Shooting Down Civilian Airliners
Shooting down a non-responsive/hi-jacked airliner, surely the rules haven't changed since 9/11, there were already adequate policies in place prior to that fatefull event?
Ooops,,, sorry, forgot,,, NO airliners were shot down that day either! Although there was supposedly a policy to do so, or not to on that day!
So what is the policy?,,, do we or don't we shoot down hi-jacked aircraft?
And if the policy IS to do so,,, why did this NOT happen on 9/11?
Ooops,,, sorry, forgot,,, NO airliners were shot down that day either! Although there was supposedly a policy to do so, or not to on that day!
So what is the policy?,,, do we or don't we shoot down hi-jacked aircraft?
And if the policy IS to do so,,, why did this NOT happen on 9/11?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rugmuncher, Why would it, or why would there be?
Had there ever been a need to shoot down 1 hijacked civilian aircraft over Western soil before 9/11, let alone 4? Was there sufficient time to scramble armed aircraft from notification of hijack to impact? Was there time, even assuming the armed aircraft were in the air, had the aircraft visually identified, and had positive confirmation of hijack, to have such an executive decision made? Was there in fact a policy to shoot down hijacked aircraft? I'm sure the information is in the public domain somewhere....
Had there ever been a need to shoot down 1 hijacked civilian aircraft over Western soil before 9/11, let alone 4? Was there sufficient time to scramble armed aircraft from notification of hijack to impact? Was there time, even assuming the armed aircraft were in the air, had the aircraft visually identified, and had positive confirmation of hijack, to have such an executive decision made? Was there in fact a policy to shoot down hijacked aircraft? I'm sure the information is in the public domain somewhere....
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH Grumpy, I dont really understand where you are coming from, forgive if I am being stupid but I dont see what you are trying to gleen by asking the questions you are. You are an Aussie civil servant, with all due respect, that doesnt give you the right to get info on highly sensitive policies regarding the security of UK airspace. Like you have claimed there is a plethora of info in the popular media, which I guess this website is, but you cant expect anyone on an anonymous forum to be discussing whether we will/wont "shoot down an airliner". Lots of people have signed the Official Secrets Act with varying degrees of access to sensitive info, doesnt mean to say that they can have access to anything which is "secret"
As has been said it is need to know, and those that need to, do. It is bound to be an emotive subject, and no one is denying your right to ask the question but you wont/shouldnt find any serious answers in this forum. Whenever this topic is raised it descends into a fairly heated argument which never achieves anything other than distort the reality that there is a serious job to be done with incorrect facts.
As has been said it is need to know, and those that need to, do. It is bound to be an emotive subject, and no one is denying your right to ask the question but you wont/shouldnt find any serious answers in this forum. Whenever this topic is raised it descends into a fairly heated argument which never achieves anything other than distort the reality that there is a serious job to be done with incorrect facts.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dirty Sanchez.
With the greatest respect, have you totally lost the plot? Anybody has the absolute right to legally try and get any info they like. Grumpy simply asked a few questions...nearly all of which are in magazines, google, or whatever. That people in the know will not pass any sensitive info is also a given and those 'in the know' simply will not pass it on. You state: ''Whenever this topic is raised it descends into a fairly heated argument which never achieves anything other than distort the reality that there is a serious job to be done with incorrect facts''. So what is your solution? Close the thread! Don't discuss it...please do get over yourself...As I see it Grumpy is simply wondering aloud what many reasonable people are thinking. I have signed the Official Secret Act and I certainly did not expect access to anything which was "secret" and which I did not need to know The subject is need to know, and so it should be...and you who have ‘’the need to know’’ have a duty not to discuss it. Ignore it if you must but do you not think you are drawing more attention to yourselves by requesting that the thread be shut down. Grumpy and all thinking people do have the right to ask the question, as you suggest in your last paragraph, even though there is an apparent contradiction when you suggest that it ‘’doesnt give you the right to get info on highly sensitive policies regarding the security of UK airspace’’ .
You have duty not to discuss and the right to ignore, that is all you have.
NC43
With the greatest respect, have you totally lost the plot? Anybody has the absolute right to legally try and get any info they like. Grumpy simply asked a few questions...nearly all of which are in magazines, google, or whatever. That people in the know will not pass any sensitive info is also a given and those 'in the know' simply will not pass it on. You state: ''Whenever this topic is raised it descends into a fairly heated argument which never achieves anything other than distort the reality that there is a serious job to be done with incorrect facts''. So what is your solution? Close the thread! Don't discuss it...please do get over yourself...As I see it Grumpy is simply wondering aloud what many reasonable people are thinking. I have signed the Official Secret Act and I certainly did not expect access to anything which was "secret" and which I did not need to know The subject is need to know, and so it should be...and you who have ‘’the need to know’’ have a duty not to discuss it. Ignore it if you must but do you not think you are drawing more attention to yourselves by requesting that the thread be shut down. Grumpy and all thinking people do have the right to ask the question, as you suggest in your last paragraph, even though there is an apparent contradiction when you suggest that it ‘’doesnt give you the right to get info on highly sensitive policies regarding the security of UK airspace’’ .
