NATO preparing to invade Yugoslavia with 200,000 troops... : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

NATO Preparing To Invade Kosovo With 200,000 Troops - London Paper 4-18-99

The paper quotes anonymous sources with NATO -- along with British and U.S. defence officials -- as saying the target date for the invasion is the end of May.

According to the Observer, the decision to invade was taken by NATO's political leaders impatient for and end to the fighting and the flood of refugees from Kosovo.

The plans for the invasion reportedly call for a spearhead of 20,000 troops to slash into Kosovo, followed by a force of "between 75,000 and 80,000" soldiers to "secure" the province.

The plan, if it exists, calls for a final push to occupy all of Serbia itself with up to 200,000 soldiers.

Just where all these troops -- with accompanying artillery, armour, ammunition and other supplies -- would come from, the report does not say.

Talk of a NATO ground invasion began circulating when Canadian Defence Minister Art Eggleton suggested on April 7 that western planners were preparing an attack.

Meanwhile, London's Sunday Times printed a letter written by U.S. President Bill Clinton suggested peace in the Balkans is an unattainable goal as long as Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is in power.

Saying it was time for Milosevic to go, Clinton called for a democratic transition for Serbia, "for the region cannot be secure with a belligerent tyrant in its midst."

Clinton did not refer to any invasion plans. NATO officials have repeatedly said that "just in case" contingency plans for invasion were in the works, but no political decision has yet been made.

-- Andy (, April 18, 1999


NATO Plans "Semi-Opposed" Land Invasion In Six To Eight Weeks 4-18-99

LONDON (Agence France Presse) - NATO is gearing up for a "semi- opposed" land invasion of Kosovo by 80,000 troops in six to eight weeks, it was reported here Sunday.

Citing sources in London and Washington, The Observer said six weeks was considered by military planners as the minimum period necessary to wear down Serb military and police units in the Yugoslav province so they offered only limited resistance.

"We are no longer talking about simply sending peace-keeping troops into an entirely permissive environment," said one unidentified source quoted by the paper.

"We are talking about the use of ground forces in a way that would have been complete taboo a month ago. That is, sending troops in semi- opposed."

The Observer said that despite repeated denials in London and Washington of plans for a ground invasion, such proposals were being rushed ahead to wrap up the military campaign in the three months since it began on March 24.

A NATO official in Washington told the paper that the ground assault would have two levels: the invasion of Kosovo, and the containing of Serbia and the region around Belgrade by a further 200,000 troops in addition to the invasion force.

Between 75,000 and 80,000 troops had been earmarked for the invasion, said The Observer, adding that some US soldiers had already begun training in reconstruction of a Balkan village in the Colorado Rockies.

The force would be preceded by an advance guard of 20,000 including reconnaissance and special forces, minesweeping and explosives experts, followed by an artillery and tank spearhead.

A further 200,000 troops would be used for the securing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's other borders with Bosnia, Hungary and Romania "to all but throttle Serbia and to cage Milosevic".

A Romanian diplomat in Washington reportedly confirmed to the paper that US officials had made preliminary overtures to discuss such a mass deployment of troops.

A US official was quoted as saying that the timing of the invasion would be "no sooner than six weeks, but not necessarily later than two months" and would depend on when the weather was more reliable.

The Observer said one of the aims of the air strikes until troops were ordered into Kosovo would be to cut Serbian communication and logistic support to the point of being negligible.

"Already we are seeing evidence that this is happening," said the source.

"The main road between Belgrade and Pristina along which the Serbs could reinforce has been cut. They are running out of diesel and petrol in the province, and we are hearing reports that when Serb troops use their radios they are not working.

"We are also hearing reports of collapsing morale in the Pristina Corps, including defections."

-- Andy (, April 18, 1999.

Sunday April 18, 2:39 PM

Defence Chiefs 'Ordered Second Trident To Sea'

Defence chiefs are reported to have ordered a second Trident submarine to sea after a Russian threat to aim nuclear missiles at Nato countries.

A nuclear submarine sailed out of the Royal Navy's Faslane base last week and it is not known whether it has returned, according to the Sunday Telegraph.

