Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 21:10:47 -0500 (EST)
From: danceswithcarp <dcombs-AT-bloomington.in.us>
Subject: Re: Rutabags (what else?)




On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Unka Bart wrote:

> We've already done one Viet Nam.  That's another of those things that I've
> already had a "full and sufficient" helping of.


Well, barto, you don't have to be for them all.  

I don't know how much of hystorical yugoslavia is going up in flames, and
I found the 13 missiles dumped on the TV station a bit much.  I was torn
about whether hitting the party headquarters was smart, but I wish
Milosevic had been home when the bag of burning shit was dumped on his
doorstep.  The bridges I can see as being of some value, as I can the oil
refinery.  The yugo factory?  Only if this is going to last for a long
enough period of time to convert it to making yugo command cars.  (Well,
that was how VWs got to be popular)

One of the Big Keys in this thing though is we are only seeing the ground
film that Milosevic wants us to see.  All I've seen on TV is THE footage
from Belgrade--maybe 3-5  hits per night.  What we're not seeing is
what's happening in the rest of the country or Kosovo.   Those A10s are
not doing the downtown runs, so they've got to be going after something
out in the boonies.  NATO is averaging 600 sorties a day, which means that
150 or so are bombing sorties with the rest being ELINT, CAP, anti-radar,
and AWACS.  Okay, where are those 140 we're not seeing on TV going to?
I haven't yet ruled out they may be going after serb troops as opposed to
cities and towns.  Milosevic understands manipulating images as good as
the Pentagon does.

But yes, NATO is on a very slippery slope.  The Hungarian agreement today
to let NATO planes use their airfields may be the first step towards
moving in the armor, but we should be told if this is the case.  Hungary
is really the only option for the heavy divisions if they are to be
committed within 6 months.  Albania doesn't even have a port, and
Macedonia doesn't have an airfield that can handle what's there now let
alone the air-traffic needed to put in the 82nd or the 101st or one of the
other "light" divisions, but this will take at least one armored division
too, and that is a resource-eating machine. The brits and froggies and
grrrmans all will need rail support for their ground troops too and that
has to come through Hungary.

The companies of tanks and Bradleys going into albania to protect the
Apaches is chillingly reminiscent of the marines going into Da Nang to
protect the planes there and the language is strikinglyu similar too.  But
as you note the MISSION has become a bit clouded and I'm not sure what it
is either.  Originally it was to protect the refugees, then to return the
refugees, and now it seems obvious that doing Milosevic in is a priority.

If someone doesn't clarify this real soon I am afeared that you will be
proven right: If this ends up as a general war against serb fascist
nationalism it will be impossible to have a positive outcome: NATO and the
west doesn't have the stomach for it.  To defeat fascist nationalism it
has to be destroyed en toto.  That's what would define "winning" from a
NATO view.  Therefore to "lose" all it would take would be for one small
nationalist faction to hang on and survive, then as soon as the occupation
is over it starts all over again.  (see "Bosnia:  Possible Outcomes When
The Troops Are Gone')

Have I given up hope that perhaps someday the people ran out of their
homes can return?  No.  But moreso and moreso this is starting to look
like something out of "1984" where war is fought simply for the purpose of
fighting a war.  Clinton asking for $7-10 billion is not a good sign.
Originally there wasn't the money to make this a war that would benefit
capital, according to the republicans on TV this morning who are ready to
spend the social security "surplus" on weapons and troops it looks like
it's going to be a winner for California and the southern aerospace
industry states.

That's too bad.  I'd rather see a bunch of albanians back in their homes
in Kosovo than a bunch of California-executives and engineers in sea-side
homes that we'll keep rebuilding for them after every el nino.

You wonder if the american people will tolerate a ground war?  Yup.
Because the stock market will start climbing like an ape shimmying up a
tree after a banana once congress turns on the money tap, and over 50% of
all american househods now have money in the market.  But maybe only 1 out
of 100 households have someone in the military.  Most americans will never
know a casualty until the toll hits 50-75,000.
 
We're a big country.  

It's too bad the good intentions of the people are so easily corrupted
along the way.



carp