Poll: 'Stop The Olympic Missiles' and you...

[Sean Hollyman]

..Lol.


Well they take security seriously I suppose ;p

 

[Hazy992]

Yeah, but that's implying a much larger operation than we're likely to expect - they're not going to take over multiple military missile bases just to crashland a plane.

They may still try it though. And it's going to be an easier target than the others because it's in a civilian area.

Let's not make things too personal. D:
I've had far too many ethics classes/exams to get emotionally invested in an ethical problem. For me, the utilitarian good of defending the thousands is enough cause for some people to lose out here.

It wasn't really much to do with you taking a utilitarian stance it was more with not having a problem taking away these people's rights. Sorry if I offended you but doing something like that doesn't sit right with me.

No, that was a comparative example to your 'so we can take away their food now' example.

Fair enough

Assuming that there are no other more suitable locations, this is our best bet I'd say. Though, as I already said, we could've had more openness about it, and perhaps a poll on the matter.

I'd have absolutely no problem with it if they'd had a vote on it or something because it's up to them. It's the fact that their opinions are being ignored I have a problem with.

And considering the size of London there must be somewhere a little more suitable?

 

[Hazy992]

..Lol.


Well they take security seriously I suppose ;p

'They'? Last time I checked Wales is part of the UK

 

[bobmus]

Yeah, but that's implying a much larger operation than we're likely to expect - they're not going to take over multiple military missile bases just to crashland a plane.

They may still try it though. And it's going to be an easier target than the others because it's in a civilian area.Perhaps, but that's not really the thing to worry about when living in that area during the Olympics.

Let's not make things too personal. D:
I've had far too many ethics classes/exams to get emotionally invested in an ethical problem. For me, the utilitarian good of defending the thousands is enough cause for some people to lose out here.

It wasn't really much to do with you taking a utilitarian stance it was more with not having a problem taking away these people's rights. Sorry if I offended you but doing something like that doesn't sit right with me.
I'd have a problem with them taking away people's rights.
I just don't think people have a right to the rooftop of a block of flats they don't pay anything to live in. (I believe this would be a stance echoed in the property laws of the UK as well.)
I get why that might be an opinion you disagree with though.

Assuming that there are no other more suitable locations, this is our best bet I'd say. Though, as I already said, we could've had more openness about it, and perhaps a poll on the matter.

I'd have absolutely no problem with it if they'd had a vote on it or something because it's up to them. It's the fact that their opinions are being ignored I have a problem with.

And considering the size of London there must be somewhere a little more suitable?

Unfortunately, sometimes people's wishes can't always be met. In fact, it's an essential part of living in a democracy - people who vote for the losing candidate don't get what they wanted.
But we're agreed that a poll would've been nice.

It might just be me being optimistic, but if they've chosen to put missiles on top of civilian flats, they probably have a damn good reason for it.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Regardless on where it should be located, shouldn't they conceal the missle launcher better?

 

[Sean Hollyman]

..Lol.


Well they take security seriously I suppose ;p

'They'? Last time I checked Wales is part of the UK

Mmmmyeah I guess.

London is quite different from Wales though, less shit going on.

 

[Hazy992]

Perhaps, but that's not really the thing to worry about when living in that area during the Olympics.

Well personally it's something I'd be worried about if I lived there

I just don't think people have a right to the rooftop of a block of flats they don't pay anything to live in. (I believe this would be a stance echoed in the property laws of the UK as well.)
I get why that might be an opinion you disagree with though.

Well I think they should still have a say because it's still their home but let's just agree to disagree.

Unfortunately, sometimes people's wishes can't always be met. In fact, it's an essential part of living in a democracy - people who vote for the losing candidate don't get what they wanted.
But we're agreed that a poll would've been nice.

Oh yeah I understand that, and like I said if they had a vote and more people were in favour then against I'd have no issue. It's the fact that there was no vote or consultation first.

