Will NATO bomb in future?

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Fri Jun 11 09:10:20 PDT 1999


At 11:24 AM 6/11/99 -0400, Carl Remick wrote:
>> That you could bomb civilian targets with relative
>> impunity has
>> been known since 2nd world war.
>
>But this campaign reflects TOTAL impunity. NATO didn't experience a
>single combat-related death. Yes, tactical air action remains

An important correction: NATO did not officially *report* a single combat-related death and that does NOT mean *experience*.


>dangerous. But for strategic bombing, the sky's the limit, so to speak.
>Our Air Force can conduct high-altitude terror bombing day in, day out,
>and incur no more risk to its personnel than it would putting them on a
>Greyhound bus to Topeka. Furthermore, while this air campaign may

But they could do that since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no? They did it in Vietnam and Cambodia, no? There were no lossess resulting from high altitude strategic bombing - but th eissue was not losses but effectiveness as these air raids did not produce the desired tactical impact.


>involve eye-popping expense, that isn't what "moves the needle" so far
>as public indignation is concerned (not until inflation increases, far

what public indignation? the only thing that can prodcue public indignation, at least in the us, is the soldiers coming back home in the body bags - which btw is likely to happen as soon as nato enters kosovo



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list