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

[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... :/

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

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

They arn't in peoples homes, they are on a social-housing block owned by the council. The council have given them permission, so there is no legal issue...

Ironically in WWII if there was fighting in Urban Areas the American soldiers were very quick to take up camp in someones livingroom/basement whether they were let in or not...

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.

I reitterate that every nation hosting the Olymics or a major sporting event in recent years has put inmeasures like this... not only that, but most nations have SAM networks as standard peacetime defense... We have the worlds busiest air routes flying near London, and these sites are meant to act as a deterrant for anyone planning to attack.

 

[Hoplon]

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...)

I think if your having to shoot things down over a city you're already fucked.

 

[Versuvius]

The problem is that they have had 7 years to find a solution to the 'terror' problem and have never once mentioned this or consulted the people who it will effect. It's been 7 years of spinning on their head in buckets of cocaine and suddenly deciding MISSILES ON RESIDENTALS.

Also a guy on page 1 suggested that everyone affected would be living there for free so their arguments are invalid. Fuck you buddy.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Ironically in WWII if there was fighting in Urban Areas the American soldiers were very quick to take up camp in someones livingroom/basement whether they were let in or not...

Not in the houses of US citizens, though.

 

[Fasckira]

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!

This in a nutshell. Majority of the flats, if not all of them, are council flats. The tenants have bugger all rights to the building anyway.

Actually, come to think of it, fuck it. Might be easier to paint big targets on said council blocks and invite terrorists to focus on them. Worst case scenario is that Jeremy Kyle would lose a fraction of his audience.

I am of course being glib but I really don't see the problem in the proposed plans, its for national safety. The only thing I'd probably worry about if I lived there is becoming a target for terrorists by having them there but as has been mentioned before the terrorist threat is pretty low.

 

[GonvilleBromhead]

The problem is that they have had 7 years to find a solution to the 'terror' problem and have never once mentioned this or consulted the people who it will effect. It's been 7 years of spinning on their head in buckets of cocaine and suddenly deciding MISSILES ON RESIDENTALS.

Or they have been working on the plans for seven years and came to the realisation the only way to provide in depth coverage from an aerial terror attack requires these buildings, due to their positioning and roof size and shape was to use these buildings. The owners of the buildings have been compensated, and the residents are free to move out whenever they want.

Also a guy on page 1 suggested that everyone affected would be living there for free so their arguments are invalid. Fuck you buddy.[/quote]

Not invalid, but you get what you pay for. It rather strikes me as giving a homeless person a sandwich and them complaining that it's got mustard in it.

The fact of the matter is that the only reason these have become a terrorist target is because it has been because the location has been broadcast everywhere simply by them whiny about it. As such they only have themselves to blame. TBPH, the MoD shouldn't have told anyone where they were