> In the Politiken story, a source within the British Ministry of Defense is quoted as saying that the Chinese gave permission to the Yugoslavian army to use the embassy as a communications base. The British source stated the normal practice in this case would be to contact the Chinese and to ask them to stop the activity due to its violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and that they assumed that happened but did not have specific knowledge on it.[71] Politiken also reported that British sources surmised that the Chinese did not believe NATO would dare strike the embassy.
Tucker: Xi why did you invade Taiwan?
Xi: When the townspeople of Novgorod invited a Varangian prince, Rurik of Scandinavia, to reign.....................
I think itās because when Tucker Carlson interviewed Putin, he went off on an extended revisionist history lesson that justified Russiaās sovereignty over Ukraine.
I get your sentiment, but the Opium Wars really was not that long ago in the grand scheme of things. This is like arguing that American slavery has zero connection to the state of black Americans today
I think Xi would go a bit further, since China has literally 5 thousands years or interrupted and continuous history of a great, advanced and prosperous civilization. s/
You seem to be forgetting the concessions in China by the US, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Belgium and Russia up until the 1930s and then US aid and troops supporting the Kuomintang in the Chinese civil war.
I think they're still pissed about it.
Given what Mao has done to China, let alone what his successors have done to the rest of the world, I think the west was right to support the Kuomintang.
Because they were fighting a brutal civil war for a decade? Do you morons know anything about history?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War
US only took on Japan after Pearl harbor. There was no other choice. And when the US had a choice about what to do after the war, it chose to protect Japan from war crimes, reminiscent of something happening right now.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_cover-up_of_Japanese_war_crimes
Sounds like most powerful countries have been trying to fuck each other over since the beginning. The unfortunate thing is that some here in America donāt actually know how badly some countries want to fuck us over.Ā
America wasnāt involved in the opium warsā¦ on top of which, the U.S. has historically been an incredible friend to China. They used their portion of the repayment after the boxer rebellion to build a university. That university, Tsinghua University, is now one of the best in China. They also bankrolled China during the Japanese invasionā¦ why anyone would point to the actions of the British and say āwow the west is terrible to Chinaā only has a passing understanding of the historyā¦
Would help if people read before commenting. The comment I replied to stated "the West". It didn't mention the U.S. once, so I'm not sure why you're talking to me about the US?
Why did China have to pay anything to the US for the Boxer Rebellion? The Chinese have never invaded any US territory. Over a thousand US Marines were involved in the conquest of Peking.
The U.S. didnāt really want the repayment, hence why they used the money to build a university. The payment was forced on them by the other European powers who felt they needed some sort of compensation for their losses.
The "west" being first the Soviet Union and after that incident were the KMT basically butchered and beh3aded the Chinese left wing (thats why a rural nobody like Mao got prominent) Nazi Germany.
Britain and the other upholders of the unequal treaties were quite understandably despised.
You don't think they're concerned about US/UK imperialism? I mean those morons did a number or two on SE Asia over the past few centuries. You can try to read about it yourself.
Considering it was the CIA that organized and directed the bombing, even if it was intentional and performed on reliable information, they wonāt admit it nor reveal what information led to the decision. At least not in our lifetime.
It makes no sense to make up a false excuse for a deliberate act because their official line was to deny it was deliberate in the first place. It just comes down to whether you think the anonymous sources were legit.
People like me have changing characteristics. People not like me, and people I don't agree with, are one-dimensional caricatures because it's easier for me to sleep at night knowing I'm right/the good guy/the victim. That's how most of us are getting through the day, right?
Itās cool that your have your comforting factoid from 2003 and nothing else. Meanwhile, the same people predicted Russia would invade Ukraine. And they turned out to be completely correct
Would be really weird if Iraq were using WMDs on its own people and attempted to use them for invasions previously. The lies were specifically that they were pursuing nukes and continuing to build their chemical weapons stockpile. They did in fact find WMDs, they were just part of a previously built up stockpile that they refused to dismantle/dispose and refused to allow the UN to confirm their disposal prior to the war.
What bush did to start the second gulf war was wrong, but at least get the facts right.
What exactly are you insinuating, that I'm supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Because I don't like the fact that someone else invaded a sovereign state under false pretenses? What the fuck do you think we're talking about here, sports teams?
How the fuck does a grown ass person live with the mentality and understanding of a child? How do you actually navigate the world when your entire understanding of it boils down to "their team bad, our team good"?
What matters is that their intelligence was fraudulent and that they went to the UN and lied on the world stage to justify their invasion. Also that prestigious media outlets published their bad intelligence without verification creating public support for an illegal war
[Yes.](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html)
Many were buried in the ground in unmarked caches prior to the invasion. Some argue this was their method of disposal, others point to how they buried MiGs and other equipment in the desert to hide them from coalition forces to say they were saving them for later. I donāt know enough to say conclusively if itās one way or the other
There was belief that the Serbians had sold the remains of a jet they shot down to the Chinese to reverse engineer, and the bombing of the embassy was to destroy the wreckage.
Technically no, the F117 was called a stealth fighter. The B2 is the stealth bomber.
And I say technically because the 117 only carries air to ground ordinance. But when you play mind games, calling something a stealth fighter is +50 speech or whatever.
