How James Blunt Prevented WWIII.

stiggie

pop
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
11,293
Location
Wollongong, Australia
Car(s)
Golf GTI
James Blunt apparently prevented a third world war. The singer made the claim in an interview about his military career. "I was given the direct command to overpower ... 200 or so Russians [in Kosovo]," he said. "And the practical consequences of that political reason would be then aggression against the Russians."


The man who later sold 11m albums with a song about a beautiful woman on a subway was once a cavalry officer in the British army, serving among 30,000 Nato troops in Kosovo. The year was 1999, and Blunt was at the head of a column that had been ordered to seize Pristina airfield. "I was the lead officer with [a] troop of men behind [me]," Blunt told Radio 5 Live's Pienaar's Politics. "[It was a] mad situation."


Although US general Wesley Clark had issued a command to "reach the airfield and take a hold of it", the Russians had arrived there first. "We had 200 Russians lined up pointing their weapons at us aggressively," Blunt recalled. "The direct command [that] came in from general Wesley Clark was to overpower them. Various words were used that seemed unusual to us. Words such as 'destroy' came down the radio.


"The soldiers directly behind me were from the Parachute Regiment, so they're obviously game for the fight," Blunt said. But he wasn't willing to risk major conflict with Russia. "There are things that you do along the way that you know are right, and those that you absolutely feel are wrong," he said. "That sense of moral judgment is drilled into us as soldiers in the British army." The singer-songwriter claims he would have declined the order even at the risk of a court martial.


It didn't come to that. British general Sir Mike Jackson sent an admonishing message down the wire. "[His] exact words at the time were, 'I'm not going to have my soldiers be responsible for starting world war three'. [He] told us why don't we sugar off down the road [and], you know, encircle the airfield instead." Asked if he thought the original order could indeed have set off a third world war, Blunt replied: "Absolutely."


Blunt's new album, Some Kind of Trouble, has yet to spark any major international conflicts.

Source.


I've heard about James Blunt's service in Kosovo before and even his confrontation with the Russian forces is old news but this is the first time I've heard about General Clark's order. Considering the part that Russia's protection of Serbia played in sparking WWI, I really don't think that it is unreasonable to suggest that Blunt is right in his assessment of how badly this could have ended.
 
You don't think NATO troops firing in anger on Russian troops could have led to war? The incident itself would have rightly been considered an act of war if Captain Blunt had followed the order.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it would have led to war even if true. Huge political shitstorm, yes, but both sides (Nato, Russia) had nothing to win in a war.


e: when I said war I meant world war. Smaller conflict? Possibly.
 
Last edited:
It would have been a casus belli, and it would bascily depend on wether or not Yeltzin and Clinton had a good enough personal relationship to avoid escalation. NATO command structures are quite good, they wouldn't act further in Kosovo right there and then.. however, I'm not so sure about some Russian officers.

Would it have set off WW3? They would probably have managed to broker a peaceful sollution, but it might very well have ended up as a major crisis, and that might have led to real loss of life. Heck, god knows wether or not it would have led to Serbian ground forces invading Kosovo with NATO troops there..

Whatever the result, it would have been fucking bad. Someone needs to sit down with General Clark and ask him what, if any of this, is true. If it's accurate, that's.. bad.
 
You don?t really take this for real, do you? Press writes 'Pop-Singer goes on the Radio saying "I prevented WW3" ' ... and you believe that? With all due respect to the Man and his military service, I call bullshit. At least to how the media spins this story.

I do actually. I remember seeing the news reports back in 1999 about NATO troops in a stand-off with Russian troops in Kosovo. There was a lot of talk at the time about what could have happened if everyone had not kept their heads. WWI began after Russia stepped in to protect Serbia from a powerful alliance who were invading them. History could have easily repeated itself.

I don't think it would have led to war even if true. Huge political shitstorm, yes, but both sides (Nato, Russia) had nothing to win in a war.

Remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which led to America's entering the Vietnam War?
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561897/General-Sir-Mike-Jackson-speaks-out.html

[...]His finest hour was undoubtedly Kosovo. The account of his eight months commanding Nato ground forces is the high point of his narrative, as well as of his career, culminating in a theatrical confrontation with the American commander of Nato forces, General Wesley Clark. The clash enhanced Jackson's reputation as the most colourful character of modern soldiery and exposed his contempt for Clark's aggressive stance.
The scene was Pristina airport. Three hundred Russian troops, in a gesture of solidarity with the Serbs, seized control of the airfield. Clark ordered Jackson to block the runway to prevent Russian reinforcement. Jackson squared up to him with the famous line: "Sir, I'm not going to start World War Three for you." When Clark, his superior officer, repeated his order, Jackson retaliated: "Sir, I am a three-star general, you can't give me orders like this. I have my own judgment of the situation and I believe that this order is outside our mandate." Clark, who later described Jackson's response as "emotional", countered: "Mike, I am a four-star general, and I can tell you these things." Wonderful stuff.

All I see here is the Press spinning a story a way that they can sell more. It?s shameful. If you look at the actual quotes from Blunt, he doesn?t even say it. They just spin it that way ...
[...]The singer-songwriter claims he would have declined the order
 
Last edited:
Remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which led to America's entering the Vietnam War?

It's one thing to start a war that you're pretty sure to win (even if you don't win at the end), than to start a war against the most powerful military force on the planet.

Do you remember that North Korea and South Korea shoot at each other all the time, but they don't start a war.
(I know that technically they are at war, but really they're not)
 
Last edited:
My point was that this sort of thing traditionally leads to war.

And perhaps the fact that the Koreas are technically still at war is the reason why they still shoot at each other.
 
But the situation is different than any in history. Two superpowers with nukes and a both of them need international trade more than ever before.
 
Those are important considerations, but certainly not guaranteed to prevent war.

Imagine the Russian and British public's reaction to seeing flag-draped coffins being carried down the ramps of transport planes after such an incident. Tearful mothers, wives and children. Most of the casualties would have been Russian. They'd have been under a lot of pressure to respond.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I have too high hopes for worlds leaders, but I think still it would've been only diplomatic incident, some cooperation projects cancelled, visas revoked etc. Some kind of limited conflict at worst.
 
He should have followed his orders.

He didn't actually get the order.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/671495.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561897/General-Sir-Mike-Jackson-speaks-out.html

All I see here is the Press spinning a story a way that they can sell more. It?s shameful. If you look at the actual quotes from Blunt, he doesn?t even say it. They just spin it that way ...

And do you think that Stanislav Petrov should've followed orders too?
 
Last edited:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/british-general-stopped-russians-from-killing-james-blunt-201011153251/

A BRITISH general's intervention to stop World War III may also have prevented the destruction of James Blunt, it emerged last night.

Is Jackson guilty of war crimes?

General Sir Mike Jackson over-ruled US orders for Blunt to attack Russian troops in Kosovo in 1999, which would almost certainly have led to a brutal exchange of fire and ensured You're Beautiful was never written.

Blunt, a former tank commander, revealed in a radio interview just how close the world had come to not having to experience the stench of his rancid, semi-acoustic vomit.

General Jackson apologised last night, but added: "How was I supposed to know I was talking to James Blunt?

"Was I supposed to say, 'ignore that order unless you are planning to write a series of simpering ballads that will be included on Valentine's Day compilation albums for fucking ever?'.

"Like you, I would happily have seen Europe and the United States ground into a fine powder, but I just assumed I was talking to the sort of chap who would leave the army and end up working for some hedge fund that would merely bring capitalism to the brink of total collapse."

But General Jackson was condemned by angry humans across Britain, with most calling for him to be smashed to pieces with bulldozers.

Tom Logan, from Peterborough, said: "Fuck World War III. We had a chance to live in an empty, smouldering world completely free from You're Beautiful, but instead we are all forced to live in an over-populated hellhole where the fucking thing is everywhere."

Meanwhile, in a chilling twist, the singer also claimed he would have disobeyed the US orders anyway, raising the appalling spectre of an army where people like James Blunt are allowed to make decisions.

Logan added: "'Oh no, I better not kill that crazy Al Qaeda Nazi that's bearing down on your family with a massive gun because they might be beautiful'."
 
With 200 or so soldiers there, I bet at least one had some sort of anti-tank weapon.
 
Possibly, but Blunt's wasn't the only armoured vehicle there. His unit was made up of several of them. He also had British paratroopers and French troops with him.
 
Top