guzzi Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11764301/Secret-plan-to-deploy-5000-soldiers-on-UK-streets-in-wake-of-major-terror-attacks.html Its almost as if its all been planned all along... Including civilians being blown up and shot dead in city centres? Come on! Last I heard that was in Paris not London or Manchester... Blimey, rmanx. 0/10 for comprehension. From the Telegraph article that you linked: "The troops would be sent to guard key targets in major cities if Isil or other terror groups launched multiple attacks on UK soil, under the plan, codenamed Operation Temperer." It isn't at all surprising that planning has been done for this contingency. I would expect at least that from any competent government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guzzi Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 The Russian plane incident has the potential to escalate rapidly. NATO has a meeting this afternoon on how to respond, Turkey, of course, being a NATO member. ISIL would no doubt love it to escalate, so one has to hope for restraint all round. I have sympathy for Russia and for Putin. They are acting in accordance with a long-standing alliance. Conversely, I find the US and UK position on Assad puzzling. Assad is no good-guy, but he is westernised and protective of religious minorities (being in a religious minority in his own country himself). Crucially, he also has the will to defend his country against ISIS. The best thing NATO and the west could do at this juncture is to let Russia and Assad continue unhindered, assuming a complete foreign policy volte-face is not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 It would certainly get rid of Isis quicker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11764301/Secret-plan-to-deploy-5000-soldiers-on-UK-streets-in-wake-of-major-terror-attacks.html Its almost as if its all been planned all along... Including civilians being blown up and shot dead in city centres? Come on! Last I heard that was in Paris not London or Manchester... Blimey, rmanx. 0/10 for comprehension. From the Telegraph article that you linked: "The troops would be sent to guard key targets in major cities if Isil or other terror groups launched multiple attacks on UK soil, under the plan, codenamed Operation Temperer." It isn't at all surprising that planning has been done for this contingency. I would expect at least that from any competent government. But what good will deploying troops (after an attack) do other than make targets out of the troops? If you were a terrorist where would you strike? The soft easy target or the one with thousands of troops stomping all over it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx - you really are missing something in your analysis of this issue. Are you being deliberately dense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx - you really are missing something in your analysis of this issue. Are you being deliberately dense? 1. Government document leaked detailing plans to deploy 5,000 British troops "after" a terrorist attack on UK soil 2. Terrorist attack in Paris 3. PM declares we are deploying 10,000 (slightly more than 5,000) troops to "help" the police fight terrorism. Are you not concerned at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 "Are deploying" or "could deploy"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 PM to deploy 10,000 British troops...on British streets...to fight terrorism. 1984 wasn't an instruction manual http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ten-thousand-troops-flood-britains-6887367 "Ten thousand troops could flood Britain’s streets to fight terrorists as David Cameron abolishes the “divide” between the Army and police. In a landmark move, the PM announced a 10,000-strong fighting force to support cops in the face of Islamic terrorism . Labour accused him of using soldiers to plug gaps when the Tories slash police budgets in the Spending Review . Speaking after a visit to French president Francois Hollande in Paris, the PM said: “As the murders on the streets of Paris reminded us so starkly, ISIL is not some remote problem thousands of miles away - it is a direct threat to our security at home and abroad.” I'm not quite sure what this means. In that troops regularly deploy to places like Heathrow. However they have to go in with the local plods as they may have lethal force and RoE on when to deploy it but they have no powers of stop and search, arrest and so forth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx - you really are missing something in your analysis of this issue. Are you being deliberately dense? 1. Government document leaked detailing plans to deploy 5,000 British troops "after" a terrorist attack on UK soil 2. Terrorist attack in Paris 3. PM declares we are deploying 10,000 (slightly more than 5,000) troops to "help" the police fight terrorism. Are you not concerned at all? I believe the "10,000 troops" is a reference to the QRF. This is simply political bs in making the right noises etc as they already exist in the Commando Brigade and the Parachute Brigade. I suppose more resources such as air transport and so forth could be held available in case of need but otherwise it's bollox. Incidentally what concentrates the mind is that Paris is only about 200 miles from London.