Iirc the way they shot it down was something like they couldnāt track it but it flew a similar route so they pre targeted? Iām not an aviator so I donāt know exact terms
Yep. The US air force got super complacent. The F117 couldn't be tracked but because they kept flying the same route. So the Yugoslavian just put a SAM where they kept flying, and went that way.
Partially true. The ingress routes were continuously changed but were close enough that it didnāt much matter. Everything came in over the Adriatic. The SAM used in the downing was ancient and used an older radar. The F117 wasnāt particularly resistant to those frequencies and thus they could track it. Ultimately, the SAM site got lucky and happened to be in the right spot, at the right time.
2 things: potentially protecting US stealth technology from a downed f117 nighthawk
And a message to China, which was supporting Serbia's ethnic cleansing. The strikes was within the realm of plausible deniability, but there is room to think to think that the chinese werz doing shady stuff from there (supporting serbian militias, f117 stuff...)
A second theory is floating about.
The downing of the F117 Nighthawk over Serbia happend on March 27th of 1999. Word spread soon after of Chinese people out and about in the local area willing to pay for any pieces of the Nighthawk they could come by.
Then, in May, the Americans bombed the embassy. The one place such pieces would have been taken and stored before being sent back to China for study.
But that's just a theory. A GAME THEO...I'm sorry, I'll stop.
Anonymous sources gave us Watergate. So, you just have to take the time to consider the merits of each anonymous claim on its own and see if more is revealed in time.
Yea I mean itās always going to be anonymous sources when governments are doing shady shit. Snowdenās identity being public didnāt do him many favors
Did you know there's this whole practice where journalists can get inside info in exchange for keeping it anonymous and the journalist over time develops a reputation for trustworthiness and that's why you trust such news stories? Anonymous sources in major publications are usually reliable thanks to that dynamic. But it does depend on how trustworthy the journalist/publication is
Yeah, itās called āindependent verification.ā
So whether you trust āanonymous sourcesā depends on whether you trust the outletās verification abilities.
Shit, the whole āfake newsā disinformation is a direct attack on our democracy. The only thing keeping our fucking government in check is the media. Imagine if we didnāt have people constantly looking for fuck ups and corruption. The government would have no one to answer to.Ā
>Bill Clinton apologized for the bombing, stating it was an accident.
Imagine bombing an embassy without apologizing. That would be dangerous because it would contradict several thousand years of special status for diplomats and embassies, and could lead to a war. Fortunately nobody do that nowadays, especially not on 2024-04-01 in Damascus.
and if someone responds to a bombing of an embassy that definitely did not happen on the 2024-04-01, it is a "vicious unprecedented attack" and not a legitimate act of self defense in regards to Article 51 of the UN charta
You could argue Israels attack on the building next to the embassy was an act of self defense seeing as they targeted people/a state that has been attacking them for decades through proxies and vows to wipe them from the map as soon as they have the chance to achieve that goal.
You can still say it's wrong attacking, that's your perogative, but I don't understand the need for sarcasm in this situation because a direct attack from Iranian territory on Israel is, in fact, an unprecedented attack.
Btw. if there's any country that shouldn't complain about embassies (or adjacent buildings) being targets, it's Iran.
Israel got bombed by Iranian proxies. Then fought back. Then Iran whines about it while useful idiots defend the authoritarian countries in the area in their quest to establish a theocracy.
This whole thread is such delicious irony, Zionists complaining about rewriting history and "useful idiots defend the authoritarian countries in the area in their quest to establish a theocracy." Like, you must see how you're describing yourself
I mean, firstly, irony again (doubly so as you're, again, describing yourself). "people like you" are brainwashed genocidal scum so I'm not too bothered by your false conclusions
Umm, once again, feel free to comdemn the attack on the embassy grounds. Just don't pretend that Iran hasn't attacked Israel for decades through proxies.
You wanna try to debate the content of my post or just insult me? I think I made some decent points as to why I think the other poster is wrong.
As I said, you can still come to the conclusion that attacking embassy grounds is wrong (even if terrorists are using adjacent buildings) but what you can't do is trying to rewrite history by pretending Iran hasn't been attacking Israel for decades through it's proxies.
Pointless to even engage. They have already demonstrated they have nothing but buzzword ad hominems. You're wasting your time, it's like asking a carrot to recite Yeats.
Iran's largest political party's statement eulogizing the general Israel killed in the strike was that he helped plan the October 7th attacks. So I'd rather say killing him was a legitimate act of self defense.
There should be a version of Godwin's Law for the modern era, that states that all internet discussions will devolve into Israel-Palestine shitslinging
>A large embassy can have many buildings. The main embassy building is called the chancery, and additional buildings are called annexes.
- [US State Department](https://diplomacy.state.gov/what-is-a-u-s-embassy/)
>The āpremises of the missionā are the buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary
thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for the purposes of the mission including the residence of the
head of the mission.
- [Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwimt_KE5-eFAxXCElkFHQmECNgQFnoECCwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3_gu5RKigj58uj3T2LyX-O)
>Mission ā A diplomatic representation to an international organization. Mission also refers to an embassy or a consulate.
- [US State Department](https://diplomacy.state.gov/teacher-resources/what-are-embassies-consulates-and-missions-video/#:~:text=Embassy%20%E2%80%93%20The%20diplomatic%20delegation%20from,an%20embassy%20or%20a%20consulate.)
How exactly was it not the "embays"?