You have duty not to discuss and the right to ignore, that is all you have.
NC43
Nutcracker,If this thread were about how to make bombs or poison people (info which is also in the public domain) would you be so liberal in your attitude, would you also expect an professional expert in explosives or chemistry to give his opinion on whether the "mix" would work or not? If he were to start giving his opinion, he could equally expect other explosives or chemical experts to tell him to shut up!get my drift???
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Widger,
Thanks for that! Grumpy simply wondered aloud what would happen if a CAP aircraft hit the button...I wonder too what would happen...so the comparison you make is not in the slightest bit similar...is it??? If someone asked on this thread how to make bombs or poison people I would not expect any professional to give his opinion as to whether the mixture would work, or not, and if he/she ventured to give their considered opinion then I would expect the appropriate organs of state to leap into action and investigate the 'specialist'...just as I do not expect any professional who is in the 'need to know' loop to pass on that info...I have said it a few times, in fact. So, no, I do not get your drift..it is at best a flabby comparison and unsound thinking.
Thank you,
NC43
Thanks for that! Grumpy simply wondered aloud what would happen if a CAP aircraft hit the button...I wonder too what would happen...so the comparison you make is not in the slightest bit similar...is it??? If someone asked on this thread how to make bombs or poison people I would not expect any professional to give his opinion as to whether the mixture would work, or not, and if he/she ventured to give their considered opinion then I would expect the appropriate organs of state to leap into action and investigate the 'specialist'...just as I do not expect any professional who is in the 'need to know' loop to pass on that info...I have said it a few times, in fact. So, no, I do not get your drift..it is at best a flabby comparison and unsound thinking.
Thank you,
NC43
Originally Posted by Widger
Nutcracker,If this thread were about how to make bombs or poison people (info which is also in the public domain) would you be so liberal in your attitude, would you also expect an professional expert in explosives or chemistry to give his opinion on whether the "mix" would work or not? If he were to start giving his opinion, he could equally expect other explosives or chemical experts to tell him to shut up!get my drift???
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ballbreaker43
You really have got a bee in your bonnet, I would love to highlight all my points in bold but I really cant be @rsed. I dont feel I need to get over myself, rather i will join the ranks of 3.14, The Rocket et al, and kindly ask you to do one and stick to model making or whatever else it is you enjoy, apart from being a gimp.
You also have the right to ignore, now there's a thought................
THANK YOU VERY VERY MUCH
DS
You really have got a bee in your bonnet, I would love to highlight all my points in bold but I really cant be @rsed. I dont feel I need to get over myself, rather i will join the ranks of 3.14, The Rocket et al, and kindly ask you to do one and stick to model making or whatever else it is you enjoy, apart from being a gimp.
You also have the right to ignore, now there's a thought................
THANK YOU VERY VERY MUCH
DS
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DS
Thanks for that.
Ahh, so you have read my profile...no bees in my bonnet old lad...personal insults would suggest a lost argument at best...we will simply have to agree to disagree...
Thank you and good day.
NC43
Thanks for that.
Ahh, so you have read my profile...no bees in my bonnet old lad...personal insults would suggest a lost argument at best...we will simply have to agree to disagree...
Thank you and good day.
NC43
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a valid debate to be had here, and some excellent arguments have been proposed. There is also the potential for a lot of nonsense and ill-informed speculation, and I fear that is the way we are heading at the moment.
I don't think anyone sees a problem in genuine, intelligent debate. Just don't expect any of the F3 mates, ATCers or FCs on here to discuss information we consider to be sensitive. That's our call, not yours. If you're so keen to push the case that this information should be made available, why not make a Freedom of Information Act request to MoD?
For the record, I sincerely hope that the Government never finds itself in a position where anyone would even consider such action.
I don't think anyone sees a problem in genuine, intelligent debate. Just don't expect any of the F3 mates, ATCers or FCs on here to discuss information we consider to be sensitive. That's our call, not yours. If you're so keen to push the case that this information should be made available, why not make a Freedom of Information Act request to MoD?
For the record, I sincerely hope that the Government never finds itself in a position where anyone would even consider such action.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VH-GRUMPY
one must ask and what happens after you hit the button?
