Paris Attacked!
Wokkafans,
Thank you for posting that 'briefing note', I enjoyed it! It demonstrates very well the murky nature of geopolitics - especially the total lack of absolutes. This is something that the bleeding heart brigade fail to appreciate when they take their "something must be done" or "there is no military solution" stances. But, sadly, it is also something that Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy et al failed to appreciate back in 2011 when they started declaring that certain leaders, Assad included, were "on the wrong side of history".
I wonder why the note made no reference to the Saudis? The conflict of interests in our relations with them is just about the thorniest geopolitical problem facing our leaders, IMHO!
Thank you for posting that 'briefing note', I enjoyed it! It demonstrates very well the murky nature of geopolitics - especially the total lack of absolutes. This is something that the bleeding heart brigade fail to appreciate when they take their "something must be done" or "there is no military solution" stances. But, sadly, it is also something that Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy et al failed to appreciate back in 2011 when they started declaring that certain leaders, Assad included, were "on the wrong side of history".
I wonder why the note made no reference to the Saudis? The conflict of interests in our relations with them is just about the thorniest geopolitical problem facing our leaders, IMHO!
Both points well played.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Police weaponary in the very last line of defence.
Sorry about the late return, fellows. Been looking at buying either a decent posh shed, or a "Zen 1 or Zen 2 log cabin" for my new garden -got to get events in perspective at times.
Also, I e-mailed by executive boss telling her I no longer want to be routed to travel through either London underground or any London railway station when I go on my sorties forth. She is yet to reply.
Responses like mine will wipe million's from London's cash/tourist intake, but that is to be expected. But possibly even planned in by our recently arrived new enemy?
Am I cowardly? Or more pragmatic? I feel I'm simply taking some responsibility for myself. But stand accused, I suppose, of treachery>.
Met Police cant defend London faced with mass attack teams using assault rifles, I would think. Someone knowledgeable said as such today in the Mail. Our ARV cops carry a version of the AR15 I think, and the G86, but with limited single shot/smaller calibre/smaller quantities of ammunition (15 round magazines)!! They've got no chance against heavily armed AK47 wielding fast firers with larger rounds (7.62 x 39mm x 60 rounds). And therefore neither would I, if caught out and relying on the Met, I decided.
* Thought about firepower - if the RM and British Army infantry used to go out on patrol against PIRA in urban and rural NI armed with a variety of arms but including SLR (and GPMG) firing 7.62mm x 51mm x 20 NATO rounds, and with the capability of calling up even further weaponry if needed, why are UK police (where armed even) still persisting with their relative pop guns at this time?
Should the UK military now intervene on the Police's behalf and save their red faces?
Its clear the tactics European based ISIS are now using. AK47 with multiple full magazines set on automatic. Maximum firepower.
Are our police behind the curve so to speak, when facing them?
HS.
Also, I e-mailed by executive boss telling her I no longer want to be routed to travel through either London underground or any London railway station when I go on my sorties forth. She is yet to reply.
Responses like mine will wipe million's from London's cash/tourist intake, but that is to be expected. But possibly even planned in by our recently arrived new enemy?
Am I cowardly? Or more pragmatic? I feel I'm simply taking some responsibility for myself. But stand accused, I suppose, of treachery>.
Met Police cant defend London faced with mass attack teams using assault rifles, I would think. Someone knowledgeable said as such today in the Mail. Our ARV cops carry a version of the AR15 I think, and the G86, but with limited single shot/smaller calibre/smaller quantities of ammunition (15 round magazines)!! They've got no chance against heavily armed AK47 wielding fast firers with larger rounds (7.62 x 39mm x 60 rounds). And therefore neither would I, if caught out and relying on the Met, I decided.
* Thought about firepower - if the RM and British Army infantry used to go out on patrol against PIRA in urban and rural NI armed with a variety of arms but including SLR (and GPMG) firing 7.62mm x 51mm x 20 NATO rounds, and with the capability of calling up even further weaponry if needed, why are UK police (where armed even) still persisting with their relative pop guns at this time?
Should the UK military now intervene on the Police's behalf and save their red faces?
Its clear the tactics European based ISIS are now using. AK47 with multiple full magazines set on automatic. Maximum firepower.
Are our police behind the curve so to speak, when facing them?
HS.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jayand, good post.
Yes a good reply to me. How would I deal with Jihadi John? And the Right Hon. Mr Corbyn always has to be brought in along as well. I cant answer for him I'm afraid. However as a paid up member of the awkward squad he hasn't half been consistently right about so many matters in the MENA areas in the last, oh 15 odd years. But then again, later on when you look back so many of his beardy corduroy type usually, later on seem...very prescient.
But back to John. What on earth do we do about the 1000* odd British blokes like him also. (Johns now dead it rather happily seems).
You see, forget John really - its the principle. We have here a UK citizen who has now been killed by the state, our UK state seemingly, without trial or fair hearing. To me, its now a dark reality that upon order of a UK politician, our unseen and unknown spooky drone operators can snuff out a UK civvy without fear of challenge or rebuke. Whoever happened to reason this is actually good, without recourse to a debate in the HoC, let alone the UK's own citizens, has much to explain.
Put it another way Jayand. In tens years time Corbyn might be PM, and he might think you pose a challenge or threat to him - so presumably when you are sunning it on your holidays abroad, he can authorise your good self to be snuffed out by lightening bolt also? That's fair, right?
Thin end of a wedge.
* Not sure about that number - no one is, but probably between 1 and 10,000 anyway.
But back to John. What on earth do we do about the 1000* odd British blokes like him also. (Johns now dead it rather happily seems).
You see, forget John really - its the principle. We have here a UK citizen who has now been killed by the state, our UK state seemingly, without trial or fair hearing. To me, its now a dark reality that upon order of a UK politician, our unseen and unknown spooky drone operators can snuff out a UK civvy without fear of challenge or rebuke. Whoever happened to reason this is actually good, without recourse to a debate in the HoC, let alone the UK's own citizens, has much to explain.
Put it another way Jayand. In tens years time Corbyn might be PM, and he might think you pose a challenge or threat to him - so presumably when you are sunning it on your holidays abroad, he can authorise your good self to be snuffed out by lightening bolt also? That's fair, right?
Thin end of a wedge.
* Not sure about that number - no one is, but probably between 1 and 10,000 anyway.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Priority.
Before I close down, my final thought - should the UK not be looking at securing the actual safety of its own citizens within its own coastline first?
I mean before it again begins very expensive and much limited-use Air Expeditionary Warfare over Syria?
If we attempted to train up 20,000 military personnel in using automatic weapons against the current threat and then stationed them throughout the UK's centres of population, and as a last line of defence? As back up to the Police? Who are stretched, generally unarmed and also on the downhill side of Govt.budget cuts?
Ideal candidates would be NCO/former NCOs of all 3 services who could meet the mental and other demands this would bring?
Just a musing. Its not all about London, despite the political bias displayed so far. ISIS will soon twig where we are weak at home.
PM Cameron seems determined to start our own air war, but that is occurring already against ISIL from better equipped and sited Air Forces than ours anyway.
Priority wrong? Who knows, or even cares until it happens. Goodnight and stay safe people.
I mean before it again begins very expensive and much limited-use Air Expeditionary Warfare over Syria?
If we attempted to train up 20,000 military personnel in using automatic weapons against the current threat and then stationed them throughout the UK's centres of population, and as a last line of defence? As back up to the Police? Who are stretched, generally unarmed and also on the downhill side of Govt.budget cuts?
Ideal candidates would be NCO/former NCOs of all 3 services who could meet the mental and other demands this would bring?
Just a musing. Its not all about London, despite the political bias displayed so far. ISIS will soon twig where we are weak at home.
PM Cameron seems determined to start our own air war, but that is occurring already against ISIL from better equipped and sited Air Forces than ours anyway.
Priority wrong? Who knows, or even cares until it happens. Goodnight and stay safe people.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Thalassa
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being an armed (with gun) police officer really must be a bit of a dodgy occupation.
Not only do you run the risk of being killed (occupational hazard ?) but you also face the certainty that, if you so much as fire your weapon never mind waste a malefactor , a horde of parasitic lawyers will descend on you like the hounds of hell and have your job and probably your liberty as well. Lovely.
Not only do you run the risk of being killed (occupational hazard ?) but you also face the certainty that, if you so much as fire your weapon never mind waste a malefactor , a horde of parasitic lawyers will descend on you like the hounds of hell and have your job and probably your liberty as well. Lovely.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before I close down, my final thought - should the UK not be looking at securing the actual safety of its own citizens within its own coastline first?
I mean before it again begins very expensive and much limited-use Air Expeditionary Warfare over Syria?
I mean before it again begins very expensive and much limited-use Air Expeditionary Warfare over Syria?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hangarshuffle,
I'm curious about your position here. You seem to be very concerned that a UK civilian (who has effectively given up his civilian status by becoming a terrorist operative in a self-declared foreign "state") can be taken out by some spooky drone driver at the will of a politician, yet you are happy to put the Army on the streets of the U.K. to do domestic security instead of properly resourcing the Police.
Can you see any dangers in the Army doing policing? It's certainly not something my Army colleagues think they should be doing.
I'm curious about your position here. You seem to be very concerned that a UK civilian (who has effectively given up his civilian status by becoming a terrorist operative in a self-declared foreign "state") can be taken out by some spooky drone driver at the will of a politician, yet you are happy to put the Army on the streets of the U.K. to do domestic security instead of properly resourcing the Police.
Can you see any dangers in the Army doing policing? It's certainly not something my Army colleagues think they should be doing.
Being an armed (with gun) police officer really must be a bit of a dodgy occupation.
Not only do you run the risk of being killed (occupational hazard ?) but you also face the certainty that, if you so much as fire your weapon never mind waste a malefactor , a horde of parasitic lawyers will descend on you like the hounds of hell and have your job and probably your liberty as well. Lovely.
Not only do you run the risk of being killed (occupational hazard ?) but you also face the certainty that, if you so much as fire your weapon never mind waste a malefactor , a horde of parasitic lawyers will descend on you like the hounds of hell and have your job and probably your liberty as well. Lovely.
He also has never had to fire his weapon once in the line of duty. (In point of fact, most officers in this county have not ever used their weapon other than at the range).
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'You see, forget John really - its the principle. We have here a UK citizen who has now been killed by the state, our UK state seemingly, without trial or fair hearing. To me, its now a dark reality that upon order of a UK politician, our unseen and unknown spooky drone operators can snuff out a UK civvy without fear of challenge or rebuke. Whoever happened to reason this is actually good, without recourse to a debate in the HoC, let alone the UK's own citizens, has much to explain'
'Jihadi John' had clearly murdered British citizens and posed a clear danger to others held hostage . As a British citizen he also signs up to abiding by the law of the U.K and whatever country he is in . It was not realistic to believe he could be apprehended without risk to life . So its exactly the same senario if you come out of a house in the U.K and point a gun at someone -your likely to die -being in Syria -being armed and being a threat to British people puts you in exactly the same postion.
So in essence - if you travel to Syria -murder people and make propaganda films about that you have decided that you wish to live outside the rules of
society -no need for the House of Commons to debate anything .
'Jihadi John' had clearly murdered British citizens and posed a clear danger to others held hostage . As a British citizen he also signs up to abiding by the law of the U.K and whatever country he is in . It was not realistic to believe he could be apprehended without risk to life . So its exactly the same senario if you come out of a house in the U.K and point a gun at someone -your likely to die -being in Syria -being armed and being a threat to British people puts you in exactly the same postion.
So in essence - if you travel to Syria -murder people and make propaganda films about that you have decided that you wish to live outside the rules of
society -no need for the House of Commons to debate anything .
