It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Chinese Embassy Bombing By United States

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 09:14 AM
On the night of May 7th 1999 during the air campaign over Kosovo Nato forces dropped 3 precision guided bombs from a B2 stealth bomber onto the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. These 3 bombs hit the 3 separare apartments of 3 chinese journalists living and working inside the Chinese Embassy - Killing the 3 Chinese journalists and injuring 20 others.

After the bombing Nato reported this to have been 'a grave mistake' and 'an error'. The official explanation for this bombing is that 500m down the road was a Serbian supply HQ. This was the actual target. We were later informed the the targeting maps were 'old' and did not mark the embassy in its current position, but in its old position. We were also informed from Tenet himself a while latter:

"Three days before the bombing, an intelligence officer realized the FDSP building was a block away from the identified location but this information failed to stop the bombing because of miscommunication."

I personally do not believe what I have been told by Nato or the Chinese. I believe there are a number of factors that contributed to this bombing and that it was certainly no mistake.

The Chinese Embassy which had been bombed was the new embassy built in around 1994/5. Beforehand the area it now occupies was a wasteland i.e there was nothing there. So how do the CIA have a map on which the Chinese Embassy is in its old location, but with the new building present?

Why was the embassy not on the 'do not target list'? Well it appears to have been so but 'because of miscommunication' it never found its way to the weapons circuitboard in the bay of the B-2 bomber.

The basic attitude taken by Nato in this case is too put as much effort and infomation into the situation thereby confusing the majority. We have heard numerous different stories from 'credible sources' confusing the issues at hand. Outdated maps, miscommunication, misinfomation, etc....

What must be realised is that the story for this bombing has been written beforehand, they know what they will say and make it so they cannot be caught out. Sure there might be a bit of controversy, but in the long term - who cares?

Below I will list the POSSIBLE reasons why I believe this bombing took place. There is no single reason, it is a combination of them all.

1)The 3 journalists are really Chinese intelligence officials in some way aiding the Serbs. Possibly providing them with inteligence.

2)The 3 journalists are intelligence officers attempting to obtain parts of the F-117A stealth fighter downed on 27 March.

3)The embassy is relaying military signals for the Serbian military.

4)Assuming the 3 journalists are journalists this is an attempt to silence and threaten Non-Nato journalists.

5)The United States is telling China not to interfere and will use force. This is a subtle warning. The Chinese Government is well aware these 3 people are not journalists.

If you believe there were any other factors involved please feel free to contribute, even if you feel it was a genuine mistake. I would like to know.

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 09:50 AM
How about posting a link instead of quoting yourself? Thanks.

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 09:57 AM
There is one quote, that of Tenet. For what do you need a link?

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 10:04 AM

Originally posted by superpaul55
There is one quote, that of Tenet. For what do you need a link?

Either you give a link or not many people will respond.


posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 02:26 PM
Just don't read it then. We can talk about aliens instead.

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 07:58 PM
Interesting story. Looking in to it a little, I found this on Wiki:

On May 7, NATO bombs hit the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, killing three Chinese journalists and outraging Chinese public opinion. NATO claimed they were firing at Yugoslav positions. The United States and NATO later apologized for the bombing, saying that it occurred because of an outdated map provided by the CIA. This was challenged by a joint report from The Observer (UK) and Politiken (Denmark) newspapers which claimed that NATO intentionally bombed the embassy because it was being used as a relay station for Yugoslav army radio signals. The bombing strained relations between China and NATO countries and provoked angry demonstrations outside Western embassies in Beijing. According to one news source, unnamed high ranking NATO sources confirmed in 2005 that the attack was in fact deliberate: "The NATO sources told Defense & Foreign Affairs that the attack was based on intelligence that then Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević was to have been in the Embassy at the time of the attack. The attack, then, was deliberately planned as a "decapitation" attack, intended to kill Milošević."


I don't know how seriously we can take the testimony of "unnamed high ranking NATO sources", but it's a theory.

I know it's hard to see how, in times of such high military technological sophistication, a mistake such as this can be made but human beings do seem to have a tremendous capacity for screwing up.

2006 - Two U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts accidentally strafed their own NATO forces in southern Afghanistan, killing Canadian Private Mark Anthony Graham, and seriously wounding five others when soldiers were trying to seize a Taliban stronghold along the Arghandab River.


However, this does not mean for one instant that I believe the offical version of events, I remain, as always, open minded.

