Well, they picked him up out of there so now that will reinforce some image of efficiency and invulnerability. But some will die soon, you can't make war without taking losses. They are all volunteers though, they worked hard to get into that cockpit, so it seems to me like some portion of the responsibility should go in their own direction.
I haven't read Clinton's exact words, but understand that he has promised to not send in NATO ground troops. This is stupid imho - even if that is the plan, it is extremely unwise to limit your options in full view of your perceived enemy of the moment. You don't take the ground until you have guys with muddy boots and rifles sweep every square kilometre of it, which is what Milosevic is doing right now with the aid of tanks and artillery. Sure - take out some of the tanks and artillery and it levels the odds somewhat - but will NATO [read 'the US'] arm and support the Kosovars to take the ground? - That would amount to supporting the independence of Kosovo, where supposedly the plan is to reinstate the autonomy within Yugoslavia that Milosevic took away in 1989. A completely separate thing, unjustifiable even under the circumstances, and leading to some very unwelcome ramifications. NATO must either 1. Deploy infantry and armoured divisions. or 2. Support independence of all or part of Kosovo. ... or 3. Admit defeat.
[edit] - had the above typed already, then Lewis MacKenzie came on CBC radio and said the same thing, more or less, but better. |