It might just be me being optimistic, but if they've chosen to put missiles on top of civilian flats, they probably have a damn good reason for it.

Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but I still think it's important to listen to the wishes of the people affected when making a decision like that

 

[bobmus]

It might just be me being optimistic, but if they've chosen to put missiles on top of civilian flats, they probably have a damn good reason for it.

Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but I still think it's important to listen to the wishes of the people affected when making a decision like that

I agree that they should be taken into account, but I don't believe that necessarily means this project can't go ahead despite some disagreements.

But, as you said, let's simply agree to disagree! Nice debating with you bro

 

[Hazy992]

But, as you said, let's simply agree to disagree! Nice debating with you bro

Yeah you too

How can I put this eloquently, you need to learn how things work. It is the job of government to impose some things on people and they have the authority given to them, BY US, to do so.

If they're able to ignore people's rights like that then the system is broken

 

[MetalMagpie]

And they say fanboys in gaming are bad, you guys are cracking down on Olympics with the god damn army? Wow... it must really be getting competitive out there.

I'm not even sure now if you are for real.

Two previous Olympic Games have suffered terrorist attacks. Most previous Olympic Games have had some involvement of the local armed forces to guard against such problems.

Is missiles on blocks of flats a bit much? I don't know. I'm not the head of the Secret Intelligence Service. I have no idea what the current "threat level" is thought to be.

 

[Hazy992]

But, as you said, let's simply agree to disagree! Nice debating with you bro

Yeah you too

How can I put this eloquently, you need to learn how things work. It is the job of government to impose some things on people and they have the authority given to them, BY US, to do so.

If they're able to ignore people's rights like that then the system is broken

Please be specific. Excactly which right set out in which law is being violated?

I was under the impression that the government had to do public consultations for things like this?

 

[Leftnt Sharpe]

My reaction upon hearing this: "Lol, Londoners". Then I got on with my life.

They should bring some of the ex-Provo lads in as consultants, they could test the defences, poacher to catch a poacher and all that.

 

[Hazy992]

But, as you said, let's simply agree to disagree! Nice debating with you bro

Yeah you too

How can I put this eloquently, you need to learn how things work. It is the job of government to impose some things on people and they have the authority given to them, BY US, to do so.

If they're able to ignore people's rights like that then the system is broken

Please be specific. Excactly which right set out in which law is being violated?

I was under the impression that the government had to do public consultations for things like this?

See that's the thing, people assume something is a right or a law when often it isn't. While I'm not an expert on British/Welsh law, it would seem that the last thing you would want to do is have public consultation on where you put your military or police assets so I really doubt that's a law unless you can point me at one. (You may CHOOSE to consult when its something like "which town should I put this air base in" but that doesn't mean you HAVE to or always will do it/listen)

A few people in this thread have also mentioned that those flats are government property. If true, that reduces the need to consult even further.

I would have thought that their being put in a civilian area on top of residencies meant that the people should have a say. They're not sticking them in a field somewhere

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

No missiles at all. The paranoia surrounding terrorism at the olympics is unfounded and intended to create an atmosphere of fear. Whilst there should be some sort of defence it doesn't need to be in the form of militarising London.

You are right, there as NEVER been a terrorist attack connected to the Olympics. Oh wait...there has...twice in fact.

Yes there have, but the paranoia surrounding it is over the top. And twice is not an awful lot in the entire history of the olympics. I'm not saying we should stop all security measures but it doesn't need to be excessive.

It's not excessive...

GBAD constitutes most countries air defence as standard, we don't, so we have added it for this time of heightened security... how is that excessive?

 

[ToastiestZombie]

No missiles at all. The paranoia surrounding terrorism at the olympics is unfounded and intended to create an atmosphere of fear. Whilst there should be some sort of defence it doesn't need to be in the form of militarising London.

You are right, there as NEVER been a terrorist attack connected to the Olympics. Oh wait...there has...twice in fact.

