhard Schroeder questioned the explanation at the time.
Thus, the Observer seemed to have reason to report the story. (again to preempt, the Times regularly grants anonymity to military sources, as they would be court-martialed or sacked for disclosing this information)
Briefly, though, I would like to compliment the NY Times for making a subtle change. Since the Observer story, they no longer refer to the "accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy" but rather to the raid "the alliance said mistakenly hit the Chinese embassy in Belgrade."
I reccomend reading all three. And as I said, if anyone reads all three and still agrees with the Pentagon, I'll respect your opinion. But to those who don't and still support the Pentagon opinion, I'll gladly show you the debating skills they teach us in Communist Reconditioning Camp.
------------------ "Oh no, I know a dirty word" - Kurt Cobain Smells Like Teen Spirit, Nirvana
posted
Would any of that be on the Canadian news broadcasts or BBC America? I just got a DirecTV receiver last Tuesday (it wasn't operational until Friday evening) and those are two of the non-American news services (there's a third, but I forget what it is).
--Baloo
------------------ That�s one of the things that bothers me about Star Trek - the faint whiff of Singapore wafts from the Federation. Clean, peaceable, industrious - with jail sentences for anti-social chewing-gum disposal. --James Lileks http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
posted
A friend of mine did some digging on this issue. The following info fell into his lap: (I haven't read the whole report he wrote up)
* A member of the Air Force intelligence found the map mixup. (which was quite real).
*This member attempted to contact high command (or whoever) and stop the flights.
* Once he got through to the relevant authorities he was politely ignored.
Now I believe this because I know the person in question who came up with the report. Even if you don't go for it, just consider the potential implications.
------------------ "Diplomacy is the art of Internationalising an issue to your advantage"
I'm rather surprised the American government is so reluctant to admit it's deliberate intentions. There is, after all, a strong argument justifying attacking a building being used for such a military purpose.
------------------ "You see, unlike you I understand history! My name will blaze across the stars long after your petty treachery has been for-gotten !!!"
posted
I got a page saying the page was unavailable, on the second link. I read the other two, and although the Observer doesn't give it's sources names, it sounds more like the truth.
The US has to be careful what it does in regards to China. We both have Nukes. There are, what, 3 billion people in China, we have 275,000,000. Just do the math.
------------------ Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!! Gandalf
posted
Yeah, but China's nukes wouldn't be much of a threat if SOMEONE hadn't given them our tech. As it is, I still say we're gonna end up in another cold war by the time I'm president.
------------------ Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works C/O Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu, Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law 1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza Dis, The Nether Regions
posted
Incidentally, the math isn't important. Quite frankly, even if the US did bomb the embassy and China was upset, China could do nothing. They'd have no chance against the US, if only due to LGM. The problem for the US is losing their European allies. Europe is already starting to drift from the US. WEU, for example. However, right now, Europe with or without Britain is no match for the US. Everything we see now has to play itself out longterm. Keep in mind, the implications of the Russo-Japanese War wouldn't be felt for 9 years!
------------------ "Oh no, I know a dirty word" - Kurt Cobain Smells Like Teen Spirit, Nirvana
Go look up some more. It greatly affected the history of the world we live in today, even though there isn't much said about it in "world history" classes in the U.S.
posted
Sorry I was away for so long to not answer your question, but Finals...
lemme quickly point out part of what I meant
After being whipped in the Russo-Japanese War, Tsar Nicholas decided to reform his military. Due to this, he couldn't protect Serbia in either Balkan War. Thus, when Austria and Russia went toe-to-toe in 1914, the former thought the latter would blink, and the latter couldn't afford to.
------------------ "Oh no, I know a dirty word" - Kurt Cobain Smells Like Teen Spirit, Nirvana
posted
I suspected the attack was deliberate from the start. I couldn't imagine how we could be so stupid as to drop TWO cruise missiles on that target, especially when the outdated maps showed the area as a dirt lot (or so I heard). Why bomb a dirt lot once, let alone twice? I think they should have come right out and said that we bombed the embasssy because they were using it against us. I don't have a problem with that.
------------------ "I promise you, Wilma, that not one man on this force will rest until the criminal scum that did this are behind bars. Now let's go get a bite to eat." - Frank Drebbin, Detective Lieutenant in Police Squad
Printer-friendly view of this topic