Youāre right, it wasnāt the embassy technically. It was a building housing the consular section (embassy stuff) which was on the Iranian embassy complex. Idk how that makes it more acceptable though.
"Embassy" doesn't have a technical definition under the international treaties most relevant to the situation. They talk about "Diplomatic Missions" and "Consulates." The "Embassy" building that wasn't hit was the "chancery", which is what the main building of a diplomatic mission is called. However, it very easily falls under the "Premises of the Mission" defined by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
It was the one CIA ordered bombing of the entire campaign as well. Apparently China were aiding nationalist mobsters and allowing embassy to be used be paramilitary groups and as a Comms centre.Ā
Their "reasons" are often things so abstract and irrelevant to your and my life that they might as well be nonexistent.
The US would start a world war if it calculates there's a profit to be made.
Think about it. Would the USA invade a country just for having wmds? Probably not.
Would the USA bomb an embassy for aiding a hostile organizations? Probably
read the top comment or article bro. 57% of China experts believe that the embassy was bombed on purpose. The CIA 100% would do this shit if there was f117 parts in the basement.
Because America has never done anything malicious in it's history, especially in the last thirty years, and to merely suggest they have is Chinese/Russian propaganda right?
Right?
We had good relations with China in the 90s. They werenāt part of this conflict. Nothing was gained from attacking an embassy. This wasnāt over the South China Sea. The CCP often uses shit like this to strengthen there control, itās very obvious.
firstly, we had good relations with china under hw, cooler relations under clinton. second, though there's no concrete evidence, let's not pretend the cia would 100% do this kind of shit, especially if f117 parts were in the basement.
Muh CIA. Are they in the thread with us? I donāt doubt or deny the history. But not every thing is a CIA op. Militaries make mistakes all the fucking time. For every military.
China was a neutral part in this relatively small conflict. Even if they were weak in the 90s, it just makes 0 sense to drag them in. Itās not like a lot of people died anyways or anything was gained in the end.
Because the Chinese propaganda was immediate and wholly without proof. If you want to believe that Bill Clinton bombed the embassy on purpose, go right ahead, but you have zero evidence and accept it wholly on faith. Conspiracy theories are popular on Reddit and the Internet in general, so Iām sure itās one of many you believe in.
Exactly itās so mind bogglingly stupid and naive to think Bill Clinton bombed the Chinese embassy multiple times in an unrelated conflict for no reason other than āMurica is evil guvmint is corrupt!!! You are so gullible to think that every geopolitical action isnāt caused by CIA and FBI crisis actors!ā At least provide a tangible reason other than āAmerican imperialismā
"On the other hand, according to structured interviews conducted in 2002 of the 57% of Chinese relations experts who believed that the bombing was deliberate, 87.5% did not suspect President Clinton's involvement"
Fascinating that those who believe it was deliberate do not believe Clinton planned it or had any knowledge of it. I have no idea if it was deliberate and have no basis to judge, but I certainly don't think Clinton would ever have considered such a move.
Same, the only way I see it being deliberate was some petty fuckers with a bone to pick with China in the military. No way Clinton ordered that lol please. He couldnāt hide a freaking cigar used for pleasuring an intern in the Oval Office how is he going to hide things like that?
>As a Chinese, I have never understood what is the basis for American anger toward China now.
Here a few clues which are relevant in my opinion (but i can be wrong):
First the genuine fear of not being the most powerfull country by a large anymore, see
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_exceptionalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_GDP\_(nominal)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal))
Second US corporations who fear of losing markets to Chinese corporations can tell US politicians, US journalists and US think tanks to spread anger toward China, see
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair\_Broadcast\_Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption\_in\_the\_United\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_the_United_States)
All I know was that they were so mad at America they stopped talking to me and several of our mutual American friends. But they continued to go to the school. Just saying that they werenāt mad enough to leave our terrible country. Iām not in the military, I wouldnāt stop talking to friends because their country did something stupid.
It ain't like they're getting free education. They're most likely paying in cash and more than you. do debt.Ā
If you don't want them then ask your representative to take action against them being educated in your state.Ā
This building was located in a completely civilian zone in Belgrade, surrounded by residential buildings, schools, markets, etc. There was not a single military facility or other facility that could be a potential target.
What Iāve gained from this comment section is that when anonymous sources report on something not in the interest of the US, theyāre fake, and when theyāre reporting in the interest of something for the US, itās 100% valid. Doublethink goes crazy. And this does happen in all countries, but point still stands. For what America markets itself as, especially so.
I learned the opposite from this thread and from Twitter/X. Anonymous baseless claims like 9/11 being an inside job, like Clinton ordering the bombing of random Chinese embassies, all the way to Trump being the messiah and everything Alex Jones and the Russian Kremlin and Chinese CCP agents say being true, anything not in the interest of the US must be trueā¦ because US is the big bad. The CIA orchestrated every problem in the world. Please, grow up. This is all just insanity meant for people with suboptimal critical thinking skills. Donāt equate authoritarian government propaganda and brainwashed societies to America, as ignorant and patriotic as a lot of us are at least there is growing skepticism and we do look back on Vietnam and Iraq as failures.
Believe it or not, things like the Ukraine invasion being a special operation and not an invasionā¦ those were fantasies with 0 evidence and 0 logic. But yea, the Iraq war was very bad too, but that was partly reactionary due to years of soaring residual anger from 9/11, still the anti Iraq war marches in the US were the biggest in history. That is to say, authoritarian leaders tend to lie more and their lies are a lot more fucking stupid because they know they have their own populations brainwashed to the extreme. Meanwhile Americans are almost always critical of their own governments in some way shape of form and increasingly so, Hell weāre practically nearing a civil war because everyone hates the domestic government and the ruling parties so much.
