Answer yes or no to the RAF bombing Syria this coming week.
Looks like a "Londoner" isn't too impressed with the Syrian intervention - he attacks passengers at Leytonstone tube with a machete shouting "This is for Syria."
Sadly I expect this will not be the last attack of this type.
https://twitter.com/Conflicts/status/673255748579627008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...te-attack.html
Sadly I expect this will not be the last attack of this type.
https://twitter.com/Conflicts/status/673255748579627008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...te-attack.html
Last edited by Wokkafans; 5th Dec 2015 at 20:54. Reason: Additional link
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Flug, I can make a statement and it could be used and quoted based on my perceived credibility (not my pprune persona). My brother in law could make the same statement but lacks any credibility. There in lies the difference.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are singularly failing to look outside that box.
Originally Posted by flugplatz
It's a shame that the ROE thread has gone, although predictable.
It seems that ROE are the British Government's dirty little secret, although not much of a secret since they are saying that no civilian casualties have been caused thus far in the Iraq/Syria air strikes. Ergo we only drop when there are definitely no civpop in the vicinity. Not exactly rocket science for ISIL.
It seems that ROE are the British Government's dirty little secret, although not much of a secret since they are saying that no civilian casualties have been caused thus far in the Iraq/Syria air strikes. Ergo we only drop when there are definitely no civpop in the vicinity. Not exactly rocket science for ISIL.
Originally Posted by Flugplatz
I also question why some PPRUNERs are so sensitive over 'OPSEC'? The outlines of the ROE are pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain. I am sure no serving military would ever post the exact nature of the ROE on this forum, so why can't we speculate and admit the obvious? It is this shutting down of all other (informed or not) opinion that led us into the whole Iraqi WMD / years in Afghan.
PN: I take your point and completely understand that justifiable apprehension.
I do feel that whatever ROE the RAF are operating under, that they are realistic enough to make the sort of difference that our MPs in the recent debate voted for (most of them). I do have my doubts though, particularly near populated areas.
No FC for me!
My own bitter experience with ROE came through the Bosnia conflict. Europe now remembers the tragedy at the supposedly UN-protected 'safe area' of Srebrenica - but at the time, many civilians of my aquaintance believed that the UN forces were there to stop the bloodshed. It was not until I got into Theatre that it became truly apparent how limited the scope of action was, compared to the public misconception. I just hope we are not going along with a similar policy whilst holding out false hope to the poor beggars in places like Raqua. That, I think, would meet Beagle's definition of BOLLEAUX!! (maybe some of those 'mercenaries' you keep talking about might get involved later on, eh Beags?)
I hope you can excuse my tone of cynicism; but something about this smells a bit 'off'.
Flug
Flug
I do feel that whatever ROE the RAF are operating under, that they are realistic enough to make the sort of difference that our MPs in the recent debate voted for (most of them). I do have my doubts though, particularly near populated areas.
No FC for me!
My own bitter experience with ROE came through the Bosnia conflict. Europe now remembers the tragedy at the supposedly UN-protected 'safe area' of Srebrenica - but at the time, many civilians of my aquaintance believed that the UN forces were there to stop the bloodshed. It was not until I got into Theatre that it became truly apparent how limited the scope of action was, compared to the public misconception. I just hope we are not going along with a similar policy whilst holding out false hope to the poor beggars in places like Raqua. That, I think, would meet Beagle's definition of BOLLEAUX!! (maybe some of those 'mercenaries' you keep talking about might get involved later on, eh Beags?)
I hope you can excuse my tone of cynicism; but something about this smells a bit 'off'.
Flug
Flug
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also question why some PPRUNERs are so sensitive over 'OPSEC'?
OP, we've answered your question re Yes or No, and now the country is at war (I concede that it could be said to have been so previously, but this is going to turn into something of far greater magnitude I suspect). The time for speculative armchair strategy is past, and it is now time to declare our support for our Armed Forces presently engaged, or to be engaged in the future.
I agree with others that discussion re ROE, tactics, targets, weaponry, etc, here is inappropriate. What the MOD chooses to reveal we cannot control, but what is posted here can be. If you think that this thread has answered the question set by the opening post and is now moving into dubious pastures you have the unique ability to delete your post and the entire thread.
Your call, and one that I would not suggest in normal circumstances, but the ayes have it, the ayes have it, and it is done. Just a thought...
I agree with others that discussion re ROE, tactics, targets, weaponry, etc, here is inappropriate. What the MOD chooses to reveal we cannot control, but what is posted here can be. If you think that this thread has answered the question set by the opening post and is now moving into dubious pastures you have the unique ability to delete your post and the entire thread.
Your call, and one that I would not suggest in normal circumstances, but the ayes have it, the ayes have it, and it is done. Just a thought...
Flugplatz, don't confuse ROE with Policy. I was there too in Bosnia and I can tell you from first hand experience that the people that constructed our ROE were not the people that dreamed up the policy.
Banging the wrong drum, although I do take your point.
