Unwelcome visitors
A while back I was listening to a debate about RPAS / drones on the radio, the journalist made an interesting question...
Quote:
If country U can use drones in country P to target individuals living there. Then where do we legally stand to stop others doing it to our nation? What happens if you were driving down the M1 motorway and as you passed Milton Keynes the car in front blows up because its being targeted by a RPAS flown from another country?
Quote:
If country U can use drones in country P to target individuals living there. Then where do we legally stand to stop others doing it to our nation? What happens if you were driving down the M1 motorway and as you passed Milton Keynes the car in front blows up because its being targeted by a RPAS flown from another country?
Are we at war with AFG and is the US at war with any of the countries that they conduct the ex-judicial killings?
One would hope the US would not be tempted to use an F-15E against any suspects that we are giving legal aid to, even if they are in Milton Keynes.
One would hope the US would not be tempted to use an F-15E against any suspects that we are giving legal aid to, even if they are in Milton Keynes.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toadstool,
I think what the radio show was saying is, if the other nation decides to blatantly ignore your code of conduct and target people here anyway. What can we legally do about it? For is the RPAS operator under our law or their law?
I think what the radio show was saying is, if the other nation decides to blatantly ignore your code of conduct and target people here anyway. What can we legally do about it? For is the RPAS operator under our law or their law?
is it not justa question of the usual parsimonious attitude to these things in UK-ie no one will spend the money or can be bothered to provide effective deterent security at MOD sites.
When I returned to UK from a long spell abroad in the early 90s I had to take my mother in law to a clinic at Aldershot garrison ( the local hospital at the time and the garrison shared facilities for some medical conditions.
Driving up to the gate and high fence of the garrison (which about ten years earlier had been the target of a terrible IRA attack ) we were greeted by a the sole security guy who had the most pronounced Irish accent I have ever heard.
I am a very liberal minded person but see no harm or threat in having proper security and deterrence at the locations where we necessarily have to store and maintain assorted nasty but necessary expensive warlike machines .
pb
When I returned to UK from a long spell abroad in the early 90s I had to take my mother in law to a clinic at Aldershot garrison ( the local hospital at the time and the garrison shared facilities for some medical conditions.
Driving up to the gate and high fence of the garrison (which about ten years earlier had been the target of a terrible IRA attack ) we were greeted by a the sole security guy who had the most pronounced Irish accent I have ever heard.
I am a very liberal minded person but see no harm or threat in having proper security and deterrence at the locations where we necessarily have to store and maintain assorted nasty but necessary expensive warlike machines .
pb
JTO, no of course we are not at war with Afghanistan, but we are fighting the Taliban and we do have air supremacy which is why RPAS works a treat. As for the US and the CIA, and what they do in Pakistan, that is their business. For you and GRtechie, as for the US using any weapon system in the UK against terrorists, this would absolutely not happen.
Last edited by Toadstool; 21st Oct 2013 at 03:45.
as for the US using any weapon system in the UK against terrorists, this would absolutely not happen
Georgi Markov
Alexander Litvinenko
Gentleman Aviator
May not have been by RPAS but who knows what "weapons systems" will be used in the future.... :
But probably on the Beltway rather than the M1 at MK......
.... on second thoughts, the Beltway is probably better defended than MK....
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some ppruners are guilty of a wilful lack of imagination by ignoring how this issue could backfire on us. How does the effectiveness of our air defence affect the legality? In any case it is by no means far fetched that before long, small drones may be deployed without achieving air superiority as we understand it now. Indeed they would make a fantastic terrorist weapon...still all fair and legal then?
Been done - if you regard the Tamil Tigers as terrorists or insurgents...can't find the link, but the Tamil Tigers used a RPA to hit a Sri lanken Army barracks during an international cricket test match. A handful killed. Can't be bothered to find a link...
You'll be telling us Terrorists will be using guns next...
I don't for one moment believe that us playing nice will stop the game from changing as such technology becomes available to those who wish to inflict their views on our society.
I don't for one moment believe that us playing nice will stop the game from changing as such technology becomes available to those who wish to inflict their views on our society.
Not sure that the Tamil Tigers used UAVs - they certainly employed Zlin 143s for air operations, including an attack on Colombo during the 2007 Cricket World Cup final (Sri Lanka lost to Australia in that match). Hezbollah, on the other hand, do have their own UAV fleet, a couple of which have been shot down by Israeli F-16s in recent years.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the idea that army dogs are less nancy than RAF dogs 
There is no debate or argument when faced with a red cap and dog.
Neither one can read, and either one is likely to bite you!
I found Leon's 'army speak' explanation of MLRS crews not being in danger quite funny.
Kind of makes me wonder why their tactic is known as shoot and scoot, in which they get the hell out rapidly after firing in order not to be blown up themselves. The MLRS leaves a huge signature and every man and his dog can see them and often return fire whether from fixed or rotary wing, RPAS or anti battery fire directed by locating device.