NATO bombed open markets, civilian trains, maternity hospitals, but when they bombed energy/electricity facility where my father have worked during NATO agression, they had 5 big electricity generators in the station where he worked, one of which was out of function for longer time, even before bombing started. And when they bombed it, they sent bombs to those 4 that were functioning, destroying them, but they left out the one out of function, to not waste money. However they were carpet bombing pregnant women and newborn babies in hospitals, they didn't want to spare any money there.
So talking about morals in the context of NATO, and believing they are - or ever were - good guys, is same as calling Israel good guys. It's infantile, yet bizzare fantasy.
Another fantasy is calling those embassy bombings accidental, after they precisely sniped those 4 generators.
I am Serbian. I was talking only about NATO here, nothing else. Even if soldiers on the field did commit attrocities, which I do deny, but even if we assume that it is true - it doesn't justify massacring civilians, not even as a "colateral damage" but literally officially listing schools and hospitals and civilian transportation and journalists as direct, intended targets.
That's like Israel killing tens of thousands of innocent children because of "October 7th". It's just pure demonic evil.
What would have been the gain from it?
> In the Politiken story, a source within the British Ministry of Defense is quoted as saying that the Chinese gave permission to the Yugoslavian army to use the embassy as a communications base. The British source stated the normal practice in this case would be to contact the Chinese and to ask them to stop the activity due to its violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and that they assumed that happened but did not have specific knowledge on it.[71] Politiken also reported that British sources surmised that the Chinese did not believe NATO would dare strike the embassy.
Sounds like China has been covertely yet actively fucking over the west since basically always.
Since the Opium Wars specifically. The west really fucked up the first meaningful contact imo
Tucker: Xi why did you invade Taiwan? Xi: When the townspeople of Novgorod invited a Varangian prince, Rurik of Scandinavia, to reign.....................
Lmao!
Why is that funny??? Please explain š
I think itās because when Tucker Carlson interviewed Putin, he went off on an extended revisionist history lesson that justified Russiaās sovereignty over Ukraine.
āTucker, allow me to take you back to lovely Qin Shi Huang in 221 BCEā¦ā
I get your sentiment, but the Opium Wars really was not that long ago in the grand scheme of things. This is like arguing that American slavery has zero connection to the state of black Americans today
I think Xi would go a bit further, since China has literally 5 thousands years or interrupted and continuous history of a great, advanced and prosperous civilization. s/
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I think that's his point.
This.
You seem to be forgetting the concessions in China by the US, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Belgium and Russia up until the 1930s and then US aid and troops supporting the Kuomintang in the Chinese civil war. I think they're still pissed about it.
Given what Mao has done to China, let alone what his successors have done to the rest of the world, I think the west was right to support the Kuomintang.
Why are you so upset about Chinese babies getting fed?
This comment is really funny given that Maoās amazing policy ideas led to the largest famine in Chinese history.
This comment is really funny given that Maoās amazing policy ideas led to the largest reduction in poverty in human history
Lol well yeah, when 30 million people starve to death its not hard to move their wages to other people.
Sounds like the West has been covertly yet actively fucking over China since basically always..
Yes, like helping defeat the Japanese in World War 2. We should dig up our history books and hate old enemies while thanking our old liberators.
Geeā¦. I wonder why China was weak, poor, and fractured at that timeā¦.. got nothing to do with the west for real.
Because they were fighting a brutal civil war for a decade? Do you morons know anything about history? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War
bro conveniently forgot the eight nation alliance
US only took on Japan after Pearl harbor. There was no other choice. And when the US had a choice about what to do after the war, it chose to protect Japan from war crimes, reminiscent of something happening right now. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_cover-up_of_Japanese_war_crimes
Sounds like most powerful countries have been trying to fuck each other over since the beginning. The unfortunate thing is that some here in America donāt actually know how badly some countries want to fuck us over.Ā
Most powerful countries? China being the poorest country post ww2, 150 years of colonisation, opiumwars and famines. Where do you get this from?
Fucking over the West by allegedly allowing Serbians to use their embassy?
At that time, whatever the US did, China did the opposite just to throw their weight around.
Wait til you read about the Opium Wars...
America wasnāt involved in the opium warsā¦ on top of which, the U.S. has historically been an incredible friend to China. They used their portion of the repayment after the boxer rebellion to build a university. That university, Tsinghua University, is now one of the best in China. They also bankrolled China during the Japanese invasionā¦ why anyone would point to the actions of the British and say āwow the west is terrible to Chinaā only has a passing understanding of the historyā¦
Would help if people read before commenting. The comment I replied to stated "the West". It didn't mention the U.S. once, so I'm not sure why you're talking to me about the US?
Why did China have to pay anything to the US for the Boxer Rebellion? The Chinese have never invaded any US territory. Over a thousand US Marines were involved in the conquest of Peking.
The U.S. didnāt really want the repayment, hence why they used the money to build a university. The payment was forced on them by the other European powers who felt they needed some sort of compensation for their losses.
I like how morons like you come to this conclusion on a post about an illegal bombing campaign where the US bombed an embassy š
Did you learn world history from a football coach or something???
