Intresting article on the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Serbia

Discussion in 'Military History' started by armchairwarrior, Jan 28, 2011.

  1. armchairwarrior
    Offline

    armchairwarrior Just Hatched

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    stealth plane reasons or military spying for the serbs.


    Asia Times Online :: China News, China Business News, Taiwan and Hong Kong News and Business.
     
    #1
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2011
  2. kyanges
    Offline

    kyanges Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    682
    Likes Received:
    53
    My only question with the rebroadcast theory is what would possibly stop the Americans from simply calling out the Chinese? Were they trying to keep their sources safe? After the bombing, doubtless the Chinese would take a good long look at possible suspects anyway. Fear of escalating the war perhaps? Then why go out and bomb the embassy? I just don't know. I guess it really was related to stealth, or some other tech.
     
    #2
  3. bluewater2012
    Offline

    bluewater2012 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    14
    Seem this whole informative article just confirmed the bombing wasn't because of the F117 wreckage, but rather of the radio signal coming out from China embassy. This what I been told before and now the article just double-confirms it.

    Suggest the U.S. doesn't even care whether China had the wreckage or not.

    edit: I'm more incline to believe China was trying to test out its anti-stealth tech during the time.
     
    #3
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2011
  4. FarkTypeSoldier
    Offline

    FarkTypeSoldier Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    To attack an embassy is like attacking that particular country invading it's sovereignty...
     
    #4
  5. kyanges
    Offline

    kyanges Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    682
    Likes Received:
    53
    Exactly.
     
    #5
  6. FarkTypeSoldier
    Offline

    FarkTypeSoldier Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sour grapes anyone?
     
    #6
  7. ronaldodm123
    Offline

    ronaldodm123 Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm more incline to believe China was trying to test out its anti-stealth tech during the time.
     
    #7
  8. bd popeye
    Offline

    bd popeye The Last Jedi

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    18,589
    Likes Received:
    80
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids Iowa
    ronaldodm123, Welcome to the forum. I invite you to read the forum rules before posting again..

    FORUM RULES: Things to Remember Before Posting, important, please read!

    also introduce yourself to other forum members..

    New members introductions - New members Introduce yourselves

    bd popeye super moderator


    How so?
     
    #8
  9. vesicles
    Online

    vesicles Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,186
    Likes Received:
    425
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Bombing a country's embassy just to protect a piece of technology? that's a little too far-fetched to me. In a war, it could happen. but in peace time? The political consequence of such action would be too unpredictable. Especially with the general impression of China being a secretive dictatorial nation, I don't think the US would risk unpredictable reactions from China for a few pieces of debris from a wreckage that had already been scavenged by many parties. I'm sure the CIA at the time already knew that multiuple pieces had been picked up and sold to agents from many countries, including China, Russia, etc. Destroying China's embassy will not stop the technology from being leaked and would potentially provoke China. I don't think anyone would do such thing.
     
    #9
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2011
  10. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,271
    Likes Received:
    406
    Several factors to consider.

    1) If the report was true, than this was a CIA op. The people 'on the Hill' may not have been briefed or even consulted to object.

    2) Also, if the report was true, than it seems that China managed to get most or the most important parts of the F117, which would make it the prime target. If the Russians only got some RAM panelling (which according to the Chinese, were pretty obsolete even to them when they got them), it probably wasn't worth the effort or consequences to bomb the Russian embassy.

    3) At that time, China was considerably weaker, and far less assertive in the application of its power. It is entirely possible someone in the CIA or Pentagon would have dismissed possible repercussions with, 'what are they going to do about it?' And it was true to some extent. At that time, America was still a firm believer of its own omnipotence and viewed China as weak and easily cowed. I have a theory that the bombing of the embassy made Beijing aware of its perceived image abroad, as well as removed any expectation that America will play by the rules when the stakes are high. Hence there has been a noticeable strengthening of its position from China diplomatically afterwards and redoubling of its military modernization, but I digress...

    The rebroadcast station theory sounds weak at best. If the Chinese really were doing something like that, then I cannot see why the Pentagon or NATO would not present the evidence publicly and demand an explanation from the Chinese and/or demand that they stop. The chronological order of events also don't work, since stories of a rebroadcast station only appeared after the bombing, whereas you would expect it to be the reverse in a real event as opposed to a cover story.
     
    #10

Share This Page