From: clg151@vaxa.strath.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: British Troops in Bosnia
Date: 6 Jan 93 13:19:52 GMT
Organization: Strathclyde University VAX Cluster

In article <1992Dec31.011409.2782@unixland.natick.ma.us>, sharon@unixland.natick.ma.us (Sharon Machlis Gartenberg) writes:
> 
> Excerpted from the Monday, December 28, 1992 Washington Post
> 
> ``No Panic in Britain's Thin Red Bosnian Line; U.N. Support Troops
> Dispute Their Vulnerability to Serb Attacks'' by Peter Maass
> 
> VITEZ, Bosnia--It was, as a British officer might say, a cracking
> good show.
> 
> During a recent patrol near the northeast Bosnian city of Tuzla, a
> convoy of British ``Warrior'' armored fighting vehicles was ambushed
> by Serb militia forces. The Serbs opened fire with everything they
> had--mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and other heavy weapons.
> 
> The Serbs never made a dent. The 45 tracked British Warriors in
> Bosnia weigh 30 tons each, have reinforced armor plating, are
> armed with 30mm rapid-fire cannon and can race across the
> countryside at more than 50 mph. The next best thing to being in
> a bunker on a Balkan battlefield is to be in a Warrior.
> 
> The Serb grenades ricocheted off the British armor, making 
> ``poing'' sounds and leaving, at worst, small burn marks on the
> white paint identifying the Warriors as being under United Nations
> command. Instead of firing back, the British plowed ahead and did
> not stop until they reached the local Serb militia headquarters.
>  
> ``We got out and shook their hands,'' said a British military
> spokesman. ``The Serbs couldn't believe it; they were amazed.''
> There was no immediate explanation of why the Serbs opened fire
> on the clearly market U.N. vehicles, but Serb commanders have
> explained such incidents in the past as regrettable accidents,
> or as the understandable reaction of Serb militiamen believing
> they were under attack.
> 
> Nevertheless, that engagement--in which Serb pride was the
> only casualty--may have been the best demonstration yet that
> the U.N. troops most at risk in Bosnia's bloody factional war
> may not be as vulnerable as some Western leaders contend. ...
> 
> [British Prime Minister John] Major's contention--as well as,
> to lesser extent, that of the French--has been that the 
> destruction of Bosnian Serb aircraft, or their bases, could
> provoke Serb militia forces to launch revenge attacks against
> British and French ground troops helping deliver U.N. 
> humanitarian aid to suffering Bosnian civilians.
>  
> But British troops operating near the frontline here seem more
> than a bit bemused by such hand-wringing. Veterans of the Persian
> Gulf War and sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland, they don't
> quite understand what the fuss is about, and they especially
> don't like politicians portraying them as frightened, defenseless
> Boy Scouts. ``We don't feel so vulnerable,'' said the spokesman,
> who asked that his name not be used. ``We could give [the Serbs]
> a nasty headache if we wanted.''
> 
> Indeed, officials of Bosnia's embattled Slavic Muslim-led government
> and some Western diplomats in the region argue that the continued
> focus on the vulnerability of U.N. relief troops is merely an excuse
> to put off intervention. ...
> 
> Muslim advocates of intervention propose Western air strikes against
> Serb air bases, artillery batteries and other military targets in
> Serb-held Bosnia, and perhaps on their support bases in neighboring
> Serbia as well.
> 
> This, the argument goes, would allow the Muslim-led government's
> lightly armed ground forces to engage the Serbs on more even
> terms; all the U.N. relief troops would have to do is hunker down and
> curtail their civilian aid operations. Bosnian government leaders
> have said repeatedly that they would gladly swap the relief
> operation for Western military intervention against the Serbs.
> 
> The main threat to British and other U.N. ground forces would
> come from heavy artillery fire, according to the military
> spokesman. The frontline is about nine miles from the base here at
> Vitez, well within range of the Serbs' 155mm howitzers, and an accurate
> salvo could cause heavy casualties.
> 
> But British officers here say that in a hostile situation, the 
> Serbs would have to be precisely on target with their first shot,
> because their batteries would likely be silenced before a second
> or third round could be fired. The British army, like the U.S.
> Army, has advanced radar and thermal-sensing equipment that can
> quickly locate smoking artillery pieces and target them for
> retaliation.
> 
> Serb artillery could be taken out in several ways, military 
> officers say. The easiest method would be with air strikes, and although 
> the British now have no long-range guns in place with which 
> to return Serb artillery fire, such weapons could speedily be shipped
> here.
> 
> ``The Serbs would be pretty stupid to take us on,'' boasted one
> British soldier as he relaxed here at an off-hours cafe where the
> video machine was playing an action movie called ``Beasts of War.''
> -- 
> Note: My current address (sharon@unixland.natick.ma.us) will be invalid
> as of 6 p.m. Dec. 31 because unixland is shutting down. My new address is
> sharon@world.std.com  
> --

Yep, we're pretty good, eh?  but what is the point?