There is no debate or argument when faced with a red cap and dog.
Neither one can read, and either one is likely to bite you!
I found Leon's 'army speak' explanation of MLRS crews not being in danger quite funny.
Kind of makes me wonder why their tactic is known as shoot and scoot, in which they get the hell out rapidly after firing in order not to be blown up themselves. The MLRS leaves a huge signature and every man and his dog can see them and often return fire whether from fixed or rotary wing, RPAS or anti battery fire directed by locating device.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Closer than you think...
Age: 65
Posts: 390
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Early 80's, Ammo Compound near Neinburg. They had this mutt on the guard dog team, a long haired, bad tempered Alsation with a well chewed ear and just generally resembling the doggy version of a tramp that had been dragged thru a hedge sideways a few times... big thing too. You get the picture...
The only handler that could get anywhere near it was a old Polish WWII vet unable to go home from the last big game. And even he sometimes got chewed when the dog had a bad day (which was most days tbh). Even feeding time was dodgy, they used to just slide the bowl under the kennel door, pushing it in with a broom handle and then retrieve what was left of the bowl when the dog was out working.
It hated vehicles and would try and chew any passing truck, land rover etc, the old boy would wrestle the dog to the ground and sit on it, in an attempt to stop it chasing after the rover and dragging him along for the ride. Mean time the dogs going berserk and trying to bite anything in reach...
One day it got away from him... And once it had finished trying to chew the landrover went ferral for about 3 days giving the wild deer in the compound a right hard time. The place was shut while they worked out how to deal with it. They got it in the end, but sadly it was 'retired' in the process. Ammo drops/pickups were never the same after
I always think of this beast when seeing the dogs walking their RAFP handlers.
The only handler that could get anywhere near it was a old Polish WWII vet unable to go home from the last big game. And even he sometimes got chewed when the dog had a bad day (which was most days tbh). Even feeding time was dodgy, they used to just slide the bowl under the kennel door, pushing it in with a broom handle and then retrieve what was left of the bowl when the dog was out working.
It hated vehicles and would try and chew any passing truck, land rover etc, the old boy would wrestle the dog to the ground and sit on it, in an attempt to stop it chasing after the rover and dragging him along for the ride. Mean time the dogs going berserk and trying to bite anything in reach...
One day it got away from him... And once it had finished trying to chew the landrover went ferral for about 3 days giving the wild deer in the compound a right hard time. The place was shut while they worked out how to deal with it. They got it in the end, but sadly it was 'retired' in the process. Ammo drops/pickups were never the same after
I always think of this beast when seeing the dogs walking their RAFP handlers.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the best lessons I ever taught was escape and evasion and how to get rid of dogs.
I was a bit scared of dogs like German Shephards, Rotty's etc until i taught the lesson with a real live attack dog and had to demo it following scent, attacking me (arm in pad) and then how to dispatch it by turning it over.
Not sure I'd like to have to do it for real though but it is nice to know how.
I was a bit scared of dogs like German Shephards, Rotty's etc until i taught the lesson with a real live attack dog and had to demo it following scent, attacking me (arm in pad) and then how to dispatch it by turning it over.
Not sure I'd like to have to do it for real though but it is nice to know how.
In reply to my
, I have a couple of points.
The question was
.
AFAIK, there are only three countries that use drones to target individuals . The USA does it in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Yemen, the UK does it in Afghanistan and Israel has done it in Egypt and the Gaza strip.
Both the USA and the UK say they are legally allowed to do it in Afghanistan. There is currently action being taken to challenge the legality of the USA conducting strikes using RPAS in Pakistan and the Yemen. The USA insists it is legal. Israel has conducted at least one strike in the Sinai with the approval of the Egyptian govt. Israel refuses to confirm or deny that it has used weaponised RPAS in the Gaza strip but there are numerous reports which indicate that this has happened. Is this legal? I doubt it, but who is going to challenge Israel? Until anyone does and is successful, then as far as Israel is concerned it is legal.
Now, before going onto the UK scenario of a car being targeted on the M1, how can one country use RPAS with impunity in or against another. In the case of Israel with the Sinai it is because it got permission from Egypt. If they had not, then this would have been illegal. Egypt, with its radar, GBAD and Airforce could have quite easily shot down the RPAS had they not given permission. In the case of the Gaza strip, it is because Israel can act without fear of legal reprisals and the fact that Gaza has no Air Defence meaning the RPAS can't be shot down.
The fact that the US uses RPAS to target individuals in both the Yemen and Pakistan would indicate that there is some sort of tacit approval by those countries. There are many reports indicating that while politically Pakistan condemns these attacks, they do in fact approve of them while taking monetary aid. In fact, Pakistan has warned the USA that it can and will destroy any RPAS. Again, this points to tacit approval as to date it has never shot down, AFAIK, a US RPAS.
Now,
. In times of peace this is absolutely illegal. There is a diplomatic and legal process in place. Say for example there is a terrorist wanted by the USA or France and this terrorist is driving near Milton Keynes on the M1. Would the USA send a RPAS from a UK base into the air to blow them up, or France send one across the Channel to do the same? Absolutely not. The process in place is such that this information would be sent to whichever department in the UK and the UK would deal with said terrorist. Again, this process and procedure has been carried out on numerous occasions.
Ah, but what if these countries wanted to do this covertly without following due process and against the laws of either country? At present, any RPAS large enough to carry weapons would, in this scenario, have to file a flight plan somewhere. If no flight plan was filed and an unidentified aircraft was in UK airspace, we have the means to identify and intercept any unidentified aircraft. Again, this is something that has been time and time again. The embarrassment and diplomatic and legal fallout for any country to do such a thing, given the due processes in place, means that for now the use of a foreign RPAS to strike targets in the UK is not an option.
This goes out of the window if war is declared. Any country could fly RPAS over our country should they wish, obviously bearing in mind that they would have to have air supremacy otherwise the RPAS would be destroyed.
I take the points about Markov and Litvinenko. Both of these were indeed illegal and murder and the legal process has been followed.
wilful lack of imagination
The question was
If country U can use drones in country P to target individuals living there. Then where do we legally stand to stop others doing it to our nation?
AFAIK, there are only three countries that use drones to target individuals . The USA does it in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Yemen, the UK does it in Afghanistan and Israel has done it in Egypt and the Gaza strip.
Both the USA and the UK say they are legally allowed to do it in Afghanistan. There is currently action being taken to challenge the legality of the USA conducting strikes using RPAS in Pakistan and the Yemen. The USA insists it is legal. Israel has conducted at least one strike in the Sinai with the approval of the Egyptian govt. Israel refuses to confirm or deny that it has used weaponised RPAS in the Gaza strip but there are numerous reports which indicate that this has happened. Is this legal? I doubt it, but who is going to challenge Israel? Until anyone does and is successful, then as far as Israel is concerned it is legal.
Now, before going onto the UK scenario of a car being targeted on the M1, how can one country use RPAS with impunity in or against another. In the case of Israel with the Sinai it is because it got permission from Egypt. If they had not, then this would have been illegal. Egypt, with its radar, GBAD and Airforce could have quite easily shot down the RPAS had they not given permission. In the case of the Gaza strip, it is because Israel can act without fear of legal reprisals and the fact that Gaza has no Air Defence meaning the RPAS can't be shot down.
The fact that the US uses RPAS to target individuals in both the Yemen and Pakistan would indicate that there is some sort of tacit approval by those countries. There are many reports indicating that while politically Pakistan condemns these attacks, they do in fact approve of them while taking monetary aid. In fact, Pakistan has warned the USA that it can and will destroy any RPAS. Again, this points to tacit approval as to date it has never shot down, AFAIK, a US RPAS.
Now,
where do we legally stand to stop others doing it to our nation?
Ah, but what if these countries wanted to do this covertly without following due process and against the laws of either country? At present, any RPAS large enough to carry weapons would, in this scenario, have to file a flight plan somewhere. If no flight plan was filed and an unidentified aircraft was in UK airspace, we have the means to identify and intercept any unidentified aircraft. Again, this is something that has been time and time again. The embarrassment and diplomatic and legal fallout for any country to do such a thing, given the due processes in place, means that for now the use of a foreign RPAS to strike targets in the UK is not an option.
This goes out of the window if war is declared. Any country could fly RPAS over our country should they wish, obviously bearing in mind that they would have to have air supremacy otherwise the RPAS would be destroyed.
I take the points about Markov and Litvinenko. Both of these were indeed illegal and murder and the legal process has been followed.
Last edited by Toadstool; 23rd Oct 2013 at 23:24.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I doubt it, but who is going to challenge Israel? Until anyone does and is successful, then as far as Israel is concerned it is legal."
As though Israel GAF, BUT, if they have the opportunity to do it with permission and of course which removes any possible problems with others attacking it, then they will.
But if not, IMHO they would find a way to do it anyway.
Just like targeted assassinations and / or extractions of people back to Israel.
As though Israel GAF, BUT, if they have the opportunity to do it with permission and of course which removes any possible problems with others attacking it, then they will.
But if not, IMHO they would find a way to do it anyway.
Just like targeted assassinations and / or extractions of people back to Israel.
Armed unmanned aircraft? Best you add Iran to the list with the Karrar fitted with a 500lb bomb...
Oh, and their Shahed 129...
Oh, and their Shahed 129...
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 24th Oct 2013 at 00:10.