Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldsnow who wrote (9560)	5/22/1999 4:03:00 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

1818 GMT, 990522 - War Means People Die NATO has come under increasing public criticism, and has seen dissent from within its own ranks, following a series of accidental strikes on civilian and diplomatic targets. On Friday, NATO spokesman Jamie Shea told reporters that NATO had no intention of changing its targeting policy as a result of the incidents. Shea insisted that military commanders would continue to take every precaution to hit targets accurately. U.S. State Department spokesman James Rubin replied to the criticism, saying, "In our view, NATO's air campaign clearly represents the most accurate and discriminating use of air power in history." The fact is that Rubin is entirely correct. Thanks to PGM – precision guided munitions, not perfectly guided munitions – it no longer takes 300 bombs to destroy a target. It takes two. Reducing weapons systems' CEP – circular error probable – to one square meter means that half – not all – of the rounds used will likely land in that one meter box. The others could hit nearby or go wildly astray, perhaps hitting another portion of the target, or a cow pasture, or an embassy. Add to this the intentional or unintentional jamming of weapons' guidance systems – with smoke, flares, clouds, or electronic signals – and intelligence failures in target selection, and it is only surprising that so few embassies, refugee columns, apartment blocks and hospitals have been hit. The problem is that so few in the media, the general public, and even in NATO member regimes understand the basic capabilities and weaknesses of weapons systems. Because they see video footage of cruise missiles flying through windows with pinpoint accuracy, they believe all cruise missiles, laser guided bombs, and air to ground missiles have such unfailing accuracy. This lack of understanding is dangerous, as it leads to a flawed doctrine for the use of military power in situations that do not impact the fundamental national interests of the U.S. and other NATO powers – situations in which allied casualties and collateral damage are deemed unacceptable. The public and the media cry out for something to be done about distant humanitarian crises – "genocide," "ethnic cleansing," and other intolerable atrocities – assuming that the wonder weapons can flawlessly administer devastating persuasive force. While, historically, even the carpet bombing of cities has proven unable to convince countries to surrender fundamental national interests, militaries ordered to use PGM to achieve the same goal are hamstrung by the requirement that these humanitarian ventures must not cause civilian casualties of their own. Publics and policymakers must learn that wars mean casualties – intended and unintended. PGM allows there to be far, far less of the latter. But neither technology nor the best of intentions can grant a war in which only the "bad guys" die.