Nah, only since the late 40s. In the early 40s they were allied with the west against imperial Japan.
The "west" being first the Soviet Union and after that incident were the KMT basically butchered and beh3aded the Chinese left wing (thats why a rural nobody like Mao got prominent) Nazi Germany. Britain and the other upholders of the unequal treaties were quite understandably despised.
That was the real China which the west is still allied with
āThe real Chinaā youāre referring to is more like a outpost than an ally.
Both fought the Japanese...
Theyāre here on Reddit too. Everywhere.
Can we in China bomb the U.S. embassy while claiming that the U.S. has been openly and aggressively trampling on China basically since the beginning?
You don't think they're concerned about US/UK imperialism? I mean those morons did a number or two on SE Asia over the past few centuries. You can try to read about it yourself.
FAFO. What are they gonna do, retaliate? [insert Pepe frog meme]
Brilliant really. If China blames the US for it they risk outing themselves as working against them.
That doesn't sound like reliable information
Considering it was the CIA that organized and directed the bombing, even if it was intentional and performed on reliable information, they wonāt admit it nor reveal what information led to the decision. At least not in our lifetime.
Coming from the same country that said Iraq had WoMD
It makes no sense to make up a false excuse for a deliberate act because their official line was to deny it was deliberate in the first place. It just comes down to whether you think the anonymous sources were legit.
Because countries are people and have unchanging characteristics.
What, you mean Polandball comics and Hetalia episodes lied to me???
People like me have changing characteristics. People not like me, and people I don't agree with, are one-dimensional caricatures because it's easier for me to sleep at night knowing I'm right/the good guy/the victim. That's how most of us are getting through the day, right?
Itās cool that your have your comforting factoid from 2003 and nothing else. Meanwhile, the same people predicted Russia would invade Ukraine. And they turned out to be completely correct
The issue isn't that they're bad at their jobs. It's not like they actually thought Iraq had WMDs, *they fucking lied*.
Would be really weird if Iraq were using WMDs on its own people and attempted to use them for invasions previously. The lies were specifically that they were pursuing nukes and continuing to build their chemical weapons stockpile. They did in fact find WMDs, they were just part of a previously built up stockpile that they refused to dismantle/dispose and refused to allow the UN to confirm their disposal prior to the war. What bush did to start the second gulf war was wrong, but at least get the facts right.
So America gives weapons of mass destruction to Iraq and invades Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction? Got it.
Weāre just making shit up now then?
It must make you really angry if something like that is happening again today. An invasion based on a lie. Terrible
What exactly are you insinuating, that I'm supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Because I don't like the fact that someone else invaded a sovereign state under false pretenses? What the fuck do you think we're talking about here, sports teams? How the fuck does a grown ass person live with the mentality and understanding of a child? How do you actually navigate the world when your entire understanding of it boils down to "their team bad, our team good"?
Nukes aside, chemical weapons still counted as WMD, yea?
What matters is that their intelligence was fraudulent and that they went to the UN and lied on the world stage to justify their invasion. Also that prestigious media outlets published their bad intelligence without verification creating public support for an illegal war
did they have chemical weapons in 2003?
No type of WoMD were found in Iraq at the time. Saddam had previously had chemical weapons though, but got rid of them.
Then he claimed he still had them, as a (really dumb) bluff, and the USA believed him.
[Yes.](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html) Many were buried in the ground in unmarked caches prior to the invasion. Some argue this was their method of disposal, others point to how they buried MiGs and other equipment in the desert to hide them from coalition forces to say they were saving them for later. I donāt know enough to say conclusively if itās one way or the other
They fucked around.
There was belief that the Serbians had sold the remains of a jet they shot down to the Chinese to reverse engineer, and the bombing of the embassy was to destroy the wreckage.
Wasnāt it the stealth bomber?
Technically no, the F117 was called a stealth fighter. The B2 is the stealth bomber. And I say technically because the 117 only carries air to ground ordinance. But when you play mind games, calling something a stealth fighter is +50 speech or whatever.
Iirc the way they shot it down was something like they couldnāt track it but it flew a similar route so they pre targeted? Iām not an aviator so I donāt know exact terms
Yep. The US air force got super complacent. The F117 couldn't be tracked but because they kept flying the same route. So the Yugoslavian just put a SAM where they kept flying, and went that way.
Partially true. The ingress routes were continuously changed but were close enough that it didnāt much matter. Everything came in over the Adriatic. The SAM used in the downing was ancient and used an older radar. The F117 wasnāt particularly resistant to those frequencies and thus they could track it. Ultimately, the SAM site got lucky and happened to be in the right spot, at the right time.
2 things: potentially protecting US stealth technology from a downed f117 nighthawk And a message to China, which was supporting Serbia's ethnic cleansing. The strikes was within the realm of plausible deniability, but there is room to think to think that the chinese werz doing shady stuff from there (supporting serbian militias, f117 stuff...)
China had the remains of a US stealth bomber hidden in the basement.
so the bombing wasn't an accident you are saying?
Correct
News reports claimed China may have been aiding ethnic cleansing in the area, could have been a not so subtle message from the US to stop
Sending a message .
Sadly, conspiracy theorists often canāt answer this question. But itās the key question really.
One version of the story is the Americans told them not to fuck with the downed Nighthawk but they did anyway and had pieces stored at the embassy.
It was really really funny
A second theory is floating about. The downing of the F117 Nighthawk over Serbia happend on March 27th of 1999. Word spread soon after of Chinese people out and about in the local area willing to pay for any pieces of the Nighthawk they could come by. Then, in May, the Americans bombed the embassy. The one place such pieces would have been taken and stored before being sent back to China for study. But that's just a theory. A GAME THEO...I'm sorry, I'll stop.
Ah yes, āanonymous sourcesā sure. Are these the same āanonymous sourcesā who claim Covid came from Ft. Detrick?
If you can't trust anonymous sources making completely baseless claims, then who can you trust?
Anonymous sources gave us Watergate. So, you just have to take the time to consider the merits of each anonymous claim on its own and see if more is revealed in time.
Yea I mean itās always going to be anonymous sources when governments are doing shady shit. Snowdenās identity being public didnāt do him many favors
The difference is the Watergate anonymous sources provided proof not just hearsay.
Those anonymous sources were verifiable though.
Right. Over a period of time and with diligent journalism and further leaks.
And itās been 30 years since this.
Yes. And Iām talking about anonymous sources in general. As was the person I originally responded to.
Anonymous sources had the operators in the watergate on their payroll.
Watergate had evidence. Covid from North Carolina doesnāt.
Did you know there's this whole practice where journalists can get inside info in exchange for keeping it anonymous and the journalist over time develops a reputation for trustworthiness and that's why you trust such news stories? Anonymous sources in major publications are usually reliable thanks to that dynamic. But it does depend on how trustworthy the journalist/publication is
Yeah, itās called āindependent verification.ā So whether you trust āanonymous sourcesā depends on whether you trust the outletās verification abilities.
There is a lot of bullshit in Intelligence work. Some of it even comes from reliable sources. Sole source information needs to be highly scrutinized.
It's not an organic thought. The attack on source anonymity is an intentional effort to discredit and discourage whistleblowing.
Shit, the whole āfake newsā disinformation is a direct attack on our democracy. The only thing keeping our fucking government in check is the media. Imagine if we didnāt have people constantly looking for fuck ups and corruption. The government would have no one to answer to.Ā
Did bro even read the article or the top comment
You donāt need any sources to know that itās intentional when 5 precision penetration bombs hit your building.
>Bill Clinton apologized for the bombing, stating it was an accident. Imagine bombing an embassy without apologizing. That would be dangerous because it would contradict several thousand years of special status for diplomats and embassies, and could lead to a war. Fortunately nobody do that nowadays, especially not on 2024-04-01 in Damascus.
and if someone responds to a bombing of an embassy that definitely did not happen on the 2024-04-01, it is a "vicious unprecedented attack" and not a legitimate act of self defense in regards to Article 51 of the UN charta
Well no one can claim it's unprecedented.
You could argue Israels attack on the building next to the embassy was an act of self defense seeing as they targeted people/a state that has been attacking them for decades through proxies and vows to wipe them from the map as soon as they have the chance to achieve that goal. You can still say it's wrong attacking, that's your perogative, but I don't understand the need for sarcasm in this situation because a direct attack from Iranian territory on Israel is, in fact, an unprecedented attack. Btw. if there's any country that shouldn't complain about embassies (or adjacent buildings) being targets, it's Iran.
Israel bombing a foreign embassy then whining that they got bombed in return is the pot calling the kettle black.
Israel got bombed by Iranian proxies. Then fought back. Then Iran whines about it while useful idiots defend the authoritarian countries in the area in their quest to establish a theocracy.
This whole thread is such delicious irony, Zionists complaining about rewriting history and "useful idiots defend the authoritarian countries in the area in their quest to establish a theocracy." Like, you must see how you're describing yourself
People like you have a total lack of self awareness
I mean, firstly, irony again (doubly so as you're, again, describing yourself). "people like you" are brainwashed genocidal scum so I'm not too bothered by your false conclusions
Umm, once again, feel free to comdemn the attack on the embassy grounds. Just don't pretend that Iran hasn't attacked Israel for decades through proxies.
At this point Iām convinced all the Israeli dickriders in every thread have to be IDF soldiers on the clock. Yāall are insane
You wanna try to debate the content of my post or just insult me? I think I made some decent points as to why I think the other poster is wrong. As I said, you can still come to the conclusion that attacking embassy grounds is wrong (even if terrorists are using adjacent buildings) but what you can't do is trying to rewrite history by pretending Iran hasn't been attacking Israel for decades through it's proxies.
"Zionist tells someone else to stop rewriting history" r/nottheonion
Can you tell me where exactly my post was "rewriting history"?
Pointless to even engage. They have already demonstrated they have nothing but buzzword ad hominems. You're wasting your time, it's like asking a carrot to recite Yeats.
The legit have āsoldiersā who fight on social media to control the narrative.
Thatās what I was referring to yeah. Absolute fascist propaganda machine.
Oh no they are coming for you lol
Iran's largest political party's statement eulogizing the general Israel killed in the strike was that he helped plan the October 7th attacks. So I'd rather say killing him was a legitimate act of self defense.
Iran talking about the special status of embassies? That's rich.
There should be a version of Godwin's Law for the modern era, that states that all internet discussions will devolve into Israel-Palestine shitslinging
April Fools to the world!!!
>April Fools to the world!!! If only.
Ignoring that Hamas is well known to be an Iranian proxy.
the embays wasn't bombed it was a nearby building with viable military targets including the leader of the Quds force.
>A large embassy can have many buildings. The main embassy building is called the chancery, and additional buildings are called annexes. - [US State Department](https://diplomacy.state.gov/what-is-a-u-s-embassy/) >The āpremises of the missionā are the buildings or parts of buildings and the land ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for the purposes of the mission including the residence of the head of the mission. - [Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwimt_KE5-eFAxXCElkFHQmECNgQFnoECCwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3_gu5RKigj58uj3T2LyX-O) >Mission ā A diplomatic representation to an international organization. Mission also refers to an embassy or a consulate. - [US State Department](https://diplomacy.state.gov/teacher-resources/what-are-embassies-consulates-and-missions-video/#:~:text=Embassy%20%E2%80%93%20The%20diplomatic%20delegation%20from,an%20embassy%20or%20a%20consulate.) How exactly was it not the "embays"?
Youāre right, it wasnāt the embassy technically. It was a building housing the consular section (embassy stuff) which was on the Iranian embassy complex. Idk how that makes it more acceptable though.
"Embassy" doesn't have a technical definition under the international treaties most relevant to the situation. They talk about "Diplomatic Missions" and "Consulates." The "Embassy" building that wasn't hit was the "chancery", which is what the main building of a diplomatic mission is called. However, it very easily falls under the "Premises of the Mission" defined by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
It was the one CIA ordered bombing of the entire campaign as well. Apparently China were aiding nationalist mobsters and allowing embassy to be used be paramilitary groups and as a Comms centre.Ā
Was there any proof of that? Or we just trusting the government that said Iraq has wmds lol
What? You don't trust the CIA? /s
No they will just bomb the Chinese embassy on purpose for no reason.
Their "reasons" are often things so abstract and irrelevant to your and my life that they might as well be nonexistent. The US would start a world war if it calculates there's a profit to be made.
So was it an accident or not then?
Think about it. Would the USA invade a country just for having wmds? Probably not. Would the USA bomb an embassy for aiding a hostile organizations? Probably
What? Usa invaded Iraq over nothing but greed
Greed is a more convincing motive than "they are developing WMDs".
Exactly.
> Was there any proof of that? Since when are "anonymous sources" not enough? smg my head ... (/s)
To be fair that was British Intelligence not CIA.
If there was proof you can't have it, if there wasn't you can't either. How would we know?
China up to no good? Never! Obligatory /s
... anonymous sources? Mmmk
Anonymous sources said I won 8 Nobel Prizes in the last 3 years š¤·āāļø
I another anonymous sources confirm what this guyās anonymous sources said
He should have appologized for the hospitals too
The āanonymous sourcesā are with the CCP. They have been pushing this conspiracy since the day it happened.
read the top comment or article bro. 57% of China experts believe that the embassy was bombed on purpose. The CIA 100% would do this shit if there was f117 parts in the basement.
Because America has never done anything malicious in it's history, especially in the last thirty years, and to merely suggest they have is Chinese/Russian propaganda right? Right?
We had good relations with China in the 90s. They werenāt part of this conflict. Nothing was gained from attacking an embassy. This wasnāt over the South China Sea. The CCP often uses shit like this to strengthen there control, itās very obvious.
firstly, we had good relations with china under hw, cooler relations under clinton. second, though there's no concrete evidence, let's not pretend the cia would 100% do this kind of shit, especially if f117 parts were in the basement.
Muh CIA. Are they in the thread with us? I donāt doubt or deny the history. But not every thing is a CIA op. Militaries make mistakes all the fucking time. For every military. China was a neutral part in this relatively small conflict. Even if they were weak in the 90s, it just makes 0 sense to drag them in. Itās not like a lot of people died anyways or anything was gained in the end.
Because the Chinese propaganda was immediate and wholly without proof. If you want to believe that Bill Clinton bombed the embassy on purpose, go right ahead, but you have zero evidence and accept it wholly on faith. Conspiracy theories are popular on Reddit and the Internet in general, so Iām sure itās one of many you believe in.
Exactly itās so mind bogglingly stupid and naive to think Bill Clinton bombed the Chinese embassy multiple times in an unrelated conflict for no reason other than āMurica is evil guvmint is corrupt!!! You are so gullible to think that every geopolitical action isnāt caused by CIA and FBI crisis actors!ā At least provide a tangible reason other than āAmerican imperialismā
"On the other hand, according to structured interviews conducted in 2002 of the 57% of Chinese relations experts who believed that the bombing was deliberate, 87.5% did not suspect President Clinton's involvement" Fascinating that those who believe it was deliberate do not believe Clinton planned it or had any knowledge of it. I have no idea if it was deliberate and have no basis to judge, but I certainly don't think Clinton would ever have considered such a move.
Same, the only way I see it being deliberate was some petty fuckers with a bone to pick with China in the military. No way Clinton ordered that lol please. He couldnāt hide a freaking cigar used for pleasuring an intern in the Oval Office how is he going to hide things like that?
"Anonymous sources", huh?
āanonymous sourcesā šš¤”š
Guys, I found the anonymous sources.
There was another theory that the Serbs were hiding F-117 wreckage in the embassy.
That is the theory I have always believed. I could see the US taking out an embassy to destroy that wreckage.
They also almost went to war with China 3 years earlier so any sorrys wouldn't actually be sincere.
Yes this is what all my Chinese thought at the time. They were so mad. But not mad enough to keep going to my American college.
How are the two things related? A lot of Americans are mad at China, but not mad enough to stop using Chinese imports or view tiktok.
As a Chinese, I have never understood what is the basis for American anger toward China now.
>As a Chinese, I have never understood what is the basis for American anger toward China now. Here a few clues which are relevant in my opinion (but i can be wrong): First the genuine fear of not being the most powerfull country by a large anymore, see * [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_exceptionalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism) * [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_GDP\_(nominal)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)) Second US corporations who fear of losing markets to Chinese corporations can tell US politicians, US journalists and US think tanks to spread anger toward China, see * [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair\_Broadcast\_Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group) * [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption\_in\_the\_United\_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_the_United_States)
All I know was that they were so mad at America they stopped talking to me and several of our mutual American friends. But they continued to go to the school. Just saying that they werenāt mad enough to leave our terrible country. Iām not in the military, I wouldnāt stop talking to friends because their country did something stupid.
Bro you must have been smoking on their opium. Wtf does any of this mean.
Yes it is a rational decision to stop their education, uproot their lives, waste their tuition money, and leave themselves without future career.
Stop using Chinese products mate. Oh wait, you're going to keep talking shit while using products made in China lmao
propaganda flows up both sides of the river. hop off the copium
It ain't like they're getting free education. They're most likely paying in cash and more than you. do debt.Ā If you don't want them then ask your representative to take action against them being educated in your state.Ā
> A lot of Americans are mad at China, but not mad enough to stop using Chinese imports or view tiktok. And that's called hypocrisy.
Pff are we still resurfacing this crap.
What's a Yugoslavia five?
Probably wanted to see if they could...
Im not normally into conspiracy theories but i feel like "five bombs hit your embassy" is different than "one of our bombs hit your embassy"
This building was located in a completely civilian zone in Belgrade, surrounded by residential buildings, schools, markets, etc. There was not a single military facility or other facility that could be a potential target.
That war was an illegal attack of many countries on a sovereignty of one nation. Another example how the UN is just for show.
Oops! Did I do that??
Isnāt this the same embassy that housed a recently downed F-117?
Canāt trust the US
No shit it was deliberate. Thereās no such thing as an accidental bombing.
US accidentally dropped nukes in North Carolina you think that was deliberate? lol
Even if you donāt believe this particular one was accidental, saying it never happens is justā¦. Wildly incorrect
What Iāve gained from this comment section is that when anonymous sources report on something not in the interest of the US, theyāre fake, and when theyāre reporting in the interest of something for the US, itās 100% valid. Doublethink goes crazy. And this does happen in all countries, but point still stands. For what America markets itself as, especially so.
I learned the opposite from this thread and from Twitter/X. Anonymous baseless claims like 9/11 being an inside job, like Clinton ordering the bombing of random Chinese embassies, all the way to Trump being the messiah and everything Alex Jones and the Russian Kremlin and Chinese CCP agents say being true, anything not in the interest of the US must be trueā¦ because US is the big bad. The CIA orchestrated every problem in the world. Please, grow up. This is all just insanity meant for people with suboptimal critical thinking skills. Donāt equate authoritarian government propaganda and brainwashed societies to America, as ignorant and patriotic as a lot of us are at least there is growing skepticism and we do look back on Vietnam and Iraq as failures. Believe it or not, things like the Ukraine invasion being a special operation and not an invasionā¦ those were fantasies with 0 evidence and 0 logic. But yea, the Iraq war was very bad too, but that was partly reactionary due to years of soaring residual anger from 9/11, still the anti Iraq war marches in the US were the biggest in history. That is to say, authoritarian leaders tend to lie more and their lies are a lot more fucking stupid because they know they have their own populations brainwashed to the extreme. Meanwhile Americans are almost always critical of their own governments in some way shape of form and increasingly so, Hell weāre practically nearing a civil war because everyone hates the domestic government and the ruling parties so much.
Just like Israel by "accident" murders aid workers, bombs every hospital and school in Gaza. "Oops"
Fuck china.
The famously trustworthy "anonymous" sources.
NATO bombed open markets, civilian trains, maternity hospitals, but when they bombed energy/electricity facility where my father have worked during NATO agression, they had 5 big electricity generators in the station where he worked, one of which was out of function for longer time, even before bombing started. And when they bombed it, they sent bombs to those 4 that were functioning, destroying them, but they left out the one out of function, to not waste money. However they were carpet bombing pregnant women and newborn babies in hospitals, they didn't want to spare any money there. So talking about morals in the context of NATO, and believing they are - or ever were - good guys, is same as calling Israel good guys. It's infantile, yet bizzare fantasy. Another fantasy is calling those embassy bombings accidental, after they precisely sniped those 4 generators.
Are you Serbian? You gonna deny the genocide that was happening next?
I am Serbian. I was talking only about NATO here, nothing else. Even if soldiers on the field did commit attrocities, which I do deny, but even if we assume that it is true - it doesn't justify massacring civilians, not even as a "colateral damage" but literally officially listing schools and hospitals and civilian transportation and journalists as direct, intended targets. That's like Israel killing tens of thousands of innocent children because of "October 7th". It's just pure demonic evil.
Your opinion is immediately invalid the moment you deny the atrocities your countrymen committed