WWW.RLFANS.COM https://rlfans.com/forums/ |
|
Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=513465 |
Page 1 of 4 |
Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
Apparently, so says Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary. So what is the point of that, then? What aerial threats may they face? It is hard to imagine anything other than hijacked planes. Is this really where we have come to? If a hijacked plane is thought to be headed for a stadium, what are we saying - that if we can blast it out of the sky somewhere else - Finchley, perhaps, or Shepherds Bush, somewhere, anywhere other than perish theb thought an Olympic venue - then that will somehow be a good result, and worth doing? Would we all then breathe a sigh of relief? Is the knowledge that this may happen going to put off your average planejacker with a deathwish? Really? Or have the lunatics taken over the asylum completely now? |
Author: | BackrowSaint [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
In a worse case scenario then around 60,000 casualties or a couple thousand casualties is an easy decision to make for me. Tragic, sickening and disturbing still, however if a hijacked plane is travelling straight for a packed Olympic stadium then damage limitation may come into play. |
Author: | tb [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
Right. It's not like we have an airforce to intercept any hijacked plane, or security measures at airports … This is just a classic example of populist kneejerking in reaction to the Americans' "we don't feel safe, we want to send FBI agents over" |
Author: | Cronus [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
I suppose if we're talking decision-making on a national security level and as a last-ditch defence option, a hijacked airliner is better disintegrating at altitude and causing perhaps a few dozen casualties on the ground, rather than piling into a stadium packed with 80,000 people. I imagine the RAF will also be on alert and probably patrolling more intensively throughout the Games. And it would make awesome TV. tb wrote:Right. It's not like we have an airforce to intercept any hijacked plane, or security measures at airports … Could a threat be identified, information passed to the top and orders given, aircraft possibly scrambled and the threat taken out in the few minutes it would take to reach Stratford from Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted or City? |
Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:22 pm ] | ||||
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics | ||||
|
Author: | BackrowSaint [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
Cronus wrote: Could a threat be identified, information passed to the top and orders given, aircraft possibly scrambled and the threat taken out in the few minutes it would take to reach Stratford from Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted or City? Probably not, if the terrorists were well organised then it would probably only become apparent once the aircraft deviated from it's flight path. Then it would be a race against time to scramble typhoon's which would probably have to come from Coningsby. |
Author: | BackrowSaint [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:26 pm ] | ||||
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics | ||||
|
Author: | BackrowSaint [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:28 pm ] | ||||
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics | ||||
|
Author: | vbfg [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:How exactly does a country shooting down an international airliner full of innocents achieve a single thing? It's the only language they understand. |
Author: | vbfg [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Ground-to-air missiles may protect Olympics |
tb wrote:Right. It's not like we have an airforce to intercept any hijacked plane, or security measures at airports … This is just a classic example of populist kneejerking in reaction to the Americans' "we don't feel safe, we want to send FBI agents over" Vested interests at work here. You just want it to hit its target rather than land on you. |
Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |