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

[SpectacularWebHead]

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

Muggings, Violence, Riots: Ooo, lets give them missiles too!
David Cameron is a fucking imbecile. Not because anyone their is smart enough to use them, because someone there is stupid enought to try to dick around with them. This is a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[getoffmycloud]

If this was a permanent thing then yes I could understand there issue but it is for two weeks to make sure the entire world doesn't witness someone crashing a plane into the Olympic stadium and killing thousands of people.

 

[mirasiel]

Actually digging in more I see that the site isn't on their roof, its even higher up on the water tower part of the main building which is another 50 or so feet up from them.

And their flats are not council owned, they are private flats in a gated community.

I love the quote from one of the idiots pushing this complaint "I can't imagine the circumstances that would require you to fire missiles over a highly populated area." .

So maybe not a NIMBY, just a complete fucking idiot then.

 

[2fish]

Let's not do half measures here. We have nukes tell the people you will remove the SAM missiles if you can store nukes there to be sure the terrorists don't get away.

'merica says

Nuke yeah!

Sorry got distracted thinking of carpet bombing...

I do think they have a historical reason to put them up so as long as they don't stay past the olympics fine by me.

 

[FamoFunk]

I don't really have much of a problem with the missiles but they shouldn't be on top of people's flats. You can see why that would make people uneasy, I mean I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

That's... not very nice

Perhaps not, but it's fairly practical. In such a built-up area, we need to put them on top of something tall, so why not use the flat blocks in said area?

Because it's a residential area with people who object to it? I was under the impression we lived in a democratic country

There's a difference between a democracy and a powerless government. I do agree that they should have been much more upfront about the plans and asked if any flats would volunteer, but in reality someone's ultimately got to bite the bullet, so to speak.

And again I must ask if you'd feel the same way if it was your flat? Would you just 'bite the bullet', or would you be pissed that the government decided to put hi-tech weaponry on top of your home without asking you?

My decision ultimately is based on the question of whether I'm living there for free. If not, yeah, I get why they're pissed, and I would be too. If these are council flats, I'd hope I was gracious enough to go 'Yeah, let's use the flats for something other than just paying to house other people.'
What would you think, if you lived in a council flat they were doing this in?

(Note: I base the thought that these are probably council flats on my experience of the areas involved)

You are fully aware that a lot of people that live in council houses and flats actually work and pay for the rent themselves? Some even brought them (Thanks, Thatcher, selling off hoses people need)

I don't even get why it matters if the council/government pay their rent or them themselves, it's still somewhere they need to live and probably raise children and they have every right to complain if they don't feel safe or are unhappy with the situation.

 

[In Search of Username]

Out of interest how could you shoot down a plane over London without it, y'know, crashing into London, anyway?

OT: I don't think the security around a sporting event should be allowed to disrupt the daily lives of the people who live nearby. Half the people in there probably don't even care about the Olympics in the slightest, and yet they're still being expected not to mind having missiles deployed around their homes for the benefit of everyone who does.

Maybe it's just because I always hate these big events that everyone is automatically expected to care about, and generally end up not caring myself - but this attitude of 'This event is more important than your convenience, because I said so!' really annoys me.

 

[Navvan]

Honestly I think its perfectly reasonable assuming the missiles have appropriate guarding. That and it doesn't directly inconvenience people without compensation. By inconvenience I mean things along the lines of security checks or other things that cost you time or money.

Its a safety measure, and as far as I can tell the buildings are owned by the government or by people who agreed to have missiles placed there. If they are privately owned building(s) and the owner(s) of the building(s) do not want them there then that is a different story.

 

[mad825]

Making civilian targets into military targets isn't such a bright idea. It would even make the deaths of the civilians more justifiable.

If the people who are effected were notified and voted on the idea then it would be morally justified.

 

[Raven's Nest]

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.

What makes you think there aren't missile sites dotted around the capital already? These ones are just to advertise that we have a deterrent. The real ones won't have their locations broadcasted in the media for painfully obvious reasons.

 

[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.

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.

I was mostly thinking about abroad-originating threats. But you're right, this is more an MI5 thing.

I confess that - suspicious person that I am - I don't find the head of MI5 saying "It's all going to be fine" to be all that reassuring. He'd hardly be likely to say "We're all going to die!" in a press release.

*Magpie does not trust professional liars-and-schemers* _>

In all likelihood, it will be fine. One thing I do trust our government (and secret services) to do is be paranoid.

 

[mad825]

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.

What makes you think there aren't missile sites dotted around the capital already? These ones are just to advertise that we have a deterrent. The real ones won't have their locations broadcasted in the media for painfully obvious reasons.

Maybe true but the problem is that with SAM sites you need preferably a wide area of open space. Maybe they're on a pulley underground but I highly doubt that.

Most military bases near and around London aren't very spacious.

 

[Raven's Nest]

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.

