Olympics- now with Anti-aircraft missles

I

IV.

Banned
Forum Sponsor
They must be expecting some serious terrorist attack from the air.
What about some people wearing backpacks with bombs?


Ministers today gave the go-ahead for the use of six anti-aircraft missile sites to protect the Olympics.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has approved the deployment despite concerns from some local residents.
The Government will also robustly fight court action aimed at stopping the locating of missile units at key locations to guard the London Games against a terror attack.
The missile sites are on top of a block of flats in Bow, on Blackheath Common, the Lea Valley reservoir, Barn Hill in Epping Forest, Oxleas Meadow in Shooters Hill and in Waltham Forest.
The units will be armed with surface-to-air Starstreak or Rapier missiles.
The weapons travel at three times the speed of sound with a range of 3.4 miles.
David Cameron or other senior Cabinet ministers will have to decide whether to fire them if a plane is bearing down on the Olympic site.
The surface-to-air missiles are being deployed as the third tier of defence aimed at slower or smaller aircraft.
Fast jets stationed at RAF Northolt will also be scrambled to intercept other planes.
Helicopter-borne snipers and SAS special forces will be on standby to deal with a terror threat.
A total of 7,500 soldiers and naval officers will be deployed in London during the Games.
HMS Ocean will anchor in the Thames off Greenwich to serve as a floating base for more than 800 marines
A 1,000 strong unarmed “contingency force” will be on stand-by to help with searches and security surrounding the games venues.
More than 12,500 police officers will be on duty.
Missile+london+Olympics
 
IV. said:
What about some people wearing backpacks with bombs?
Click to expand...

You posted the answer yourself.

"Helicopter-borne snipers and SAS special forces will be on standby to deal with a terror threat".
 
Why do I fail to see the issue here with proper security being taken?
Just because the missiles are at the ready doesn't mean they will be fired just to do it... I would think with the way things have gone the last few years that they're on pretty high alert over there for good reason.
 
rmemedic said:
Why do I fail to see the issue here with proper security being taken?
Just because the missiles are at the ready doesn't mean they will be fired just to do it... I would think with the way things have gone the last few years that they're on pretty high alert over there for good reason.
Click to expand...

IMO they are keeping fear alive.
Every event will now have the FEAR FACTOR.
So who really wins, we now have missiles guarding us at sporting events.

Let's be real, if a plane is hijacked by the time they figure it out that plane will have hit Buckingham Palace.
What about the trains and subways?
 
IV. said:
What about the trains and subways?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they have plans in place for those things..they won't advertise everything and a lot goes on that you probably won't see.
 
IV. said:
What about the trains and subways?
Click to expand...

You posted the answer yourself.

"A total of 7,500 soldiers and naval officers will be deployed in London during the Games".

IV. said:
So who really wins, we now have missiles guarding us at sporting events.
Click to expand...

No. the British do, for the Olympics. Their threat assessment lead them to believe they required it as they are the most likely to be attacked in the world and have been for a very long time.

We didn't have AA batteries in our Olympics and we won't have them at the next Grey Cup.

Looks like keeping fear alive works on some tho :)
 
Last edited:
IV. said:
IMO they are keeping fear alive.
Every event will now have the FEAR FACTOR.
So who really wins, we now have missiles guarding us at sporting events.

Let's be real, if a plane is hijacked by the time they figure it out that plane will have hit Buckingham Palace.
What about the trains and subways?
Click to expand...

You do realize the extent of possible and very legitimate threats right?
As far as I see it, they are doing a few positive things here. First, showing those planning on attending that it will be safe to do so, and that they don't need to worry about being blown up in a crowd for the world to see.
Second, they are putting it out there to anyone planning anything that they mean business and aren't messing around.

This isn't just some sporting event. This is something that the entire world will be watching, and is the perfect stage for someone to make a message out to the world.

The world we live in is NOT NICE. That's just the way it is, get used to it.

I'm sure they have full plans for any thinkable scenario, lets just hope they haven't missed any. There are so many possible routes, and they don't all involve violence. Some type of Biological weapon with a long incubation period would be very effective. Infect a few million people who in a few days will carry whatever virus back to their countries around the world before anyone is showing any symptoms. Scary thing is, these are the cheapest ways to create massive casualties... But hey, I'm just spreading the fear!
 
