It does appear, according to the book “Censored 2001” that the US did, in fact, intentionally destroy the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
It was payback for the Chinese involvement in the downing of a stealth bomber in Serbia.
Apparently an at least temporarily successful coverup.
Actually, I heard space aliens altered the path of our bombs and made them hit the embassy.
Okie-dokie.
You know, I was all set to simply make a flippant, witty comment. (Can you imagine that?) Something along the lines of, “Hey, berdollos. Can I borrow your hat? I want to wrap up some leftover pizza and put it in my fridge.”
Instead, I will try to point out the flaw in the OP’s assertion.
What value does bombing the Chinese Embassy have in retribution for a downed Stealth plane in the Balkans, if we immediately state the bombing of the embassy was a mistake and apologize repeatedly and profusely? Doesn’t that tend to mitigate the value of such a retaliatory bombing?
Or was it done just so military types can high-five in some hidden, smokey backroom somewhere?
As Milo points out, this is a really dumb theory. Bombing the embassy and immediately apologising and paying compensation for the damage and lives lost seems like a pretty dumb thing to do. Not to mention the US has other, much more effective, ways of pressuring China (and they use them often).
So, I’ll be in my corner thinking of a good, flippant, remark…
Milossarian wrote:
But an ordinary metal-foil hat is only good for stopping the more primitive mind-affecting devices. It can’t screen out the more sophisticated mind-reading rays sent out by Major League Baseball’s satellite! What you really need is … Tinfoil Hat 2000!
Act now, and we’ll throw in a complete set of Chakra crystals absolutely free – guaranteed to prevent alien abductions or your money back!
If true, how does this affect my life, berdollos?
What’s really interesting here is, our ENEMIES (the Chinese in particular) obviously have a lot more respect for the U.S. government and our armed forces than any American has.
Think about it: AMERICANS, as a whole, have no trouble believing that our intelligence agencies are inept and incompetent enough to pick the wrong targets! The Chinese, on the other hand, think our intelligence agencies are so omnipotent and so omniscient, they MUST have known they were bombing the Chinese embassy!
Astorian, that’s because many of us know at least one f#$k-up in the US military or other related agencies. Chinese military folks, however, probably only meet with the cream-of-the-crop from our military.
Our ENEMIES, eh? What war are we in with China?
Some people just always have to have a “them” to fulfill their us-vs-them worldview.
remember ** Milo’s** thread about the Chinese holding the plane and crew? (ya have to, it was 7 pages long) in it, on page 4, China Guy makes the statement:
here (gave up on doing the ultra cool link to the individual post thing, but it’s China Guys’ post 4/6 at 7:06 pm )
Balduran then submits this link. here
which contends the same thing, making the embassy at least at some level a potentially legitimate target, disputing the claim it was accidental.
I’m just ‘a quotin’ from the other thread. Thought I remembered something from there about it. I don’t know the link provided, am not vouching for it’s source.
Not necessarily – mind you I don’t really have any particular opinion on this at all-- but if in fact the embassy had some legit target value and if in fact “we” wished to hit it, it makes perfect sense to abjectly apologize and pay compensation afterwards.
After all, (a) hitting diplomatic targets is a fairly large no, no, so one should never get caught doing it on puprose – make sure its an “accident” (b) to support it being an “accident” one should react in the same vein, apologize abjectly etc. etc. Good game actually, if true.
Collounsbury has it pegged. Either it was an accident or it was an “accident.” Either way, our response would be the same.
So, again I ask, berdollos: If your OP is correct, why the fuck should I care?
If you don’t care, stay out of the thread. :rolleyes:
Yeah, :rolleyes: right back at you, Spiny.
Berdollos has not returned to this thread. I want to know what his point is, and whether he has anything to contribute beyond a poorly-cited suggestion of coverup.
I want him to tell me WHY his OP is important, WHAT there is to debate, and WHY it should be debated.
Clear enough?
Yes, but the OP suggested that it was done to get back at the Chinese, which I would think would only be effective if they knew it was done on purpose. If, however, there was a military purpose to hitting it, then your reasoning would be correct. Revenge is rather pointless if the object doesn’t know that it was revenge. Hence, berdollos’s theory is rather flawed, in addition to the lack of evidence he has presented. The claim that was made in the link wring presented, on the other hand, does make sense.
I was merrily ignoring the OP in question as I often do to go after something at least marginally more thought-provoking.
If of course, I certainly don’t think of this as a proven. If were, I would not be terribly bothered. Sometimes you have to do things…
Yup.
At the time of the bombing, Clinton was under the spotlight for his clandestine affairs. Does anyone think that may have something to do with it? I would not think that Clinton would bomb the embassy just to divert attention from his domestic problems, but coupled with the fact that the embassy was engaging in communications detrimental to the UN mission, may that have been a factor?
The fact that two events happened in a similar time frame does not at all even come close to establishing causality, or even a link between the two events.
Yeah, I don’t think there’s any way one can reasonably claim that Mr. Clinton’s domestic political battles influenced the bombing. If he wanted to do a Wag the Dog, there were much better opportunities–and if someone wanted to accuse him of it, there are likelier candidates. In the US, the bombing was in and out of the news like shit through a goose–hardly the kind of distraction that would be needed to make the pols and the press forget Clinton’s troubles.