Read the forum code of contact
By: - 16th July 2005 at 16:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As far as I know, the only losses were an F-16 and an F-117, both of the USAF.
By: - 16th July 2005 at 16:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
yes but this are official losses and in war you know there is a lot of cover up
Korea war casualties that have been underreported with many other planes beign shot down by soviet aces
By: - 16th July 2005 at 16:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
yes but this are official losses and in war you know there is a lot of cover up
Korea war casualties that have been underreported with many other planes beign shot down by soviet aces
Oh ok, so there is always cover up. Do you really think it would matter if just 2 aircraft or 10 were lost, considering the extent of the air campaign? Hardly, I would think. Not that I am saying 10 were lost.
By: - 16th July 2005 at 16:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I remember the RAF lost one Harrier after been hit by shoulder-launched SAM, could some update me on this?
By: - 16th July 2005 at 17:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
the Harrier was I think lost in a "training accident" but who knows....anybody got a clue ?
By: - 16th July 2005 at 18:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How long will it take for the name "Venik" to pop-up in this thread ? :diablo:
By: - 16th July 2005 at 19:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
well 3 hours and 16 minutes it seems :p
By: - 16th July 2005 at 19:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No not Venik ! His posts are nonsense I know but I simply ask cuz I compared the Gulf war and Allied Force and it's strange no ?
By: - 16th July 2005 at 19:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yeeee-haw:D !
TJ, will you take the honours again?
Kojedub: what 'info' have you got that suggests more than the F-16 and F-117 were downed, and that A-10 had it's engine nacelle badly damaged?
By: - 16th July 2005 at 19:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nothing but I've seen a photo with coffins of "apparently" US soldiers being transported somewhere in the Balkans and during the war the respected magazine "defence & foreign affairs "( a us magazine) said that the losses were higher than said.Is it true or is it BS ?And I think many said that losses were heavier were they all lying ?
thanks
By: - 16th July 2005 at 20:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hello !!!!
where are you ???
Is there something new or not ?
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Had there been more NATO loses in the air camaign over FRY in 1999, they should have came out by now. I mean after six years it is hard to keep thing hidden in the global village we live by now.
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't know what photos you are talking about (TJ is the ultimate debunker of this stuff), but from what lies within my grasp of fact-checking, the official lists are perfectly reliable.
And thanks for the kind and patient words, as well as your well-defined references to larger NATO losses :rolleyes:
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
yes but the photos of coffins ?who was in them and when I compare the Gulf war and Allied Force something is abnormal 28 ( Iraqis poorly trained or at least not as well trained as the Yugoslavs ) and 2 by the Yugoslavs plus 30 or so drones
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Let's put this in easy-to-understand-English: WHAT photos of coffins? Where? When?
And if you don't want to believe the loss rates: fine, don't. But don't expect any of the serious members of this forum to come out and find support for your delusions.
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No you don't understood I'm not anti NATO but I was shocked by the photos an dI started to have some doubts cuz I saw those photos of coffins I can show them to you wait a little bit and go and have
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No you don't understood I'm not anti NATO but I was shocked by the photos an dI started to have some doubts cuz I saw those photos of coffins I can show them to you wait a little bit and go and have a look at my post about the SAS
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The picture of the coffin is hard to find again but I can assure you I saw what appeared to be coffins transported by soldiers and does anybody know what was the truth in the story about the "annual insp" markings on a supposedly Yug shot down mig 29
By: - 16th July 2005 at 21:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The picture of the coffin is hard to find again but I can assure you I saw what appeared to be coffins transported by soldiers and does anybody know what was the truth in the story about the "annual insp" markings on a supposedly Yug shot down mig 29
By: - 16th July 2005 at 22:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here is the photo with the coffins and do you know what was the cause of the crash of the apache helo in Albania (one accident but the other ?)
Posts: 139
By: Kojedub - 16th July 2005 at 15:09
Does anybody know anything about NATO losses in this air campaign ?
Has anything new emerged about NATO losses (I think about the photo with
supposedly coffins of US dead in Macedonia published in Greek newspaper )?
Some people said that there were more losses than NATO actually admitted,
now in 2005 has anybody got any new info ?(I'm not anti-NATO just seeking the truth)
PS:Why officially 28 planes were shot down in Iraq(with a poorly trained Iraqi army )and only 2 in Yugoslavia with a much better trained Yugoslav army ?was it a question of altitude ?