OP, how much experience in tactical risk assessment, on a global scale, would you say you have?

Just curious....
 
When you try to pickup a handful of sand, some grins still slips through.
A guy wearing a dress or a woman can have enough stuff to cause trouble.

But then again, it's now a BIG MONEY Industry.
 
Last edited:
IV. said:
When you try to pickup a handful of sand, some grins still slips through.
A guy wearing a dress or a woman can have enough stuff to cause trouble.

But then again, it's now a BIG MONEY Industry.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is, we should just not bother?

You do know how many cameras are in Britain for security right? And that they are all connected to the facial recognition system that mathematically can't be fooled by disguises that don't completely hide the face.
There are so many different levels of security that you have no clue about, and you will also never likely hear about the busts they make simply to hold their cover.

No doubt, some wacko will try something, but why make it easy on them?

The sky isn't falling, the "man" isn't always out to steal your money and to oppress you.
 
The problem with counter terrorism is, when you are successful, nobody knows. When you fail, people die, people are scared to go about their every day life, scapegoats and scandals and blame games go on for years and the idiot masses cry "why wasn't enough done" or "why didn't you have a contingency plan for this" but yea,

They should do nothing for fear of the all mighty internet know-it-alls that post news feeds to forums in order to sound intelligent.
 
I really don't see this as a useful defence against anything, all things considered. If a civilian aircraft is making a beeline for an Olympic facility, the decision to shoot it down will never be made in time. If a military aircraft flies anywhere near the UK, they're going to know about it with enough notice that they will be able to intercept it properly with their own aircraft and observe it to make an informed decision (and probably shoot it down).

I'm all for being prepared, but to me this stems from the peculiar sense of paranoia the UK seems to have. The only scenario where this could make any sense is if they are trying to counter multiple enemy aircraft i.e. an organised military assault. Seems a teensy bit unlikely to me, who can afford to start a war with the UN these days?
 
rmemedic said:
Why do I fail to see the issue here with proper security being taken?
Just because the missiles are at the ready doesn't mean they will be fired just to do it... I would think with the way things have gone the last few years that they're on pretty high alert over there for good reason.
Click to expand...

Different mindset. Civvies say military/police state, the informed say contingency planning or SHTF planning. Very few people feel safe surrounded by military, idk why that is.

D23 said:
The problem with counter terrorism is, when you are successful, nobody knows. When you fail, people die, people are scared to go about their every day life, scapegoats and scandals and blame games go on for years and the idiot masses cry "why wasn't enough done" or "why didn't you have a contingency plan for this" but yea,


They should do nothing for fear of the all mighty internet know-it-alls that post news feeds to forums in order to sound intelligent.
Click to expand...

Further proving my point :)

EVERYONE knows about U.S. Air Marshalls, did you know the RCMP has a program for it too? The difference is ours is Top Secret. They way it should be imo.
 
Last edited:
Macs said:
Different mindset. Civvies say military/police state, the informed say contingency planning or SHTF planning.
Click to expand...

I'm honestly not any more informed than any normal civilian should be if they actually gave a F about the world outside of Canada (or in some cases things that have been planned here).
It should be common knowledge that Britain is actually under a decent level of threat. People already forget the last set of attacks there?

Maybe they don't plan on actually using the missiles, and maybe they actually don't expect a threat from the air, but why not cover their *** to be prepared? And with it now being known they have a defense from an attack from the air, they are less likely to see one attempted.
 
rmemedic said:
I'm honestly not any more informed than any normal civilian should be if they actually gave a F about the world outside of Canada (or in some cases things that have been planned here).
It should be common knowledge that Britain is actually under a decent level of threat. People already forget the last set of attacks there?

Maybe they don't plan on actually using the missiles, and maybe they actually don't expect a threat from the air, but why not cover their *** to be prepared? And with it now being known they have a defense from an attack from the air, they are less likely to see one attempted.
Click to expand...

Most people I know don't give an F about anything outside of their own skin, let alone enough of one to read past a Toronto Star or Sun (depending on their political affiliation) article. Most will just bleet back what they read and try to discredit you with their "facts".
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom