U.K. and Ireland - Missiles on my apartment? London resident balks at Olympics security measures

MSNBC: Missiles on my apartment? London resident balks at Olympics security measures (http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/29/11454116-missiles-on-my-apartment-london-resident-balks-at-olympics-security-measures?lite)

I don't think I'd be happy if they did this to my flat!! Not sure if this is normal for Olympics or not...

Britain's military has told the 700-odd residents of Whelan's apartment development near the Olympic Park in east London that it is considering installing a missile battery on top of a tower within their housing complex to defend the 2012 Games this summer.

Given the population of the area I would have thought it would cause less damage to let an aircraft fly into the Olympic Stadium. The death toll would be in the tens of thousands either way.

And given the number of flights into London each day why are these missiles only now needed?

The death toll would be in the tens of thousands either way.Not if they blast the aircraft to bits. Sure, there will be casualties on the ground either way, but it's a significantly different visual if there is a plane crash in a major Olympic venue vs. a building that's a few blocks away.

If they can destroy the plane rather than just shoot it down so that the pieces that fall aren't that large then it will be a lot less casualties on the ground should it have hit a venue. The question is can they do that with the Starstreak?

I think it's mostly PR. They're publicising this well and well in advance so that everyone knows about it. Most potential attackers, such as they are, will hopefully be scared off by this news.

I think it's mostly PR. They're publicising this well and well in advance so that everyone knows about it. Most potential attackers, such as they are, will hopefully be scared off by this news.

I don't know, if you're dumb enough to go and become a suicide attacker whatever method you use, then I don't think the chance that the British Army are going to shoot at you with a Starstreak is going to put you off.

I don't know, if you're dumb enough to go and become a suicide attacker whatever method you use, then I don't think the chance that the British Army are going to shoot at you with a Starstreak is going to put you off.

+1...I doubt most suicide bombers care much about the possibility of being foiled...

Reminds me of the Nike Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries around USA cities back in the day.:D

Anything smaller than an atomic weapon that hits an airplane is going to result in BIG pieces coming down.

Cheers

I believe they are proposing to deploy these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak_%28missile%29

Not much explosive payload.

Reminds me of the Nike Anti-Aircraft Missile Batteries around USA cities back in the day.:D....


Hard to believe that firing T-shirts and tennis shoes at airplanes would be very effective, although they might make a nice swoosh as they went by.

I believe they are proposing to deploy these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak_%28missile%29

Not much explosive payload.

Nope it won't although there was more detail in the paper tonight, the Starstreak is going to be the close in weapon of last resort. The Typhoons and then the helicopters then the Rapiers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapier_%28missile%29) then the Starstreak.

Hard to believe that firing T-shirts and tennis shoes at airplanes would be very effective, although they might make a nice swoosh as they went by.
:D:D:D

I don't know, if you're dumb enough to go and become a suicide attacker whatever method you use, then I don't think the chance that the British Army are going to shoot at you with a Starstreak is going to put you off.
Do you really think that anyone is going to be so stupid as to fly a plane into the Olympic village? I find it highly unlikely.

Do you really think that anyone is going to be so stupid as to fly a plane into the Olympic village? I find it highly unlikely.

Yes if it's an organised terrorist attack then this would be a very high profile target to try and hit.

Yes if it's an organised terrorist attack then this would be a very high profile target to try and hit.
Maybe it's just me, but I find it extremely unlikely - especially wih all of this PR.

Maybe it's just me, but I find it extremely unlikely - especially wih all of this PR.

Try looking at it from the other side of the coin, think of the massive PR you/your terrorist organisation would get from an attack like this.

Try looking at it from the other side of the coin, think of the massive PR you/your terrorist organisation would get from an attack like this.
If somebody were looking to organise a terrorist attack in the UK at this time, surely an attack on a more underprotected city like Birmingham, Manchester or Edinburgh (because you know spare capacity will have been sent down to cover London) would be more likely to be successful? Hundreds or thousands dead even outside London would still disrupt the Olympics and get worldwide headlines.

If somebody were looking to organise a terrorist attack in the UK at this time, surely an attack on a more underprotected city like Birmingham, Manchester or Edinburgh (because you know spare capacity will have been sent down to cover London) would be more likely to be successful? Hundreds or thousands dead even outside London would still disrupt the Olympics and get worldwide headlines.

But it wouldn't disrupt the games to the same extent as it would it one of the venues was hit. Nor would it have the same media effect as there will be loads of journalists/broadcasters in London for the games and it would be beamed live into more living rooms as a result.

when bush/cheney went to bunker mentality, they mounted a bunch of missiles around the white house(also had 24 hr air cover at about the beltway perimeter). it was pointed out that the missiles would do much more damage when they landed in the suburbs than the damage they would protect.

i recall an article that the great patriot missile success in Israel did much more damage to tel vive than to Iraq missiles, or did Iraq missiles.

when bush/cheney went to bunker mentality, they mounted a bunch of missiles around the white house(also had 24 hr air cover at about the beltway perimeter). it was pointed out that the missiles would do much more damage when they landed in the suburbs than the damage they would protect.

i recall an article that the great patriot missile success in Israel did much more damage to tel vive than to Iraq missiles, or did Iraq missiles.

Whilst all that is true the effect of hitting the White House would have a greater damage than just to the physical building. In the same way the heads of state that are coming to London for the games need to be protected. If you think about it that's a lot of VIP's in one place which would make it a very prized target.