Olympics, SAMs, and "1000 US agents"
Discussion
I heard on BBC news tonight there will be SAMs in some "woods" in south London, and the US wants to send 1000 agents to protect their athletes and diplomats.
After a search it seems it's relatively old news, with reports from November saying the same thing. Do we really need 1000 (armed?) US agents here, apparently 500 of them FBI? Is our own security that lacking?
After a search it seems it's relatively old news, with reports from November saying the same thing. Do we really need 1000 (armed?) US agents here, apparently 500 of them FBI? Is our own security that lacking?
the US have not grown up since the red panic of the early - mid C20th they are also paranoid aobut the number of South Asian faces in the UK as the average merkin thinks Team America World Police is a documentary ....
SAM wise the British Army has Rapier and Starstreak in it's inventory and both the LML version and the Stormer HVM vehicle-mount version of Starstreak (Stormer being stretched CVR(T)) and the trailer version of Rapier designed for a semi fixed site
SAM wise the British Army has Rapier and Starstreak in it's inventory and both the LML version and the Stormer HVM vehicle-mount version of Starstreak (Stormer being stretched CVR(T)) and the trailer version of Rapier designed for a semi fixed site
So if a hijacked plane turns up they can shoot it out of the sky. OK, so it'll land on a housing estate and kill a few local peasants but at least no atheletes will be harmed.
Since the biggest threat is likely from a triumvirate of bearded flea-ridden backpackers I hope they're not substituting military might for common sense.
Since the biggest threat is likely from a triumvirate of bearded flea-ridden backpackers I hope they're not substituting military might for common sense.
carmonk said:
So if a hijacked plane turns up they can shoot it out of the sky. OK, so it'll land on a housing estate and kill a few local peasants but at least no atheletes will be harmed.
That was my first thought, difficult decision to take but I suppose given a choice between, say, 1,000 on Oxford Street and 80,000 in the stadium with the world watching ...But as you say, is hijacking really a vector these days?
carmonk said:
So if a hijacked plane turns up they can shoot it out of the sky. OK, so it'll land on a housing estate and kill a few local peasants but at least no atheletes will be harmed.
Since the biggest threat is likely from a triumvirate of bearded flea-ridden backpackers I hope they're not substituting military might for common sense.
The Rapier deployments aren't really to deter terrorists, let alone stop them. They're for public consumption.Since the biggest threat is likely from a triumvirate of bearded flea-ridden backpackers I hope they're not substituting military might for common sense.
Sir Humphrey: Bernard, what is the purpose of our defence policy?
Bernard: To defend Britain.
Sir Humphrey: No, Bernard. It is to make people believe Britain is defended.
Bernard: The Russians?
Sir Humphrey: Not the Russians, the British! The Russians know it's not.
rxtx said:
That was my first thought, difficult decision to take but I suppose given a choice between, say, 1,000 on Oxford Street and 80,000 in the stadium with the world watching ...
But as you say, is hijacking really a vector these days?
The games are a target everybody who goes there knows this and takes a risk (however small)But as you say, is hijacking really a vector these days?
Why should some poor peasants have a plane landing on their heads they might have stayed at home because they didnt want to be blown up.
Pesty said:
The games are a target everybody who goes there knows this and takes a risk (however small)
Why should some poor peasants have a plane landing on their heads they might have stayed at home because they didnt want to be blown up.
I don't think those sorts of reasons are taken into account if the sWhy should some poor peasants have a plane landing on their heads they might have stayed at home because they didnt want to be blown up.
t should hit the fan. I imagine, never having been in that position, that it comes down to choosing the least devastating outcome, however unpalatable.fandango_c said:
They have already insisted to send an aircraft carrier to the Thames!
EFA. Although isn't it a USMC carrying heli / harrier carrying one?It is not likely at all that it will be used as the evacuation point for all athletes & diplomats if the fit hits the shan. Much the same way the there always seems to be a visit from a friendly CVN at exactly the same time as POTUS comes to town. G20? Check. Last year? Check.
Pesty said:
rxtx said:
That was my first thought, difficult decision to take but I suppose given a choice between, say, 1,000 on Oxford Street and 80,000 in the stadium with the world watching ...
But as you say, is hijacking really a vector these days?
The games are a target everybody who goes there knows this and takes a risk (however small)But as you say, is hijacking really a vector these days?
Why should some poor peasants have a plane landing on their heads they might have stayed at home because they didnt want to be blown up.
Its a big problem. I worked closely with a few universities, who were bidding to host the olympians in their pre-olympics training. Much kudos to the Universities if they got a good "name" to go there- China, Team GB etc
Nobody wanted Israel or America because of the security issues, or the bad press from being associated with them.
Nobody wanted Israel or America because of the security issues, or the bad press from being associated with them.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff