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

[Daveman]

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!

Regardless of if it's free I doubt it said in the tenancy agreement "we reserve the right to turn your rooftop into an anti-air missile platform".

I'm not sure what good they'll go in the centre of London anyway. Surely if we shoot anything in the air that'll just mean a shitload of debris falling just about anywhere? Last I checked we still had jets. We could use them to intercept anything before it got there, or do the terrorists have stealth bombers now?

Just seems generally a little crazy is all.

 

[KeyMaster45]

Hating these Olympics, way to bankrupt the country.

Just ask Greece how they got on!

From what I understand, Greece had economic problems that had been brewing long before the Olympics brought the riotous hordes of international sports fans to its doorstep.

OT: I think I'd be more worried if there wasn't somebody protesting it. Though frankly I think both sides have something of a "sky is falling" attitude.

The missiles on roofs is a bit much considering they're there to counter the slim chance of an air based attack, but they're putting somebody important's mind at ease and probably a damn sight cheaper than having fighter jets circle the area 24/7 during the games. The people freaking out about the missiles on the roofs are overreacting though.

Yes, I can see being upset that the military just plopped some missiles on your roof without asking, but in the end they're just going to sit there and bother exactly no one. Well it might bother the poor bastards who have to sit on the roof and keep an eye on them.(who, despite being in the military, probably have a million other places they'd rather be than on top of an apartment complex watching some missiles rust in the London fog) I also imagine that the security around the buildings will be a bit beefier than usual, so I'd consider that something of a perk.

Of course this could all just be a ruse and the missiles are really there to keep the mutant gargoyle monsters, which plague the London skies at night, from disrupting the event. They are a national secret of course, so any that get shot down will not be reported.

 

[Neonit]

sigh, that reminds me of the big anti missile shield project, and why people are against it.

lets say that i am a terrorist leader, and i plan to drop a plane on a stadium. I KNOW there are missile launchers placed on top of flats. i know WHICH ones. if i have the menpower and materials to hijack a plane, avoid interceptors AND standard AA installations.... how much of a trouble would it be for me to place a few extra bombs... you know, in a flat that is unguarded?

this whole situation puts them at risk. ANY risk that is created by government should be compensated by government. now, i dont claim i know everything about this whole situation, just what ive heard from the news, but from my point of view - people are being put at risk by government. that should not happen, at least in a way that is happening right now - because it SCREAMS chaos, and that my friend, is exactly what "they" want.

but thats just my opinion.

edit: oh yeah, and lets not forget that such a roof isnt designed to hold a missile launcher. we dont know how much they weight, less how much of an impact they generate on launch. im not saying it would drop right through the roof, but it could damage the whole construction. you know, small cracks that get larger every time temperature shifts...

 

[Atmos Duality]

Huh. Is it wrong that the only thing I'm thinking right now is the line from Weird Science:
"A missile. A missile! A MISSILE IN MY HOUSE, GARY!"

 

[Imat]

Yeah, I imagine they aren't exactly going to be over the moon about it, though I disagree that they'll be targets (terrorist organisations want to hit civilians, not fight the military).

Right, and these people are civilians. With missiles on their flats. Missiles meant to stop air-based attacks. It's not hard to see why they'd be a target.

However, how much right does a person living in a house that someone else owns have in saying what that person does with their house? I think the government (and the military) are justified

Again, you're basically saying that because it's not their house the government can just dick them over. Well no they can't. This shit might fly in China but not here.

I mean that food they bought isn't technically theirs it's the government's. It's cool for them to just take it then right?

their business isn't to ensure everyone is happy.

Kinda is

That really isn't the job of the government. The government exists to protect, or at least that is what it should exist for. Anything else is extra, so that you'll put people back in office when they want it, despite them raising taxes to pay for this program that you'll never even see.

Anywho, if they are living in free housing, provided by the government, they'll just have to deal. They can think of it as a "property tax" that doesn't cost them a cent. If it is their own housing that they pay for the matter is different. They should've had a say in that case, and should at the very least receive some sort of compensation in the form of rent from the missile-toting soldiers who get this nice little roof all to themselves.

 

[chadachada123]

I would personally volunteer my house to have missile sites on top of it if the Olympics were nearby. How freaking awesome would that be?

However, I can understand why some people that aren't as awesome would whine about it being done without permission.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I say it's absurd. What sort of threat are they expecting that needs to have SAM sites everywhere? Terrorists don't usually have access to jet fighters and attack helicopters, and there haven't been any dragons in the UK for thousands of years. Wtf are these missiles for?

Since 911, the UK military has helicopters constantly in the air watching aircraft for suspicious movement (in lieu of building a radar station on a really tall tower). SAM missiles on flats? Mind you, might help if the dragons are walking along teh ground.

I mean, I could see the point in having a sort of antimissile defense like Phalanx CIWS/CRAM systems in case someone managed to get their hands on some rocket-type weapon, which wouldn't be quite as far-fetched, but this seems pretty crazy imo.

Er...if you have one of those turned on, it will constantly start firing at anything flying around in the area. Radar glitches and pigeons would send thousands of 20mm rounds around London.

 

[Private Custard]

While they're handing stuff out, I'll take one of these on my roof.


I've paid my taxes Mr Cameron. I'll even wash it myself when I do my car.....whaddya say?!

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

snip

I find that hard to believe quite frankly. I seriously doubt you'd be cool with the government going 'oh BTW we're putting missiles on your roof kthxbai' without consulting you or giving you a say in the matter. You'd be pissed off and you'd have every right to be.

Not to mention that these missiles make these flats a potential target for anybody planning something. If I lived in these flats I'd be pretty damn scared right now because I'd be constantly thinking something bad could happen or go wrong.

I have to ask because I'm in the US, are the missiles actually blocking anything? Its on the roof, right? Is it blocking out satellite tv or something?

 

[SlaveNumber23]

These protesters are idiots and selfish assholes, they would rather compromise the safety of thousands of others rather than have something they don't want built on the roof of their building? They do not even own the building, just live in it. If their protest was successful and there was an air attack, they would be begging them to put the SAMs up. To everyone using the argument of there apparently being a tiny chance of a terrorist attack, therefore the threat is insignificant: this is the Olympic Games we're talking about here, where thousands of people gather tightly packed into one area, you know, the kinda thing that makes them perfect victims of terrorist attacks? Regardless of previous statistical suggestion, if a terrorist decides they are going to attack the Olympic Games, the chance of them attempting that is 100%. No matter how small the chance of such a threat may be, as long as that chance is greater than 0 it is worth making the precautions if the threat is going to harm so many people. Better to be safe than sorry or dead.

 

[SnipErlite]

No problem with these, it's all about safety - Sure I wouldn't mind having it on my roof if it means a plane won't come crashing into the olypmic stadium.

Also I'm not just saying that - The counter-plan is to build a tower with the missiles on about 10 minutes from my house, and I would be totally fine with that.

 

[flames09]

Stupid argument led by ignorant people, take no notice of it.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Bet all those pigeons in trafalgar square are bricking it now

Being serious now are anti air missiles really necessary as an counter terrorist measure for the olympics? I imagine having a fight or two ready just in case of a major incident but unless terrorist cells have secert airship fleets I think this is a tad excessive.

Good on the residents for complaining, I'm sure there are plenty non-residential building the MOD could put these missiles on. Incidentally I wonder how many joke planning permission applications for roof mounted missiles will be made because of this.

 

[Laughing Man]

My god their is a whole lot of dumb going on in this topic. Every person who has asked the question 'I can't see why you would need SAMs it's not like terroists... then insert your list of stupid military hard ware terroists may have here.'

The sites themselves ARE the detorant, A fanatic who is planning to hijack an airliner will only go ahead and do so if they think they can actually get away with it. That is how they managed to pull off 9 / 11 and specifically since then with the massive increase in in flight security why no one has since managed to pull it off again.

A hi jack fanatics goal would be to get the plane and get it to it's target right here and right now the situation is they get the plane and chances are it's going to get shot down, so no fanatic is even going to bother trying. The sites have done their job and they haven't even had to let one of the missiles off the chain.

As for making the buildings they are sitting on a more valid target, hoo boy that is just about as stupid as asking why the sites are there in the first place. Terroists have attacked military infra structure in the past but when have terroists ever pulled off an attack on multiple military targets located over a large area and succeeded? Never.

These folk, who are moaning about missiles on their roofs are pathetic, day to day they will make no difference to their lives what so ever and if they are worrying about them then my god they really need to get a sense of perspective. Try living five miles from a major submarine base during the height of the cold war and then come back and tell me that you're worried because the military has put some anti air missiles on your flat roof and you're worried that your a god damn fucking moron.... sorry that your house has suddenly become a target for fanatics!

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Something I find funny about this: in the US, a very strong argument could be made that this was unconstitutional under the third amendment, which reads "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." You know why we have the third amendment? Because redcoats were quartered in people's homes in exactly that manner in colonial times. Some things never change, I guess XD

 

[StBishop]

I have been watching with interest the stories of the 'Stop the Olympic Missiles' protesters, and their apparenty futile efforts to oppose the deployment of Rapier and Starstreak SAM sites to their residencies.

Now, don't get me wrong, the deployment of these sites without the consultation of the residences I agree with. It should have been announced and discussed before hand, but that is the only thing I agree with in the whole affair.

I personally think that the missiles should be deployed as a deterrant in the locations in London. They are an intrinsic part of an Integrated Air Defence System, and their use is a last line of defence against a threat to air.

The location of these sites is very unlikely to attract attacks to their locations, and the munitions don't pose any risk to the people who live there, so I think it is a selfish, and not well thought out plan to try and get rid of them.

Well... that is my opinion on the matter... What is yours?

(For more information see these links...)

You could always volunteer to have one in your front yard.

Just Saiyan.

OT: I don't have enough context to form an opinion.
I don't imagine I'd be bothered if there was a SAM site across the road, but I don't know enough about the place and people who live there to make assumptions about how I'd feel in their shoes.

 

[Kaymish]

all it will take is for one car-bomb to go off outside a flat with a SAM site on top and it doesn't even need to be very effective because these people will be validated and public opinion will force all the other sites off the roofs giving any terrorist another 4 or so weeks to smash a plane into something (or the security around them will be beefed up but for the purpose of my argument the former is the case)
and it will be less difficult because you only have to hit the weakest one and they are in residential and low income areas where cheap cars are parked all the time and people are less likely to ask questions of suspicious occurrences

 

[Riddle78]

I have a simple philosophy: If the threat exists,even in such a minute degree,then steps must be taken to neutralize or make the threat moot.

I support the SAM's being deployed in the area. People can complain,and I agree that they have the right to complain because they weren't informed and/or consulted. However,the Olympics are a VERY big thing,and should be protected for morale's sake. If you don't like the SAMs going up,that's your buisness. However,they're there for protection against airborne threats that may strike against the Olympics. However slim the chance. Because,let's face it,the Olympics were attacked in the past. Let's not have a repeat performance.

 

[Daniel Ferguson]

It's very V for Vendetta, in a way.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

London has 5 airports around it, there are gonna be planes in the air, its a bigger risk that someone would get an itchy trigger finger and shoot one down, rather then someone actually high-jack one. Assuming of course those are real missiles and not just dummies to make it look like they are doing something. Its much more likely that some asshole would just do a homemade bomb, that seems to happen in almost every Olympics.

The itchy trigger finger scenario cannot happen... these launchers are operated by trained professionals at a much higher level of training than say, the Syrians that shot down the Turkish F4s. The order to fire has to come from a senior level politician and them only, the sites are not running autonimously with a local commander.

You could always volunteer to have one in your front yard.

Just Saiyan.

I'm in the military... I have dangerous hardware in my front and back garden all day every day as I live on base in the mess... Doesn't make my life any more dangerous... in fact, because of all the security we are probably safer than people living in east london social-housing without armed military and police on their roofs... :/