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Is there really a difference between ordering a crew to drop a dumb bomb at X,Y that may or may not kill a combatant and equally may have collateral deaths too and authorising a smart bomb that will kill a combatant and will not have any collateral casualties?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I said deash weak link had to be logistics and lo and behold:
US A-10 Attack Planes Hit ISIS Oil Convoy to Crimp Terror Funding | Military.com
But before we say they got it right, look at this,
Back in Aug 2014
US Squadron of AC- 130 ' could end ISIS in few months time., page 1
US A-10 Attack Planes Hit ISIS Oil Convoy to Crimp Terror Funding | Military.com
But before we say they got it right, look at this,
Back in Aug 2014
US Squadron of AC- 130 ' could end ISIS in few months time., page 1
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Troppo, it doesn't follow that they have either ships or missiles in place. Their at sea replenishment may be more difficult than for USN. As for submarines, launching a missile reveals its position; they may wish their submarines to remain covert.
That of course presumes they have the right assets in place. Remember the last time they used ship borne cruise missiles they experienced some unwanted publicity.
That of course presumes they have the right assets in place. Remember the last time they used ship borne cruise missiles they experienced some unwanted publicity.
Thanks PN.
Troppo, it doesn't follow that they have either ships or missiles in place. Their at sea replenishment may be more difficult than for USN. As for submarines, launching a missile reveals its position; they may wish their submarines to remain covert.
That of course presumes they have the right assets in place. Remember the last time they used ship borne cruise missiles they experienced some unwanted publicity.
That of course presumes they have the right assets in place. Remember the last time they used ship borne cruise missiles they experienced some unwanted publicity.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
They got complaints from Iran when, reportedly, 4 of the SSM fired from the Caspian crashed on their territory en-route. Not sure what route the bombers flew or their launch points. Any reports/supposition?
The Aviationist:
As initially reported by Reuters, a US official has confirmed that Moscow has conducted a significant number of strikes in Syria using both sea-launched cruise missiles and long-range bombers.
The Russian MoD said 25 long-range bombers took part in the raid: 5 x Tu-160s, 6 x Tu-95MS and 14 x Tu-22M3.
According to one our sources who wishes to remain anonymous, the long-range bombers the Russian Air Force has used against ground targets in Syria early in the morning on Nov. 17 were Tu-22M Backfire strategic bombers.
The aircraft were allegedly launched from Mozdok airbase, in Ossetia, where as many as 6 Tu-22s were spotted on a recent deployment.
Remains of a KH-555 missile wreck were found in Syria: considered that this type of air-launched missile is mainly carried by Tu-95 Bear and Tu-160 Blackjack bombers (Tu-22s have been tested with the KH-555 but full integration is not completed or at least unknown), the long-range bombers that launched the attack on ground targets using those missiles may have been the Tu-95s or Tu-160s flying alongside the Backfires.
The Aviationist:
As initially reported by Reuters, a US official has confirmed that Moscow has conducted a significant number of strikes in Syria using both sea-launched cruise missiles and long-range bombers.
The Russian MoD said 25 long-range bombers took part in the raid: 5 x Tu-160s, 6 x Tu-95MS and 14 x Tu-22M3.
According to one our sources who wishes to remain anonymous, the long-range bombers the Russian Air Force has used against ground targets in Syria early in the morning on Nov. 17 were Tu-22M Backfire strategic bombers.
The aircraft were allegedly launched from Mozdok airbase, in Ossetia, where as many as 6 Tu-22s were spotted on a recent deployment.
Remains of a KH-555 missile wreck were found in Syria: considered that this type of air-launched missile is mainly carried by Tu-95 Bear and Tu-160 Blackjack bombers (Tu-22s have been tested with the KH-555 but full integration is not completed or at least unknown), the long-range bombers that launched the attack on ground targets using those missiles may have been the Tu-95s or Tu-160s flying alongside the Backfires.
Dear Regressive Left,
Riddle me this - if terror attacks in the West are a consequence of our record of intolerance, military intervention and interference in the Islamic world, how do you explain the reported threats to stage attacks in Germany, which has pointedly refused to take part in any of said interventions and controversially opened its doors (if only briefly) to unfettered migration?
Yours sincerely,
Me.
Riddle me this - if terror attacks in the West are a consequence of our record of intolerance, military intervention and interference in the Islamic world, how do you explain the reported threats to stage attacks in Germany, which has pointedly refused to take part in any of said interventions and controversially opened its doors (if only briefly) to unfettered migration?
Yours sincerely,
Me.