[Closed] Missiles on the roof approved

Its a big sports day FFS

Like Munich?

[img] http://www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/03-04/Baker_JS_BK_3-04/Images/appartment [/img]

Its a big sports day FFS. Nobody is going to do a 9/11.

And I hope you're right. But given that it is a very high profile event, that a reasonable percentage of the world will watch or be aware of, and thus presents an excellent terrorist target, it seems sensible to take some rudimentary precautions to me.

I don't doubt for a second it could be prevented without need for the military hardware on display.

I suspect the fact that the military hardware is so well known about is part of that deterrent.

Nobody is going to do a 9/11

You heard it here first folks!

nobody would get on a bus for the games with a back pack full of explosives. oh wait a min. . . . . .

nobody would try and releice a gas in the underground. oh wait a sec . . .

Like Munich?

Which would have been easily prevented through the judicious deployment of surface to air missiles. Get a grip! 🙄

Matt, the He is yours!

Thinking about it, it would be a lot better to use statically moored hot air balloons. Lots of different colours and a lot more pretty at night. You'd make a fortune from the tourists and get a jolly good view over London from one.

Sorry, who mentioned the [i]missiles[/i] preventing Munich?

Was Munich 'just a big sports day', or a terrible tragedy, that could have been prevented with better security?

[i]The absence of armed security guards had worried Israeli delegation head Shmuel Lalkin even before his team arrived in Munich. In later interviews with journalists Serge Groussard and Aaron Klein, Lalkin said that he had also expressed concern with the relevant authorities about his team's lodgings. They were housed in a relatively isolated part of the Olympic Village, in a small building close to a gate, which he felt made his team particularly vulnerable to an outside assault. The German authorities apparently assured Lalkin that extra security would be provided to look after the Israeli team, but Lalkin doubts that these additional measures were ever taken.[11]

Olympic organizers asked West German forensic psychologist Georg Sieber to create 26 terrorism scenarios to aid them in planning security. His "Situation 21" accurately forecast armed Palestinians invading the Israeli delegation's quarters, killing and taking hostages, and demanding Israel's release of prisoners and a plane to leave Germany. Organizers balked against preparing for Situation 21 and the other scenarios, since guarding the games against them would have gone against the goal of "Carefree Games" without heavy security
[/i]

Nobody is going to do a 9/11

You sure about that?

You have first hand, iron clad evidence that proves there wont be an attempt at a "spectacular"?

Would you rather take the risk that maybe an effort wont be made?

Whats wrong with a show of strength? I think they call it a "deterrent.."

Personally if I was a all het up terrorist hell bent on destruction & someone said "Right London's got SAMS..." I'd think twice about the idea of a 9/11 style event & try something else..

Seriously some of you really need to lay off the conspiracy guff & chill the f out..

Thats my 2c & Im off.

your right,

but they havent told you about all the other military assets that are / will be deployed that are not on the news.

Personally - if I was going to do a spectacular, I'd wait a week or 2, then while they're all patting each others backs about how well the security operation went, then......

ALLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!! [b]BOOM!!![/b]

mrlebowski +1

GrahamS +1

zulu +1

[img] [/img]

lol.

anyway its lunch time (fish finger sandwiches Mmmmmm)

back later.

you kids play nice now.

fish finger butties? An inspired lunch choice. White bread, cheese single and ketchup?

binners: why is it "tinfoil hat" to suggest that terrorists might seek to attack London, as they have done in the recent past; but not "tinfoil hat" to suggest that the missiles are actually part of a secret power grab by Big Government and shadowy figures in the MilInd Complex???

Or were the previous terrorist attacks faked as part of the Lizard People's cunning plot?

matt, that guyu can't be any good, he's not even looking where he's shooting 😀

Personally - if I was going to do a spectacular, I'd wait a week or 2, then while they're all patting each others backs about how well the security operation went, then......
ALLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!! BOOM!!!

It wont be much of a spectacular of everyone has gone home

but do have a hand in the air defence plan of london

STW doesn't like people with [b]actual[/b] first hand knowledge.

Armchair expertise, Conjecture, guesswork and wild stabs in the dark are the way.

