Srebrenica airlift?

Status
Not open for further replies.
c. 8,500 Bosniaks killed in 1995 after the Dutch handed some of them over.

Logistically, could they have been airlifted to safety if the Dutch had stood firm? I've heard the excuse that the RAF and USAF denied air support, and I don't want to hear it again.

Was there an airstrip good enough for a Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules?

If not, Chinooks carry up to 55 passengers http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/chinook.cfm

So we'd be looking at maybe 200 individual lifts across a couple of days.

Presumably NATO had over 200 Chinooks at their disposal for Bosnia in 1995 (UK currently has 60 in service).

This was UN jurisdiction so NATO would have had to have ignored the UN in this ATL. But I'm putting the politics to one side, just interested in the logistics for now.
 
Last edited:

Archibald

Banned
nice for the Netherland soldiers. They were denied the right of firing back against fucker Karadzic because of U.N mandate. So no, they didn't handled the bosniaks to their murderes.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
Ofcourse DUTCHBAT wasn't perfect. Kattemans really was The worst possible commander and the troops were pretty screwed up after the long siege. However, Srebrenica was such a moronic position defensively and DUTCHBAT so underequipped that the enclave could only have been defended through the extensive use of airpower. The Dutch knew that, The UN knew that and the Serbs sure as hell knew that.
 

Archibald

Banned
As for any airlift, do you really think Serbs are going to seat down and led Chinooks and Hercs carry all those people they want to slaughter so much ? DUTCHBAT knew they need a) a mandate to fire out at Serbs b) heavy weapons and c) air power. They were denied both. what could they do ?
 
Who, exactly, would be being airlifted? Just the soldiers and paramilitaries? The more than 30,000 Bosniak civilians present in the town and immediate vicinity? If it's the latter...you'd need more than 200 Chinook lifts.
 

BossaNova

Banned
c. 8,500 Bosniaks killed in 1995 after the Dutch handed some of them over.

Logistically, could they have been airlifted to safety if the Dutch had stood firm? I've heard the excuse that the RAF and USAF denied air support, and I don't want to hear it again.

Let me guess - American? Or a Brit?

Well, though shit: because that's what happened:

Now a survey of the mass of evidence reveals that the fall of Srebrenica formed part of a policy by the three “great powers” – Britain, France and the US – and by the UN leadership, in pursuit of peace at any price; peace at the terrible expense of Srebrenica, which gathered critical mass from 1994 onwards, and reached its bloody denouement in July 1995.

The allies gave up on Srebrenica weeks before the enclave fell. One of the reasons being British and French soldiers held hostage by the Serbs. So you expect the Dutch to sacrifice their lives, while the allies were not not willing to sacrifice the lives of the British and French soldiers held hostage. Typical.

Air cover for ground troops is not against an air force but against, well, ground forces, tanks, APCs, and just superior numbers of the opponent.The Dutch weren't allowed to arm their APCs with 20mm cannon, which would look "too aggressive", but only with 50 cal. machine guns. That alone would have given them a slight chance against Serbian TANKS. That's why air support from other participating countries was promised, and denied when the need materialised. How else were 300 lightly-armed, collge-aged draftees supposed to fight off 5000 Serb troops with tanks and attack choppers? Want to save Srebrenica? Change the attitudes of your government who left the enclave to rot.

But they were not perfect:

Let's get one thing straight, Serbians did the murdering and so are morally, ethically, politically and any thing else you may want to drag in, responsible.
 
Last edited:
As for any airlift, do you really think Serbs are going to seat down and led Chinooks and Hercs carry all those people they want to slaughter so much ?

Yes, probably? The Serbs had themselves proposed that the UN send in as many trucks and buses as it wants and evacuate as much of the Srebrenica population as it wants, back in 1993.
 
Let me guess - American? Or a Brit?

Well, though shit: because that's what happened:



The allies gave up on Srebrenica weeks before the enclave fell. One of the reasons being British and French soldiers held hostage by the Serbs. So you expect the Dutch to sacrifice their lives, while the allies were not not willing to sacrifice the lives of the British and French soldiers held hostage. Typical.

Air cover for ground troops is not against an air force but against, well, ground forces, tanks, APCs, and just superior numbers of the opponent.The Dutch weren't allowed to arm their APCs with 20mm cannon, which would look "too aggressive", but only with 50 cal. machine guns. That alone would have given them a slight chance against Serbian TANKS. That's why air support from other participating countries was promised, and denied when the need materialised. How else were 300 lightly-armed, collge-aged draftees supposed to fight off 5000 Serb troops with tanks and attack choppers? Want to save Srebrenica? Change the attitudes of your government who left the enclave to rot.



Let's get one thing straight, Serbians did the murdering and so are morally, ethically, politically and any thing else you may want to drag in, responsible.

To repeat, my question is strictly about the logistics, which is why I'm not interested in national culpability whether American, British or any other. And steady on with the personal attacks and profanity, which are against the rules of this forum. You guessed wrong about my nationality and I'm not going to guess where you are from. In keeping with netiquette I'm hereby disengaging to avert a flamewar, so feel free to have the last word.
 
The 30,000 civilians. I'm interested in the logistics of civilian refugee airlift and looking at this as an example. You could probably pack about 90 people into a Hercules, so that would be 333 lifts if there was an airstrip or ground that could be turned into one. With enough planes, you could do it in under a week.

Chinooks have a bit more than half the capacity but perhaps quicker turnaround time, so we're looking at about the same time-frame without a landing strip.

Murderers tend to do their business behind closed doors. There's an outside chance that an ATL airlift filmed by news cameras would not have been violently stopped by Serbian troops.
 
Last edited:
To repeat, my question is strictly about the logistics, which is why I'm not interested in national culpability whether American, British or any other. And steady on with the personal attacks and profanity, which are against the rules of this forum. You guessed wrong about my nationality and I'm not going to guess where you are from. In keeping with netiquette I'm hereby disengaging to avert a flamewar, so feel free to have the last word.
then maybe stop making those accusations about the Dutch while you don't want to hear about the worthless (in that situation) americans and brits. you were the one to throw the proverbial first stone, so don't start about the rules of the site because they call out your position
 
Warning
then maybe stop making those accusations about the Dutch while you don't want to hear about the worthless (in that situation) americans and brits. you were the one to throw the proverbial first stone, so don't start about the rules of the site because they call out your position

To repeat, this is a question about logistics. To clarify, and repeat, I'm not interested in anyone's culpability. I stated the Dutch were in a difficult position.
 
No accusation intended, and I apologize if I hurt anyone's feelings. Whatever description of the events one prefers, I'm interested in the logistical side of an ATL Srebrenica airlift.
there is one huge problem with the airlift. it puts the un between a rock and a hard place. leave the refugees there and they get killed, move them out and the un is assisting with ethnic cleansing
 
the logistics would be doable (from a technical aspect), however it needs a lot of political determination, and i simply don't see the un taking the decision to go with option #2
way too bad for their plush careers (since its a violation of the geneva convention)
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
To repeat, this is a question about logistics. To clarify, and repeat, I'm not interested in anyone's culpability. I stated the Dutch were in a difficult position.
BS.

You picked a fight and now you are upset that you are losing it.

Don't flamebait.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top