I saw a heck of a lot on intact armor withdrawing from Kosovo at the time. Clinton punished Serbia proper. So severely the Wall Street Journal reported at the time that Serbia would take 12-15 years to recover economically from it. Bridges. RR. And of course the "CNN" of Serbia. And not to mention the Chinese embassy.
If air power alone is so effective in breaking the will of the enemy then why are we still in 'Stan?
Airpower is a force of its own, now, and no longer just a supporting force to a ground campaign.
Sometimes the Air Force leads, sometimes not.
The Army/ground forces, are not always the lead component anymore. Sometimes airpower will be the lead, like Gulf War I, and sometimes the ground campaign leads. . .such as in the “stan” as you call it.
The facts in the article are undisputed and accurate.
The “Chinese Embassy” was a communication node that was actually being used as a hub to route enemy communications.
The selection of that target was done by the CIA, so, the USAF had no role in determining if it was placed on the Master Target List.
JWAC assessed the BDA and the attack went as planned.
Blame the CIA, but then again, if not, okay, then I blame the Army for shooting journalists that film from hotel balconies and are misidentified as holding RPGs. See? Intel in not exact.
Complicating everything in Kosovo was Gen Clark, US Army.
He demanded a specific number of targets, not targets with any value. Just numbers so he could say, “We bombed ‘X’ amount of targets today,” regardless if they actually had any effect. That is why many bombs were dropped and missiles fired. . .at targets that held no strategic value.
And we can't forget Wild Bill Cody, US Army, and his Apache fiasco in theater at that time. Apache's are airpower, you know, and he mucked up the deployment and preparation for employment so much so he (they) were pulled.
Gen Clark, US Army, was a typical tactical officer with no clue about strategic targeting and weapons effects. Gen Cody was cartoonish in his ego.