I think my eye sight is going. I keep reading this thread title as "Missus on the roof approved". Which if it were mine would be a far better deterent against terrorist attacks.

I suspect the fact that the military hardware is so well known about is part of that deterrent.

If sams or the promise of them are needed then OK I guess, personally I reckon it's probably OTT but better paid people than me have decided different. I do have issues with the placement of them on top of peoples houses. And if the authorities are confident shooting down a plane over a massive city is a lot less carnage than hitting a stadium again fair enough.

But don't these terrorist scrotes usually go for low security stuff? High streets, pubs, buses, office blocks on an idle tuesday done with nowt but a small knife and some experience on flight sims. High casualty but "soft" targets?

nobody would get on a bus for the games with a back pack full of explosives. oh wait a min. . . . . .

nobody would try and releice a gas in the underground. oh wait a sec . .

and of course these would be prevented by roof mounted surface to air missiles

Was Munich 'just a big sports day', or a terrible tragedy, that could have been prevented with better security?

Whats wrong with a show of strength? I think they call it a "deterrent.."

Personally if I was a all het up terrorist hell bent on destruction & someone said "Right London's got SAMS..." I'd think twice about the idea of a 9/11 style event & try something else

But don't these terrorist scrotes usually go for low security stuff?

So isn't that a good argument for not making The Games low security?

It wont be much of a spectacular of everyone has gone home

Yeah... you're right. Central London will be deserted by then, returning as it will to the sleepy village it was before sports day.

They're not crediting these terrorists with much imagination, are they. If I hated this country enough to want to kill masses of people, I'd wait til they're all sat huddled around their military-industrial hardware in the capital, then just set off a dirty bomb in Birmingham or Liverpool, who will only have 2 community support officers on duty, as everyone else is on premium overtime, guarding McDonalds in Hackney

The thing is, as with all things, Londerner's are so parochial and self-obsessed that they're the [i]only[/i] ones who could [i]possibly[/i] be important enough to be targets. After all... the whole ****ing world revolves around us, doesn't it?

I want to live in a free country but I'm not prepared defend it.

You don't see a propaganda victory that will be talked about or years, easily n the scale of the world trade centre attacks

No. You don't say the plane was shot down by secret missile batteries.
You tell everyone that the passengers heroically overpowered the hijackers then flew the plane into the ground. Then you make a movie about it.

I suspect there may not be any live SAMs, it's all just a deterrent.

I suspect that there are live SAMs, just not on the roof of that building.

So isn't that a good argument for not making The Games low security?

yes, better security. Not la la land security implemented by halfwits

No, you have a plausible attack scenario, and you mitigate it by having resources in place to deal with it - ie. restricted flying areas, fast jet interceptoos, helicopers and GBAD manned by trained cloudpunchers

then you have other plausible attack scenario's - which are in turn mitigated through other resources, like metal detectors, bag scanners, armed police, intelligence led operations, etc etc.

As was displayed with the munich example, they came up with 26 plausible scenario's - what happened was number twenty one.

People here appear to think that either an airborne attack is so implausible as to be not worth mitigating against (plainly wrong, as we know its happened before) or that mitigating against an airborne attack prohibits you from taking action on any other plausible attack scenarios

the truth is, that you would expect them to have taken steps to guard against [b]all[/b] realistically plausible scenarios - air defence is just one of them.

I suspect there may not be any live SAMs, it's all just a deterrent.
I suspect that there are live SAMs, just not on the roof of that building.

I'd be very surprised if there aren't any live SAMs on that billion pound type 45 air defence destroyer being moored in the thames.
But I am also a little surprised that the powers that be don't appear to have sufficient confidence in it to cover the job.

mt - Member
I want to live in a free country but I'm not prepared defend it.

🙄

it's still stressing out the residents

Boo hoo.

I get stressed out by security restrictions at airports. It's a pain in the harris having to unpack my laptop and iPad, put all my liquids in a little bag, take my jacket, belt and shoes off, get felt up etc.

That isn't really a good argument for removing that security.

I want to live in a free country, not one where the army can set up ordinance on your local park, in your street, on your roof, without you being able to do anything about it.

...and I want to keep them in that park. Who gets more say in it, you or me?