What makes you think there aren't missile sites dotted around the capital already? These ones are just to advertise that we have a deterrent. The real ones won't have their locations broadcasted in the media for painfully obvious reasons.

Maybe true but the problem is that with SAM sites you need preferably a wide area of open space. Maybe they're on a pulley underground but I highly doubt that.

Most military bases near and around London aren't very spacious.

There are however, plenty of big government owned buildings with rooftops. MI5 HQ for example.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

This is the first I've heard of it, but I have to wonder what the hell they need the SAM missiles for. I mean shit, what the hell are they expecting? Terrorists in Harriers (shut up, it's the only fighter plane I could think of)?

 

[Westaway]

I don't see the problem, I would love to have some SAMs on my block, I would go chat up the guys operating it in hopes of testing it out.
But seriously, I think it would be fucking cool to have that shit on my block.

 

[Bestival]

I don't really have much of a problem with the missiles but they shouldn't be on top of people's flats. You can see why that would make people uneasy, I mean I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

That's... not very nice

The reason why they are on top of peoples flats is very simple, if they weren't they would hit buildings when launched. Its not very nice but the reality is that the only place where they can be effective is on top of peoples flats. No one likes to live next to sewage farm but without them we would be dying of Colora. The missiles are not going to be there permanently but just for 8 weeks

Yeah but people not wanting missiles on top of where they live isn't exactly whining is it? I wonder if you'd feel the same way if it was your flat?

I would LOVE a fuckin SAM site on my roof, that shit's badass as all hell!


To me this is the same bullshit as people bitching about living next to a prison... Even if an inmate escapes, you really think he's going to be hanging around the fucking prison!? Ofcourse not, dude's gunna bail at full speed.

 

[freaper]

I think it's a goddamned ridiculous and unnecessary piece of security theatre that was forced on the residents of the sites over their very vocal objections. I also think it's really sad that a country that fought off real invasions from Spain, France, and Germany over the centuries should get into such an alarmist pearl-clutching the-sky-might-fall state over an imagined and extremely unlikely threat.

Yea, warfare 70 years ago is really comparable to warfare today. [/sarcasm]

OT: If the missiles don't hinder the residents' daily lives I don't see why the added (psychological) security would be a bad thing. It's not like anti-missile-missiles form a larger target.

 

[Xyliss]

I don't really have much of a problem with the missiles but they shouldn't be on top of people's flats. You can see why that would make people uneasy, I mean I certainly wouldn't like it.

I think it's a great idea, and most of the people living in the flats are probably there for free anyway. Quit whining, I say - it's hardly the worst thing about living in said areas!

That's... not very nice

The reason why they are on top of peoples flats is very simple, if they weren't they would hit buildings when launched. Its not very nice but the reality is that the only place where they can be effective is on top of peoples flats. No one likes to live next to sewage farm but without them we would be dying of Colora. The missiles are not going to be there permanently but just for 8 weeks

Yeah but people not wanting missiles on top of where they live isn't exactly whining is it? I wonder if you'd feel the same way if it was your flat?

To be honest I wouldn't mind...it'd be one of the safer areas around. I would however like to be told about it beforehand, which is what I disagree with in this instance

 

[mad825]

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.

What makes you think there aren't missile sites dotted around the capital already? These ones are just to advertise that we have a deterrent. The real ones won't have their locations broadcasted in the media for painfully obvious reasons.

Maybe true but the problem is that with SAM sites you need preferably a wide area of open space. Maybe they're on a pulley underground but I highly doubt that.

Most military bases near and around London aren't very spacious.

There are however, plenty of big government owned buildings with rooftops. MI5 HQ for example.

waaay too far.

By the time they are recognized as a potential threat they would already be on a collision course and missiles will only turn them into a flaming ball.

Spoiler: Planned SAM sites

As you can see, the SAM sites are close to the stadium and clear of most tall buildings.

 

[MrPeanut]

Why don't they have turbolaser batteries in London? After all, it's just as likely they get assaulted by Imperial Star Destroyers.

 

[Raven's Nest]

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.

What makes you think there aren't missile sites dotted around the capital already? These ones are just to advertise that we have a deterrent. The real ones won't have their locations broadcasted in the media for painfully obvious reasons.

Maybe true but the problem is that with SAM sites you need preferably a wide area of open space. Maybe they're on a pulley underground but I highly doubt that.

Most military bases near and around London aren't very spacious.

There are however, plenty of big government owned buildings with rooftops. MI5 HQ for example.

waaay too far.

By the time they are recognized as a potential threat they would already be on a collision course and missiles will only turn them into a flaming ball.

Spoiler: Planned SAM sites

As you can see, the SAM sites are close to the stadium and clear of most tall buildings.

The olympic stadium isn't the only target in London. I'm talking about long term defences not just for the time we are hosting the olympics.