[edit on 3/2/07 by Implosion]

posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 04:38 PM
It really is amazing how they can lie to us and get away with it so easily. First they tell us it was a mistake. Then they tell us the map was wrong. Then they tell us there was only one bomb. Then they tell us that there were three bombs. Then they tell us the map was right. Then they tell us there were two bombs. Then they tell us it was on purpose. Then they tell us it was a mistake. Then they tell us it was due to misinfomation. Then they tell us it was really on purpose. Then they say the map was right. Then they say the map was wrong. Then they apologise for doing it on purpose. Then they agree it was a mistake and so on till everyone gives up.

You've actually gotta give it to them. Its genius! Its easily enough to destroy anyones opinions!

I also discovered into my investigation of the bombing of Lybia in around 1989 (I think) that there was one particular country that had lots of interests in Libya which was France. They spoke out against America and said the bombing was unneccesary. Well - the Americans dropped a bomb on the French Embassy in Libya by mistake as well!

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 06:44 PM
Interesting article with a little about both here.

Interesting human view of the Libyan bombing here.

On 15–16 April 1986, U.S. warplanes launched a series of military strikes called Operation El Dorado Canyon from British bases — the first U.S. military strikes from Britain since World War II — against Tripoli and Benghazi, Libya, in retaliation for the bombing ten days earlier of a West Berlin nightclub used by U.S. soldiers, which had killed three and injured 230. (Gaddafi had, in turn, ordered the West Berlin bombing in revenge for the sinking of two Libyan boats by the United States in the Gulf of Sirte at the end of March.) Among dozens of others, the airstrikes killed Hanna Gaddafi, a baby girl Gaddafi claimed to have adopted.


Until the September 11, 2001 attacks, the bombing of Flight 103 was the worst act of terrorism against civilian citizens of the United States. The 270 fatalities (259 on the plane, 11 in Lockerbie) were citizens of 21 nations. Of them, 189 were Americans.


[edit on 6/2/07 by Implosion]

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 07:26 PM
I never for one second believed the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade was an accident. Whatever the reason for it, it was a calculated, deliberate action on the part of the US, through NATO.

At the time, I thought it was in retaliation for the theft (or gift?) of the nuclear secrets on the hard drives from Los Alamos.

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 07:56 AM
Of course, USA bombed Chinese Embassy deliberately.
Americans dare to do anything they want, just because they own
a strong economy and a strong force.
So not only Chinese but also people around the world are always in danger
of USA's attack if they do something offend USA's hegemony.
American is the largest rascal country.
Why don't the rest of the world join together to teach Americans a lesson?

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 08:22 AM
I think our political system, at least in the past, has given us an advantage in facing off with the rest of the world because we have the ability to make course corrections in policy relatively quickly through the democratic process, when it is allowed to function.

If a leader or government is perceived to be getting us into too much trouble, we the people have the capacity to choose others to represent our interests relatively quickly, without rebellion or violent political upheaval. Flexibility has always been one of our greatest strengths, imo.

That, and a superpowerful weapons arsenal (which should be used for defensive purposes only, imo).

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 12:40 PM
On the Libyian Bombing:

"The fiery bomb blasts of another F-111 just ahead forced the second plane's crew off its attack path and sent three 2,000-lb. bombs into the French embassy."

I find that seriously hard to believe. I think I could find numerous other supposedly plausible explanations for this event too! Its all part of the gmae. Once somebody said "its easy to hide something when its right infront of your eyes". From two events I conclude certain things:

1)The Americans and their allies run wars based on the policy of scorched earth.
2)The Americans and their allies attack foreign embassies on purpose.
3)The Americans and their allies policies are a combination of 1 & 2.

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 12:59 PM
As I was doing research for my book, I came to the conclusion that the Chinese embassy was hit because there was something in it that would've been too damaging to U.S. interests if it got out. My speculation is that they had been storing electronics which had survived the crash of the F-117a.

The stealth skin of that aircraft was obsolete by 1999. The engines which power that aircraft after off-the-shelf stuff that's more than 30 years old. The only thing in a Nighthawk that would be easily upgrade-able would be the electronics.

Modern stealth depends on more than just a fancy skin. As I understand it, the F-117 has as many as 12 black boxes in it. This might include the very advanced target designator. Even if all they got was the navigation and avionics software, it may have been worth doing to destroy the embassy to prevent that material from reaching Chinese military labs.

It's worth noting that the Chinese government didn't put up too much of a fuss. It seemed clear to me at the time that both sides each new something that they weren't willing to talk about.

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 12:03 AM
Yeah I'll go with the F-117 scenario. It's been well documented that the Chinese have been aggresively seeking US military technology, eg the F-16 they got from Pakistan. This comes at the same time China was developing their own in-house airforce projects where the J-10 was one result.

new topics

top topics


log in