Banging the wrong drum, although I do take your point.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 6th Dec 2015 at 08:22.
Quote glad rag, "You are singularly failing to look outside that box."
Well there we differ old fruit. Tornado still trumps Typhoon at this job and, anyone who might suggest the carriage of AIM 120 is important here misunderstands the situation. Also, the direct comparison with Bucc/Tonka in '91 is wrong. That situation was due to an appaling concept of Ops in the late 80's that led to a deficiency in target designating. The problem here is a physical shortage of Tonkas and their crews. Cheers
OAP
Well there we differ old fruit. Tornado still trumps Typhoon at this job and, anyone who might suggest the carriage of AIM 120 is important here misunderstands the situation. Also, the direct comparison with Bucc/Tonka in '91 is wrong. That situation was due to an appaling concept of Ops in the late 80's that led to a deficiency in target designating. The problem here is a physical shortage of Tonkas and their crews. Cheers
OAP
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoon and aging Tornado warplanes paired to avoid what British journalist Andrew Gilligan described as "accidental clashes with Russia".
Read more: UK Plans to Pair Typhoons, Tornados to 'Avoid Clashes' With Russia
Read more: UK Plans to Pair Typhoons, Tornados to 'Avoid Clashes' With Russia
Well Eclectic, just shows you what bolleux passes for informed comment. What are the "self protection" circumstances that could possibly warrant retaliation with AIM120, or any other weapon, between coalition air? The Turks have fallen into that pit. IMO, air to air weapons are just a liability in the present circumstances, a waste of DI and load.
OAP
OAP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Eclectic, just shows you what bolleux passes for informed comment. What are the "self protection" circumstances that could possibly warrant retaliation with AIM120, or any other weapon, between coalition air? The Turks have fallen into that pit. IMO, air to air weapons are just a liability in the present circumstances, a waste of DI and load.
OAP
OAP
Whats all this 'Ageing Tornado' rubbish?
Tornado's first flight was 41 yrs ago.
B52........63 yrs since first flight
F15........43 yrs since first flight
F16........41 yrs since first flight
A10........43 yrs since first flight
Sentry.....43 yrs since first flight
KC135.....59 yrs since first flight
All still serving with distinction.
Tornado's first flight was 41 yrs ago.
B52........63 yrs since first flight
F15........43 yrs since first flight
F16........41 yrs since first flight
A10........43 yrs since first flight
Sentry.....43 yrs since first flight
KC135.....59 yrs since first flight
All still serving with distinction.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO the UK has fallen into a trap.
ISIS want us to bomb them. We can do no real harm but we hand them a huge global propaganda victory.
They want worldwide Muslim opinion polarised against the West, and they are succeeding. As we saw in Soussse, San Bernadino and Leytonstone. Expect these events on a regular basis. The more we attack ISIS the more these atrocities will happen.
We are heading towards 300,000 dead in Syria, mostly Sunni civilians, mostly killed by Assad's barrel bombs. This is the real problem. This is what causes the migrant hordes. And we are doing nothing about it. If the RAF were to destroy all Assad's helicopters on the ground one night it would be a great event for humanity.
Globally the real problem is Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism and the Muslim World League. Already identified by the EU as the main sponsors and financiers of global terrorism. Islamic State is just Saudi Arabia Mk2 and has received massive Saudi finance. Yet we supply Saudi with advanced weapons which they use to murder thousands of Yemeni civilians and we fly the Union Jack at half mast over Buckingham Palace and the Houses of Parliament when the Saudi king dies.
ISIS want us to bomb them. We can do no real harm but we hand them a huge global propaganda victory.
They want worldwide Muslim opinion polarised against the West, and they are succeeding. As we saw in Soussse, San Bernadino and Leytonstone. Expect these events on a regular basis. The more we attack ISIS the more these atrocities will happen.
We are heading towards 300,000 dead in Syria, mostly Sunni civilians, mostly killed by Assad's barrel bombs. This is the real problem. This is what causes the migrant hordes. And we are doing nothing about it. If the RAF were to destroy all Assad's helicopters on the ground one night it would be a great event for humanity.
Globally the real problem is Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism and the Muslim World League. Already identified by the EU as the main sponsors and financiers of global terrorism. Islamic State is just Saudi Arabia Mk2 and has received massive Saudi finance. Yet we supply Saudi with advanced weapons which they use to murder thousands of Yemeni civilians and we fly the Union Jack at half mast over Buckingham Palace and the Houses of Parliament when the Saudi king dies.
Well done glad rag!
Underlining the caveat on my post and being abusive to me shows something!
There is NOT going to be an inter-coalition dust-up out there. The TURKS will have been given an internal red card and all other NATO players will be on an air to air self-defence weapons hold (or very similar).
Now, pray tell your opinion?
OAP
Underlining the caveat on my post and being abusive to me shows something!There is NOT going to be an inter-coalition dust-up out there. The TURKS will have been given an internal red card and all other NATO players will be on an air to air self-defence weapons hold (or very similar).
Now, pray tell your opinion?
OAP
