Clinical Syrian RPAS Strikes.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we're mostly agreed that these two met their end most deservedly, before we let our collective gushing go too far, perhaps time to at least reflect how this changes the terms of reference for the future. Does this mean RAF personnel might be required to kill a British Citizen in, say, Belgium if they were plotting an attack? How about Bradford? Equally, how will we feel when another nation claims the same rights -if, for instance Turkey were to strike a PKK member in the UK?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Law and order CM? Thousands of Turkish people have been killed in attacks by Kurdish terrorists/freedom fighters. I suspect their government would furiously disagree with you glibly telling them there was "no need" for action. But you ducked my main point which is that RPAS are becoming widely available. Whatever legal rights we establish for using them will soon be adopted by other states. Let's make sure we're happy with the result.
"The pair have said that one of their proudest moments to date involved helping to foil a rocket" (RPG ?) "attack on their base at Kandahar airfield in 2010. There was a high threat and the base was expecting an imminent attack after some men were spotted in a nearby ditch, setting up to fire a rocket at their accommodation block. They took the aircraft out to 15 miles from their position in the ditch and came down to low level, approaching at more than 500mph and as close to the Operational Low Flying minimum of 100 feet as possible, passing directly over them before heading into a steep climb. The rocket crew immediately scarpered in a truck and the pair felt they had made a tangible difference to protect their colleagues. The intention is to always use the minimum force required to provide the effect needed by the guys on the ground".
Am I missing something here ? This was in 2010, and there was a war going on in Afghanistan (as we have 453 good reasons to remember). This is the enemy, and he is making ready to kill you (or some of your comrades) if he can. You are airborne in one of the RAF's most powerful weapons. You have a 27mm cannon.
You buzz him off (as I used to shift a flock of goats off my strip before landing). So that he can come back later and try again ? (Better luck next time ?)
Danny42C.
Am I missing something here ? This was in 2010, and there was a war going on in Afghanistan (as we have 453 good reasons to remember). This is the enemy, and he is making ready to kill you (or some of your comrades) if he can. You are airborne in one of the RAF's most powerful weapons. You have a 27mm cannon.
You buzz him off (as I used to shift a flock of goats off my strip before landing). So that he can come back later and try again ? (Better luck next time ?)
Danny42C.
@shotone: the governments in question have working agreements with each other not to do such things, that's why it isn't done. In Syria these days, it's Indian Country. Thus the door opens for options one would not exercise if there was one government to work with ... funny old thing, that's how is WAS in Syria before the revolt began.
I have to reiterate Danny42c's post, if we were doing "fly by" tactics in the hot war in Afghanistan only five years ago, what has changed in the "rules of engement" that allows the targeting of the traitorous scum who leave Britain to fight for IS ? I suspect like most posters on this thread, my only disappointment is that it was only two. As for why did we not do the same with the IRA, I reckon the fact that it was an "in country" rebellion made us act differently, which begs the question, what is the correct response to an IS slaughter crusade, emanating from Rotherham, Blackburn, Aylesbury etc ? Do we have a government with the gonads to deal with it ?
Smudge
Smudge
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,561
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
The BBC local TV to Waddington made quite an "anti" news report yesterday - the thrust of their report was interviewing the locals to see how concerned they were about events, followed by a very negative interview with the local MP. To be fair on them, they reported tonight that they had received a huge response to their news item and over 95% of the e-mails supported the action in Syria.
Guys, regarding Afghan RoE & Shows of Force (read beat up) surely, when the bad guys are running around housing estates filled with children it is better to scare them off than blow them up and possibly kill someone's kid hiding in the bushes nearby. Just a thought. Hearts & minds and all that.
It was, and remains, a very valid response.
Not every time though.
Well done 13 Sqn (my old Sqn...when we flew a proper ac).
It was, and remains, a very valid response.
Not every time though.
Well done 13 Sqn (my old Sqn...when we flew a proper ac).
Guys, regarding Afghan RoE & Shows of Force (read beat up) surely, when the bad guys are running around housing estates filled with children it is better to scare them off than blow them up and possibly kill someone's kid hiding in the bushes nearby. Just a thought. Hearts & minds and all that.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Miss PN, for her university dissertation was permitted to read some misreps from Iraq. ROE did not permit weapons release unless in self-defence and the IntO was all for having the pilot courts martialled for breaking the rules.
The pilot had been tasked to recce a village that an Army column was soon to enter. He was suspicious and flew low over the village for 2 1/2 hours. Eventually they shot at him whereupon he bombed them thus alerting the Army column that he had been unable to contact.
Btw, that was in the 1920s.
The pilot had been tasked to recce a village that an Army column was soon to enter. He was suspicious and flew low over the village for 2 1/2 hours. Eventually they shot at him whereupon he bombed them thus alerting the Army column that he had been unable to contact.
Btw, that was in the 1920s.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mostafa et al
A number of posters on here are drawing dodgy comparisons between ISIL/ISIS/IS (or whatever the 7th century tribute act is called this week) and the IRA. As someone who grew up in NI and served there as well as Iraq and Afghanistan I just don't think that is valid.
Evil though many of the provos were, they were never anywhere near the same league as these animals. The IRA were guilty of dreadful atrocities. However the "dirty war" was a fact. There were equally evil atrocities committed by the loyalist paramilitaries (Shankill Butchers anyone?), not to mention illegal killings committed, certainly in the early days, by shady army units and the 'B Specials'.
Nonetheless it is utterly gauling to see players back on the streets who should have remained locked up for decades, particularly for friends/family/colleagues of their victims. It was a high price to pay, but a price that bought a greater good and peace for a community that absolutely needed it. I just hope that the NI politicians can continue to hold it together (rightly recently branded by Col Tim Collins as "the worst politicians on the planet")....
The point is that awful as the NI paramilitaries were/are, there was always enough reason in them to hold out hope of a settlement, but only after they had been fought to a stalemate. I think IS are singular in their utter lack of potential for redemption or reason. I have just watched a harrowing report on the BBC about the final days of poor Kayla Mueller, the American hostage repeatedly raped then murdered by the big man himself, Abu Baker Al Baghdadi. The self-proclaimed caliph is clearly leading from the front, inciting his troops to rape and slaughter their way to the caliphate. There will never be negotiation or rapprochement with these scumbags. We simply need to kill them in large numbers. Until we truly grasp that nettle, the situation will just get worse and worse.
One day we may be able to reach a distasteful but workable settlement with evil f***ers like the Taliban or Assad (albeit giving undesirable advantage to the ISI and Putin respectively), but there is only one answer to IS. let's get on with it and limit the final toll on the poor Syrians and Iraqi's, limit the terrorist threat in our own countries and stabilise the refugee crisis that will affect Europe and the Levant for years to come.
Evil though many of the provos were, they were never anywhere near the same league as these animals. The IRA were guilty of dreadful atrocities. However the "dirty war" was a fact. There were equally evil atrocities committed by the loyalist paramilitaries (Shankill Butchers anyone?), not to mention illegal killings committed, certainly in the early days, by shady army units and the 'B Specials'.
Nonetheless it is utterly gauling to see players back on the streets who should have remained locked up for decades, particularly for friends/family/colleagues of their victims. It was a high price to pay, but a price that bought a greater good and peace for a community that absolutely needed it. I just hope that the NI politicians can continue to hold it together (rightly recently branded by Col Tim Collins as "the worst politicians on the planet")....
The point is that awful as the NI paramilitaries were/are, there was always enough reason in them to hold out hope of a settlement, but only after they had been fought to a stalemate. I think IS are singular in their utter lack of potential for redemption or reason. I have just watched a harrowing report on the BBC about the final days of poor Kayla Mueller, the American hostage repeatedly raped then murdered by the big man himself, Abu Baker Al Baghdadi. The self-proclaimed caliph is clearly leading from the front, inciting his troops to rape and slaughter their way to the caliphate. There will never be negotiation or rapprochement with these scumbags. We simply need to kill them in large numbers. Until we truly grasp that nettle, the situation will just get worse and worse.
One day we may be able to reach a distasteful but workable settlement with evil f***ers like the Taliban or Assad (albeit giving undesirable advantage to the ISI and Putin respectively), but there is only one answer to IS. let's get on with it and limit the final toll on the poor Syrians and Iraqi's, limit the terrorist threat in our own countries and stabilise the refugee crisis that will affect Europe and the Levant for years to come.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much longer before our politicians, Euro-pollies, US-pollies, Russo-Pollies, Sino-Pollies, and any other Pollies who wish to join get together and set our collective military forces on these bastards and just wipe them off the face of the earth?
And then deal with the root of the problem - Saudi Arabia.
And then deal with the root of the problem - Saudi Arabia.
To be honest I really don't see the problem.
It is obviously the prerogative of the government to eradicate any citizen at will without due process. Anyone thinking otherwise is should actually see the full might of the public force.
I'm looking forward to the dismantlement of the judicial system and the huge savings to the UK budget.
It is obviously the prerogative of the government to eradicate any citizen at will without due process. Anyone thinking otherwise is should actually see the full might of the public force.
I'm looking forward to the dismantlement of the judicial system and the huge savings to the UK budget.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Pastor Martin Niemöller once said;
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
However I think the one most fitting saying in this instance is;
'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
However I think the one most fitting saying in this instance is;
'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK on a crosswind
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my view, we should not be attacking them in their countries. W should let them have whatever form of government they want. We should receive refugees only from the Christian minority. We should leave the whole middle east to its own devices. Our effort should be to absolutely ensure (insofar as one can) that they cannot ever interfere in our country. We can and should use lethal force against any who, in this country attempt to use violence. We can and should in this country close all of their institutions. We can and should break up all ghettos and force those remaining in this country to live amongst the wider community. Why we should risk the lives of our servicemen fighting in their countries when it is obvious that such wars can never be won. These people are flocking to the ISIS leadership because they know that it is following very carefully the exact teachings of the koran. Whatever we popularly like to believe, these ISIS are not fringe dwellers, they are led by a considerable moslem scholar and their people know this. We should let them have their country and then set about ensuring that they cannot get ours. Their leader made a speech recently about conquering Europe/UK. He urged moslems to migrate to our countries - and our stupid politicians allow them in.
We should let them have their country and then set about ensuring that they cannot get ours.
Rather not let them get there, I think.