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx - you really are missing something in your analysis of this issue. Are you being deliberately dense? 1. Government document leaked detailing plans to deploy 5,000 British troops "after" a terrorist attack on UK soil Erm, I don't think so the link below shows this was post-Paris 2. Terrorist attack in Paris 3. PM declares we are deploying 10,000 (slightly more than 5,000) troops to "help" the police fight terrorism. Are you not concerned at all? You don't understand this bit of the reports? "Soldiers would serve alongside armed police officers to protect against further attacks while plotters were hunted down." Really? I know you are cynical, but the presumption is that a proportion of the cell survives the attack. What contingencies do you think should be put in if an active "suicide commando squad" was in London? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx - you really are missing something in your analysis of this issue. Are you being deliberately dense? 1. Government document leaked detailing plans to deploy 5,000 British troops "after" a terrorist attack on UK soil Erm, I don't think so the link below shows this was post-Paris 2. Terrorist attack in Paris 3. PM declares we are deploying 10,000 (slightly more than 5,000) troops to "help" the police fight terrorism. Are you not concerned at all? You don't understand this bit of the reports? "Soldiers would serve alongside armed police officers to protect against further attacks while plotters were hunted down." Really? I know you are cynical, but the presumption is that a proportion of the cell survives the attack. What contingencies do you think should be put in if an active "suicide commando squad" was in London? Shouldn't policing be left to the police and not front line combat troops? And if the attack has already taken place, what good are combat troops going to be? Armed police and combat troops operate under different ROE (as someone else mentioned) and are taught to fight differently. And where are they to find 10,000 troops in this time of increased overseas deployments and troop cuts? What contingencies do you think should be put in if an active "suicide commando squad" was in London? What do you think SO19 are for? Or Counter Terrorism branch? Combat troops and armed response police are completely different breeds of animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx, You really don't understand that a terrorist attack can be an on-going situation, do you! What do you think is happening in Brussels at the moment? There is specific intelligence that surviving members of an armed group who have already killed hundreds of people could launch an attack there. If that happened in London there are literally thousands of potential targets. The whole point, as ... ... Raffaello Pantucci, director of international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute think tank, said the plan was "sensible". "You really have to have contingency planning, to prepare for potentially the worst," he said. "If you had multiple sites as they had in the Paris attacks it is possible you would have overstretch, you would look to other options and the Army would be the most obvious port of call.” Rmanx - you really are coming over as very dense. Do you really think this is just conspiracist japes? Multiple cities - Mumbai, Nairobi, Paris - have seen just how deadly such a terrorist group could be. There are 31,000 policemen in London - you are making a deal out of adding 10K soldiers to support them during an ongoing situation. Citizen Smith level Lala land. Are you Jeremy Corbyn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Call me all the names you like. There are 31,000 policemen in London - you are making a deal out of adding 10K soldiers to support them during an ongoing situation. And how many of those 31,000 are routinely armed? If you can't handle a situation with 31,000 police (even if only 1% are armed that is still 310 armed police) in the city of London, do you honestly think setting loose thousands of armed troops is going to make it better? The Army is not designed for counter terrorism, it is designed to engage the enemies armies in warfare...the clue is in the name. Also please explain how 10,000 troops would help in the ongoing situation in Brussels? You defeat terrorism with intelligence activities not mobbing the streets with armed troops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 But it would give comfort to the mass of the population in a crisis. Apart from the 1984 theorists and the terrorists of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share Posted November 24, 2015 Rmanx, I can fully understand why politicians in Brussels have done what they have done, and am not surprised at all that the UK has similar contingency plans. You seem to see pictures like these as being Orwellian. I don't, I see a polity trying to ensure their population is safe during an ongoing crisis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.