Just wondering.
Just wondering.
You're right. One (all of us) must ask;
1. Is it morally right?
2. Is it legal?
3. What is the fallout of doing it?
4. What may the consequences be of 'not doing it'?
5. Where does the responsibility lie?
... and I could go on and on with these questions.
The truth is, is that you shouldn't need to ask these questions as a little thought will produce the answers. Asking such questions on a military forum is tantamount to goading someone into spilling more beans than they're allowed. If you want to know, then write to the PM's office for the official line. Or the MOD.
Originally Posted by NC43
I do not expect any professional who is in the 'need to know' loop to pass on that info
If you don't 'expect' a coherent answer, then any replies you do get are meaningless ... Am I missing something here?
Originally Posted by Dirty Sanchez
Two Words
BEAD WINDOW
BEAD WINDOW
(Just to lighten the mood a little) ... I may be mistaken, but I was always under the impression that BEADWINDOW was one word?
... whoops?! Perhaps it's a beadwindow talking about the beadwindow?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tablet eraser.
Not sure that anyone is pushing the case for information at all...that seems to be something someone has drummed up and I agree with you that I do not expect any of the ''F3 mates, ATCers or FCs'' on here to discuss information you consider to be sensitive so I am not sure who you are adressing yourself to. To correct you, it is not your call at all to divulge or discuss sensitive information at all...the Official Secret Act 1989 covers that quite clearly. To say however that one may not wonder about a hypothetical situation that you consider sensitive is an entirely different matter. ''If you're so keen to push the case that this information should be made available, why not make a Freedom of Information Act request to MoD?'' Has anybody done that (pushed the case for the information to be made available or even suggested it)? Far from sounding like a forum for sensible discussion it is beginning to sound like the mad hatter at the tea party.
Threepointonefour. Could you show me where I have asked for any information...I should be most interested.
Thank you.
NC43
Not sure that anyone is pushing the case for information at all...that seems to be something someone has drummed up and I agree with you that I do not expect any of the ''F3 mates, ATCers or FCs'' on here to discuss information you consider to be sensitive so I am not sure who you are adressing yourself to. To correct you, it is not your call at all to divulge or discuss sensitive information at all...the Official Secret Act 1989 covers that quite clearly. To say however that one may not wonder about a hypothetical situation that you consider sensitive is an entirely different matter. ''If you're so keen to push the case that this information should be made available, why not make a Freedom of Information Act request to MoD?'' Has anybody done that (pushed the case for the information to be made available or even suggested it)? Far from sounding like a forum for sensible discussion it is beginning to sound like the mad hatter at the tea party.
Threepointonefour. Could you show me where I have asked for any information...I should be most interested.
Thank you.
NC43
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: someplace, nowhere.
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'You're right. One (all of us) must ask;
1. Is it morally right?
2. Is it legal?
3. What is the fallout of doing it?
4. What may the consequences be of 'not doing it'?
5. Where does the responsibility lie?
... and I could go on and on with these questions.'
only one of these questions matters, all others follow...
1. Is it morally right?
2. Is it legal?
3. What is the fallout of doing it?
4. What may the consequences be of 'not doing it'?
5. Where does the responsibility lie?
... and I could go on and on with these questions.'
only one of these questions matters, all others follow...
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by civobs
only one of these questions matters, all others follow...
Originally Posted by civobs
Threepointonefour. Could you show me where I have asked for any information...I should be most interested.
At no point in my post did I suggest you had asked for information - I used your phrase to illustrate the point - "Why did VH-GRUMPY ask the question, if he only expected answers from those 'not-in-the-know' and/or conspiracy theorists?"
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NC43,
If you want to find an argument in even the most conciliatory of messages, I see no point in anyone offering any feedback to this thread.
This thread is all about people wanting to find out about the shooting-down of civlian airliners in the event of a hijack. That sort of information, and anything pertaining to it, cannot be divulged through unofficial sources, which is why I suggested a FOI request if someone's concerned or interested. There is a case for debate in a democratic society, and it's entirely right that people consider the different possibilities. There is no case for anyone to expect political information about anything this sensitive in this sort of forum.
I would suggest that the mad hatter at the tea party is the one who remains blind to all arguments contrary to his own position.
That is my last contribution to this thread.
(Edited to acknowledge NC's PMs - no offence intended or taken by either side!)
If you want to find an argument in even the most conciliatory of messages, I see no point in anyone offering any feedback to this thread.
This thread is all about people wanting to find out about the shooting-down of civlian airliners in the event of a hijack. That sort of information, and anything pertaining to it, cannot be divulged through unofficial sources, which is why I suggested a FOI request if someone's concerned or interested. There is a case for debate in a democratic society, and it's entirely right that people consider the different possibilities. There is no case for anyone to expect political information about anything this sensitive in this sort of forum.
I would suggest that the mad hatter at the tea party is the one who remains blind to all arguments contrary to his own position.
That is my last contribution to this thread.
(Edited to acknowledge NC's PMs - no offence intended or taken by either side!)
Last edited by tablet_eraser; 28th Mar 2006 at 20:30.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester
Age: 51
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having re-read GRUMPYs opening post in this thread, nowhere can I see him asking for details of the policy around the shooting down of civilian aircraft. The only question asked was "what happens after you hit the button?"
I can only guess that he was wondering what the political fallout would be in the light of any public outcry.
Most of the responses in this thread seem to have been answering the unasked question "what happens leading up to you hitting the button?"
Maybe my understanding of simple English is flawed, due to the fact that I was born in Stoke?
I can only guess that he was wondering what the political fallout would be in the light of any public outcry.
Most of the responses in this thread seem to have been answering the unasked question "what happens leading up to you hitting the button?"
Maybe my understanding of simple English is flawed, due to the fact that I was born in Stoke?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Phoenix da cat
You are right on the button.
I was more interested under what laws government's are permitted to make a conscious decisons to kill say 350 innocent men women and children in the air and then maybe further significant numbers on the ground in trying to stop some mis-guide idiot from killing say some politicians (i.e. the Whitehouse; Westminster Palace or our Oz Parliament House).
Would the ensuing Royal Commission (because there would have to be one) support the government's legal right to order the decision - would they be immune from prosecution.
I also queried the logic of this type of defence/offence. It is less likely now of course with sky marshalls more prevalent, increased airpor security and reinforced cockpit doors - but no one on this thread pointed this out to me.
But despite it being less likely, we had the F/A 18s up over Melbourne during the Commonwealth Games.
Cheers
You are right on the button.
I was more interested under what laws government's are permitted to make a conscious decisons to kill say 350 innocent men women and children in the air and then maybe further significant numbers on the ground in trying to stop some mis-guide idiot from killing say some politicians (i.e. the Whitehouse; Westminster Palace or our Oz Parliament House).
Would the ensuing Royal Commission (because there would have to be one) support the government's legal right to order the decision - would they be immune from prosecution.
I also queried the logic of this type of defence/offence. It is less likely now of course with sky marshalls more prevalent, increased airpor security and reinforced cockpit doors - but no one on this thread pointed this out to me.
But despite it being less likely, we had the F/A 18s up over Melbourne during the Commonwealth Games.
Cheers
I can't understand how showing terrorists that we are happy to shoot them down & kill them when they are quite happy to die for their cause anyway is going to stop them trying to committ these atrocious acts.
And - once we've actually been able to intercept a hijacked airliner and we were to shoot it down killing the innocent people and the terrorists instead of it maybe managing to hit a very important place or people do we turn around and shout 'Ha - your plot failed terrorist scum; we killed the innocent people not you!'?
Now quite why if a plane had been hijacked and it was clearly on its way to kill an important person or place - or even more innocent people we have time to scramble an aircraft(s) get into a position to launch missiles and down the airliner without (or with) it falling onto more innocent people - but we don't have time to try to evacuate the very important people etc from the 'target' - c'mon it's just the realm of utter and complete nonesense.
The Germans in this case are the first and so far only nation to have come to the correct conclusion. A conclusion that does actually prove to terrorists that they will not make us give up our values and our way of life.
And - once we've actually been able to intercept a hijacked airliner and we were to shoot it down killing the innocent people and the terrorists instead of it maybe managing to hit a very important place or people do we turn around and shout 'Ha - your plot failed terrorist scum; we killed the innocent people not you!'?
Now quite why if a plane had been hijacked and it was clearly on its way to kill an important person or place - or even more innocent people we have time to scramble an aircraft(s) get into a position to launch missiles and down the airliner without (or with) it falling onto more innocent people - but we don't have time to try to evacuate the very important people etc from the 'target' - c'mon it's just the realm of utter and complete nonesense.
The Germans in this case are the first and so far only nation to have come to the correct conclusion. A conclusion that does actually prove to terrorists that they will not make us give up our values and our way of life.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some of the points raised in the last 2 posts are very valid.
VH-GRUMPY, you said;
Now you should ask yourself, "Why did our government do this?"
VH-GRUMPY, you said;
But despite it being less likely, we had the F/A 18s up over Melbourne during the Commonwealth Games.