11-07-2012, 12:01 AM
1
Are Olympic missiles just for show?
Anti-aircraft missiles are being stationed in London to protect the Olympics from aircraft used in a terror attack. But could they actually be used? And what are the risks if they are fired?Six sites are being used to site surface-to-air missiles to guard the 2012 Games. The missiles will be a mix of Rapiers - used in the Falklands conflict 30 years ago - and the Starstreak high velocity missile (HVM), which has a shorter range but is faster.
Their location in built-up areas has worried some, especially residents of the Fred Wigg Tower in Waltham Forest, north London, who took the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to court to try - unsuccessfully - and remove HVM missiles from their roof.
While the MoD has said there is no specific threat to the Games, the missile deployment follows similar measures taken at the Beijing Games in 2008 and the Athens Olympics in 2004.
Here is the full article should you wish to read it all.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18766547
11-07-2012, 07:25 AM
2
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
Is it over the top?Well if we are attacked during the games, then it wasn't.
If we are not attacked then it was, but we have to remember the twin towers, the Israeli team in Munich attack when their team was virtually wiped out.
Too many fanatics out there not to do something in my opinion.
11-07-2012, 08:53 AM
5
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
If I lived in London I'd feel safer with them there.................and hopefully they will be a deterrent and won't need to be used. I don't consider any form of defence 'over the top' in these times of worldwide terrorism. As wrinkly says, remember the Twin Towers.
11-07-2012, 08:08 PM
6
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.Too late to have the games in a non-residential area now, and the missiles are like a large target for terrorists to practice on. I feel so sorry for the people living under them.
Maybe the MPs could do an exchange of living accommodation with these families
12-07-2012, 09:18 AM
7
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
IF--- and I say --IF ----- there were a terrorist attack and a missile was usd to "bring down" an aircraft, the resulting debris falling from the sky woud possibly set fire to several buildings and kill perhaps ten / twenty people.If the missiles weren't there and the same aircraft were to crash into the olympic stadium, it would more than likely be stuffed wife explosives, the death toll could be around ten thousand, and the ramifications in the afterevent would make the Twin Towers tragedy look pale by comparison.
As for the cost of things, well everything costs money these days and a few million spent here and there bears no relation, its pennies in the greater scheme of things, and if it were to save ONE life, it would be well worth it.
12-07-2012, 10:15 AM
8
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
If we seriously think about it, the types of people who would do such a thing, wouldn't worry one bit about the plane being brought down over London.But it has to be seen to be done by all the countries taking part.
If there is an attack I believe it will be a targeted attack like the Israeli attack in Munich, or perhaps a suicide bomber.
12-07-2012, 10:24 AM
9
Re: Are Olympic missiles just for show?
Wrinkly,Unfortunately we will never know until ---if it ever does ---happen. Any attack will be brutal and I have no doubt lives will be lost, and then, all the braying in the world from those in the media, all the laying of blame, all the ---they should have done this or that brigade, will be too late.
No-one can stop a determined terrorist / whatever from doing what they do best, killing people, all the missiles in the world won't stop them, but as long as we try and safeguard all, then nothing will have been in vain.
|
|