Yes there have, but the paranoia surrounding it is over the top. And twice is not an awful lot in the entire history of the olympics. I'm not saying we should stop all security measures but it doesn't need to be excessive.

It's not excessive...

GBAD constitutes most countries air defence as standard, we don't, so we have added it for this time of heightened security... how is that excessive?

It's excessive because people who live in the worst part of London might have to deal with a bit of loud noise if something comes along that's a thread to national security! How dare they want to protect the people by putting their missiles near people live, even if it is the most logical and least dangerous place to put them! It doesn't matter if it saves the lives of thousands of people, those poor people in their houses paid for the council shouldn't have to put up with this bullshit!

(If you couldn't tell, heavy sarcasm just happened.)

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

And they say fanboys in gaming are bad, you guys are cracking down on Olympics with the god damn army? Wow... it must really be getting competitive out there.

I'm not even sure now if you are for real.

Two previous Olympic Games have suffered terrorist attacks. Most previous Olympic Games have had some involvement of the local armed forces to guard against such problems.

Is missiles on blocks of flats a bit much? I don't know. I'm not the head of the Secret Intelligence Service. I have no idea what the current "threat level" is thought to be.

This pretty much answers your last line... The SIS look outside the country and MI5/Security Services look at home, so it's them who are doing security. So they are saying that there are no credible reports, but don't want to be caught out as they cant see everything.

 

[mirasiel]

Wow these people were slow to get started, I heard about this plan at the start of the fucking year.


boo-fucking-hoo, you live at/in some of the highest points (owned by the govt, well local council I imagine) in London so yeah, you got the fucking short straw, suck it up and move on.

God, these people are like the NIMBY fuckers who keep moaning on about the RAF and Navy running training excercises in our area of the country but demand we invade whichever mean man is dictator of the week or want to run their tech-rich lifestyle but don't want to have ANY sort of power generation facility near their lovely view (whether it be coal, nuclear, wind, solar or tidal).


/edit

And to answer the inevitable question, yes I would be happy to have a rapier site located on top of the multi-story block I lived in. I am happy that my town regularly gets 'bombed' by Tornadoes and Typhoons, I am happy for the regular visits we get from naval training vessels. I am also eager for us to erect wind turbines in all the empty 'pretty' green land we have thousands of miles of or put Tidal generators out in the shallows.

You know why I am happy? because I know that I benefit greatly from these tiny fucking inconveniences and I am not a whiny little shit who wants all the cool stuff of living in a 'relatively' advanced, safe and free country but doesn't want to pony up any of the costs to maintain and secure it.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

No missiles at all. The paranoia surrounding terrorism at the olympics is unfounded and intended to create an atmosphere of fear. Whilst there should be some sort of defence it doesn't need to be in the form of militarising London.

You are right, there as NEVER been a terrorist attack connected to the Olympics. Oh wait...there has...twice in fact.

Yes there have, but the paranoia surrounding it is over the top. And twice is not an awful lot in the entire history of the olympics. I'm not saying we should stop all security measures but it doesn't need to be excessive.

It's not excessive...

GBAD constitutes most countries air defence as standard, we don't, so we have added it for this time of heightened security... how is that excessive?

It's excessive because people who live in the worst part of London might have to deal with a bit of loud noise if something comes along that's a thread to national security! How dare they want to protect the people by putting their missiles near people live, even if it is the most logical and least dangerous place to put them! It doesn't matter if it saves the lives of thousands of people, those poor people in their houses paid for the council shouldn't have to put up with this bullshit!

(If you couldn't tell, heavy sarcasm just happened.)

I didn't only notice the sarcasm, but I heavily engoyed it!

Sums up your point well too!

 

[White Lightning]

Aww man seriously? I would give my left foot to have missles on my house and these guys are literally being HANDED them, and they're complaining?

 

[Doclector]

What's the problem? I can't see why having a sam site on top of the building you live in would be a problem. If anything, that'd make me feel safer.

And besides, those things are perdy.