The Ministry of Defence refused to comment on the report, but the move would have coincided with reports that Russia's President Boris Yeltsin ordered nuclear weapons to be aimed at Western countries. According to the report, the order to sail could also have signalled that Nato countries took these reports more seriously than first thought and went on a higher state of nuclear alert.

An MoD spokesman said: "For security reasons we do not comment on the movement of nuclear submarines."

However, senior Defence sources insisted at the time they were relaxed about the Russian threat as missiles can be retargeted in seconds and it was seen as a political rather than a military gesture.

The Kremlin also denied the order had ever been given and Russian foreign minister Igor Ivanov telephoned Foreign Secretary Robin Cook to deny Russia had any wish to be involved in the conflict. The nuclear submarine HMS Splendid is already known to be operating off the Balkans and has fired cruise missiles against Serbian targets.

If another nuclear submarine was put to sea it would have broken the normal routine of one nuclear submarine being at sea on 24-hour patrol while two others remained ready to provide back-up.

-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.

Oh, Andy ... here you were showing signs of "getting it" by labeling your last off-topic thread with the "OT" in the title, and now you've gone and started three in a row that have not a single pretense of any Y2k connection and ... you've forgotten to label any of the three as off-topic. Do you always forget so fast? Maybe there's some herbal remedy.


See, it's simple. Just take the last two letters of NATO and reverse them. OT. Off-topic. OT.

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

Ya know No Spam,

You call this off topic, your current mantra-du-jour it seems.

I've been reading every post lately, and what do I find, you always pop up like my friend Prairie Dog, maybe I should refer to you in future as MEERKAT, however my point is that there are many many posts that I would consider off topic.

Now do I harass those posters? - no.

Do YOU harass those posters? - no.

Yet they are off topic according to YOUR rules Meerkat.

That makes you a class one hypocrite.

And by the way, the amount of bandwidth you took up over the last two days about the UN Court Martial was eminently OFF TOPIC my old son, it was also enough to power a Cray Supercomputer for a day or two.

Your problem is that you're not taking any meds.

I would start drinking some beer (Guinness) if I were you and mellow out.


-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.

When you are no longer the most prolific off-topic thread starter, we'll meet less often.

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

Kiss my ass Himmler - stop harrassing people - NATZI.

-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.

Oh, that's a fine comeback of which to be proud, Andy.

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

My answer in response to another thread's question on the relevance of this post:-

"Thank you Sue, A little more civil than my erstwhile friend Meerkat. Yep it's a pain in the ass what is going on - talk of the draft, reserves being called up, talk on this forum for a long time about mock invasions in Monterrey and Texas, talk of a 200,000 strong invasion task force, talk of nukes on the forum.

So what does all this have to do with y2k - superficially not a lot, other than the possibility of other disputes breaking out elsewhere in the world other than Yugoslavia, thereby stretching the depleted military to perhaps a position of impotence, and what of y2k itself if it hits hard with the majority of those who would have been deployed in the USA off on foreign soil. You believe this has nothing to do with y2k? So what has been talked about on the forum by many people over all these months is off topic and not relevant? Dig a little deeper and you'll find that the y2k card is VERY relevant in this context. The threads are out there if you are interested.

I disagree with you and Meerkat on this point. So can you. Just walk on digitally by. Ignore this topic if you believe it's not relevant. Many believe it IS relevant as I'm getting a lot of private correspondence attesting to this.

Are we going to have censorship on this forum?

Is that what it's coming to?

Where do we draw the line?

Look at recent posts - Joke lists circulating (two or three) - Circuses (two Yourdon ones) - Rats - One Act Plays... Plenty more where these came from...

You get my drift.

Are these y2k related? - I say yes! Why the hell not? The forum is constantly eveolving.

What happens if a suitcase nuke goes off in Des Moines - will this be talked about on the forum? you betcha. Will it be y2k relevant - again - you betcha. Why? Apart from the obvious, to see how the agencies cope, FEMA, the military, water, power - the whole gamut.

y2k encompasses ALL facets of modern life - you and Meerkat would wish to compartmentalise it to fit your preconceived notions.

That's a little arrogant don't you think?

Let's just agree to differ Sue."

-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.

As for the Censorship straw-man argument you keep raising: Will you acknowledge that you've been informed on multiple occasions that there is at least one other Greenspun forum where your topics would be on-topic? Moving them there would satisfy me. I don't suggest that your postings be suppressed -- I just want them posted where they belong.

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

Nazi is the correct spelling for the evil German party.

I hear they used to eat babies, and that they drew-up plans to nuke whales...

-- oldman (oldman@america.north), April 19, 1999.

Thank you oldman, I stand Corrected, NAZI it is.

-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.

Lets see: "Kosovo is on topic" "no, it is off topic". Back and forth.

I believe that y2k has a lot to do with this one. We are using our cruise missiles because they go poof at the GPS rollover. Perhaps the whole operation was an excuse to have US troops on the European landmass during the 1999/2000 flip. But yes, it does look like the troops are spread thin. How many can be spared for NYC, Detroit, Chicago, and DC? To say nothing of LA?

How about labeling anything on this was as "AOT" which stands for "allegedly off topic". Perhaps all of you can live with that label.

Got rice and beans?

-- David Holladay (, April 19, 1999.

ANDY, back to THIS topic. These published accounts suggest that the planners have NO CLUE!! They seem to be planning for a tightly scripted cake walk from "semi- opposed invasion" (can you say OXYMORON??) to the occupation of Yugoslavia (!!!!) by way of a completely swept Kosovo. Don't these people read ANY history?!?!?!?!? Arguably the BEST high speed military force in the modern era broke its teeth in Montenegro and in Serbia. After taking almost ALL of a MUCH BETTER armed Europe in just such a scripted cakewalk.

SHEESH!!! Chuck

-- chuck, a Night Driver (, April 19, 1999.

"Don't these people read ANY history?!?!?!?!? Arguably the BEST high speed military force in the modern era broke its teeth in Montenegro and in Serbia. After taking almost ALL of a MUCH BETTER armed Europe in just such a scripted cakewalk."

I agree Chuck. If I was a grunt about to head over there I would be Cr*^*&^g myself. They have been fighting for years, they are born fighters, it is their home turf, they are digging in, they have Russian arms (latest and best) coming in via the back door, Russian volunteers are arriving as we speak.

Can you say fiasco?

-- Andy (, April 19, 1999.


Get your blood pressure down pal, it's a waste of time anymore I think. We don't read history anymore Andy. We emote the current events around us, and pontificate endless emotional demouguogery to create CLIMATES, not results.

No Spam is too busy (like most idiots nowadays) quibbling insignificant points and legalistics and missing the giant foot that's about to quash us all.

Fuck-em and realize they're going to get what they reap.

-- INVAR (, April 19, 1999.

My husband, whose ears are permantly attached to talk radio (masks his tinnitus) just heard Miloslovik (sp??) quoted as saying something like: We are ready for you. We have 200,000 soldiers. And, unlike the US, we have no gun laws in this country. So every household has weapons."

The Germans in WWII and also, later, the Russians (Tito was allowed to do his own thing) gave up on Serbia. It is far more mountainous than Korea ,(we did not win that one either) with soldiers well dug into bunkers.

The Bosie Nam War, will be Atilla the Hick's long sought legacy.

-- Mary (, April 19, 1999.


>No Spam is too busy (like most idiots nowadays) quibbling insignificant points and legalistics and missing the giant foot that's about to quash us all.

What I'm doing is helping people clean their windows so they can see for themselves that the "giant foot" theory is based on only the shadow of a passing cloud. Windex is significant and legal in this context.

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

I'm sorry, nospam, but your line of thinking is bullpucky.......This NATO little thing is "an indicator", of how the world is...I don't think it is Y2K Wag the Dog (god spelled backwards)...I think it is goverments doing what they always do. You need to expand the box of your thinking outward a bit to larger SYSTEMS...Kosovo is not about Kosovo, or so-called ethnic is about imperialism, plain and simple...about the big guys telling the little guys which bad ones are bad enough to kill. Need to read more philosophy and psychological sociology...It's okay...most humans don't know what you know...don't take offense at my suggestion...they would have to start at altered world history, circa 1900....or before.

-- Donna Barthuley (, April 19, 1999.


We have differing interpretations of "giant foot".

-- No Spam Please (, April 19, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