No, you have a plausible attack scenario, and you mitigate it by having resources in place to deal with it - ie. restricted flying areas, fast jet interceptoos, helicopers and GBAD manned by trained cloudpunchers

Steady on there! Calm yourself, man!! Do you you find yourself getting... ahem.... you know... a bit ....erm....'overexcited' when you watch documentaries about helicopter gunships? 😉

No. You don't say the plane was shot down by secret missile batteries.

You mean the secret ones that everyone knows about because they've been on the BBC? These ones
Lexington Building, Fairfield Road, Bow, Tower Hamlets - high-velocity missile
Fred Wigg Tower, Montague Road Estate, Waltham Forest - high-velocity missile
Blackheath Common, Blackheath (Lewisham/Greenwich) - rapier
William Girling Reservoir, Lea Valley Reservoir Chain, Enfield - rapier
Oxleas Meadow, Shooters Hill, Greenwich/Woolwich - rapier
Barn Hill, Netherhouse Farm, Epping Forest - rapier

No-one will ever link any airborne incident with these, rgardless of whether they get fired or not, will they?

Boo hoo

we seem to be arguing slightly at odds here graham, if I promise to let you keep your missiles for the olympics do you promise to keep them away from peoples homes? 🙂

I want to live in a free country, not one where the army can set up ordinance on your local park, in your street, on your roof, without you being able to do anything about it.

I want to live in a country where I don't get blown up by terrorists because some Daily Mail reading NIMBY prevented the implementation of adequate security. I'll take a bit of minor inconvenience over a large scale explosion any day, thanks.

I too want to live in a free country where a visible police force and military presence isn't necessary. But the thing about a free country is, it attracts the attention of bad men who want to take that away from you.

Cougar - Member
I too want to live in a free country where a visible police force and military presence isn't necessary. But the thing about a free country is, it attracts the attention of bad men who want to take that away from you.

Blowing up large sections of other people's countries attracts the attention of people who want revenge.

I get stressed out by security restrictions at airports

EDIT - and FWIW, at Palermo, I noted two the security guards unbuckling their holsters as I taking the belt off. They then all gathered around to have a good look at it before i got it back.

Blowing up large sections of other people's countries attracts the attention of people who want revenge.

Bit of a result, I'd have said

we seem to be arguing slightly at odds here graham, if I promise to let you keep your missiles for the olympics do you promise to keep them away from peoples homes? 🙂

How about the military promise not do anything if terrorists are attacking homes and only get involved if they attack something important? 😉

For god's sake, SALAD CREAM with a fish finger sandwich - not tomato ketchup!

Does appear to be a bit odd that in one of the most democratic, free countries in the world, that for a period of a month, people are going to be banned from using public transport, using roads, walking in places they would normally, and that live missiles are going to be placed in centres of large civilian population when there is NO identified terrorist threat.

Anyhow back to the point. Surely the terrorist are more clever than the government? 911 was a spectacular military success because it avoided all the western preconceptions of how you are supposed to wage a war.

Do 'experts' really think that anyone who wants to attack the games/UK will use the same tactic again?

Probably more likely they will just sail a boat up the Thames (or have we got nuclear submarines patrolling it) or put BSE in all the burgers sold at McDonalds.

Personally I cant understand why its being done, is it to protect the population, no definately not, is to warn off terrorist, no because they would not be that stupid, they will do some thing else...

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

"Blowing up large sections of other people's countries attracts the attention of people who want revenge."

Blowing up fairly large sections of your own gives them what they want

Bit of a result, I'd have said

Plus it would be using British labour!

FunkyDunc
Probably more likely they will just sail a boat up the Thames

Did anyone else see Dara Obrain's comments on exactly this possibility on Mock the Week about a fortnight ago. I think its expired from iplayer now, but was very relevant to the missiles and the destroyer. sorry, but can't find the clip at the moment.

there is NO identified terrorist threat

Isn't there? Okay. I haven't read all the intelligence dossiers yet.
I'm still waiting for the head of MI6 to finish with them.

Do 'experts' really think that anyone who wants to attack the games/UK will use the same tactic again?

We'd look a bit of an arse if they did and we'd done nothing to prevent it.

Abdul Melchett: [i]"Doing precisely what we have done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they'll expect us to do this time!"[/i]