the rest of SLATE's media survey (by Scott Shuger) is worth quoting:

>Despite all the havoc wrought in and around Belgrade by NATO since Friday,
the WP sees signs that the bombing may be having the unintended effect of
rallying the Yugoslavs against NATO. The paper describes a large group of
young people, many of them sporting targets on their chests, linking arms
on one of the few bridges left intact near Belgrade, in an attempt to
shield it from an air attack. 

>The LAT's lead includes this gee-whiz description of the Apache
helicopters: "...[They] can within 30 seconds detect 128 potential targets,
select the most dangerous and initiate an attack coordinated with other
aircraft," never letting on that these aircraft were implicated in attacks
on friendly forces during the Gulf War. Also, although all the papers
discuss what extra possibilities these aircraft introduce--being able to
operate against Serbian armor below the cloud cover that has stymied NATO
anti-tank airplanes--there is no discussion of whether or not the Serbs are
packing the biggest threat to low helos, man-portable surface-to-air
missiles, which undid the Soviet helicopters in Afghanistan. 

>A front-page LAT story states that the U.S. military operation, conceived
as air-power-only was "virtually fated to fail at the one thing the United
States most wanted to accomplish: preventing a Serbian military offensive
that would terrorize, slaughter, and eventually eradicate ethnic Albanians
in the once-obscure province of Kosovo." A WP front-pager says that
according to "sources familiar with their thinking," in the weeks before
the balloon went up, the U.S. military chiefs expressed deep reservations
about the Clinton administration's approach to Kosovo and warned that
bombing alone would probably not achieve its political aims. The paper adds
that, today, twelve days into the campaign, the chiefs still remain
doubtful. The WSJ reports that the weekend troop and hardware moves into
Albania have been opposed by some senior Pentagon officials, who fear that
they could be a major step towards involving the U.S. on the ground in
Kosovo and could widen the war if the Serbs retaliate. That you're reading
about this now is the beginning of the service chiefs' own exit strategy:
"Hey, it wasn't our idea." 

>A WP story reports that support is growing inside the Clinton
administration and its NATO allies for making the ouster of Slobodan
Milosevic one of the Yugoslav war objectives. The story reports that the
topic was on the agenda for a discussion involving President Clinton last
Friday and has also been the subject of a conference call conducted by
Madeleine Albright and her counterparts in the governments of Britain,
France, Germany and Italy. Methods of removal being floated apparently
include getting Yugoslavian army dissidents to instigate a coup or a
popular uprising, or convincing Milosevic to go into exile in exchange for
a lighter sentence before a UN war crimes tribunal. Big question: Why is
this story on page 12?<

Copyright (c) 1999 Microsoft and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved. 

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &
http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html



Reply via email to