Olympic Security

H

hawky94

The Brit Pack (probationer)
Hi everyone,

I was just browsing through the interwebs today - like I do, and I came across a news article in the London Evening Standard, it was about UKSF, and their possible use of American MH-6 'Little Bird' helicopters at the 2012 Olympics in London.

I've seen several articles about Olympic security - and according to the same newspaper, over one billion pounds has been spent on security already.

There are SAS & SBS squadrons on the Thames, Royal Marine assault units moored at Greenwich, two Royal Navy air squadrons on standby, Rapier air-defense missiles, SAM (surface-to-air-missiles) sites on the roofs of tower flat blocks.

My question to you lot, is: Is THAT MUCH really necessary? One BILLION pounds... not mention several tens of thousands of soldiers on the ground.

My opinion, you can never be too careful. But, honestly, I believe that they've got just a bit too far, only a bit.
 
hawky94 said:
Hi everyone,

I was just browsing through the interwebs today - like I do, and I came across a news article in the London Evening Standard, it was about UKSF, and their possible use of American MH-6 'Little Bird' helicopters at the 2012 Olympics in London.

I've seen several articles about Olympic security - and according to the same newspaper, over one billion pounds has been spent on security already.

There are SAS & SBS squadrons on the Thames, Royal Marine assault units moored at Greenwich, two Royal Navy air squadrons on standby, Rapier air-defense missiles, SAM (surface-to-air-missiles) sites on the roofs of tower flat blocks.

My question to you lot, is: Is THAT MUCH really necessary? One BILLION pounds... not mention several tens of thousands of soldiers on the ground.

My opinion, you can never be too careful. But, honestly, I believe that they've got just a bit too far, only a bit.
Click to expand...

I guess they aren't taking chances, besides which we don't know what intel they have received about possible terrorist attacks. If innocent lives were lost to terror attacks due to lack of or poor security the fallout for the UK would be horrendous.
 
hawky94 said:
Hi everyone,

I was just browsing through the interwebs today - like I do, and I came across a news article in the London Evening Standard, it was about UKSF, and their possible use of American MH-6 'Little Bird' helicopters at the 2012 Olympics in London.

I've seen several articles about Olympic security - and according to the same newspaper, over one billion pounds has been spent on security already.

There are SAS & SBS squadrons on the Thames, Royal Marine assault units moored at Greenwich, two Royal Navy air squadrons on standby, Rapier air-defense missiles, SAM (surface-to-air-missiles) sites on the roofs of tower flat blocks.

My question to you lot, is: Is THAT MUCH really necessary? One BILLION pounds... not mention several tens of thousands of soldiers on the ground.

My opinion, you can never be too careful. But, honestly, I believe that they've got just a bit too far, only a bit.
Click to expand...

They will probably prevent a similar event as what happened in Munich; to prevent a suicide bomber can be more difficult, but if the person has a bomb shoved up in his axx, he could be identified by his strange walks.

A reference to another thread on this forum

http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/sodomy-ok-if-advances-jihad-t97221.html
 
.
I think that it would be far easier and cheaper to just do away with the Olympics and hold combined anti terrorism exercises.

When it's all boiled down, they are only a very expensive chest puffing exercise anyway.
 
Last edited:
senojekips said:
.
I think that it would be far easier and cheaper to just do away with the Olympics and hold combined anti terrorism exercises.

When it's all boiled down, they are only a very expensive chest puffing exercise anyway.
Click to expand...



And it will only create an illusion of security, which can never be achieved
 
senojekips said:
So,... you advocate that we do nothing??
Click to expand...

We can put x amount of soldiers and defense system around a city, but only one man can ruin the day. We can never catch that man until it’s too late. The security is always an illusion, you can spend a lot on the defense budget and you will never get security.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
We can put x amount of soldiers and defense system around a city, but only one man can ruin the day. We can never catch that man until it’s too late. The security is always an illusion, you can spend a lot on the defense budget and you will never get security.
Click to expand...
So, you still advocate that we do nothing?

In case you haven't thought of it, it's not necessarily the "security" that the Army etc., provide, but it does give any potential terrorists another hoop to jump through.
 
Last edited:
I3BrigPvSk said:
We can put x amount of soldiers and defense system around a city, but only one man can ruin the day. We can never catch that man until it’s too late. The security is always an illusion, you can spend a lot on the defense budget and you will never get security.
Click to expand...

It is still better to have something in place to react to and contain an incident. If nothing else but to pick up the pieces.

This level of security will make it harder for a terrorist attack to occur. But you would rather leave that to chance or the apathy of a terrorists?
 
senojekips said:
So, you still advocate that we do nothing?

In case you haven't thought of it, it's not necessarily the "security" that the Army etc., provide, but it does give any potential terrorists another hoop to jump through.
Click to expand...

I never said we shall not do anything, I said the soldiers cannot provide with security, don't add things I haven't said. But people feel more secure if they see a lot of soldiers and defense systems, but one individual can change the whole concept of security.
 
captiva303 said:
It is still better to have something in place to react to and contain an incident. If nothing else but to pick up the pieces.

This level of security will make it harder for a terrorist attack to occur. But you would rather leave that to chance or the apathy of a terrorists?
Click to expand...

No, but people will feel more secure when they see all the safety preparations. The security beneath the surface will probably have more effect than the security we can see.
 
Making people feel secure will also help pay for the security costs.

Isn't that apart of the solution. The soldiers have a function that is only really relevant in the extremer events but the security presence will have an effect on any would be terrorist. By either A) deterring them or B) altering their behaviour and plans making tnem more obvious or channleing their actions to make them predictable and suspicious.
 
captiva303 said:
Making people feel secure will also help pay for the security costs.

Isn't that apart of the solution. The soldiers have a function that is only really relevant in the extremer events but the security presence will have an effect on any would be terrorist. By either A) deterring them or B) altering their behaviour and plans making tnem more obvious or channleing their actions to make them predictable and suspicious.
Click to expand...


Yes, I support the cost for the security; it can never be to high, better to pay the bills for it than losing lives. I was on a conference a few years ago, the head of the British Civilian Defense for London was there. You may remember the terrorist attacks in London a few years ago, he took the decision to open up the subway system after the attacks. He told us how nervous he was when he did, he feared a second wave, it never occurred. Anyway, I asked him if he was looking forward to the Olympics, he said Hell no! I will take a vacation during the Olympics, but that was a joke, I suppose he is there now and he is nervous
 
A few days/weeks ago the police stopped a bus on one of the motorways and apparently found a couple of suspects with regard to attacks during the Olympics.
 
BritinAfrica said:
A few days/weeks ago the police stopped a bus on one of the motorways and apparently found a couple of suspects with regard to attacks during the Olympics.
Click to expand...

I hope that wasn't by chance, I hope they had information about these people and went after them. The Security system in the UK need to be lucky every damn time, the others only need to be lucky once. I hope for a nice Olympic Games.

Suddenly I am thinking about the Monty Python and the silly Olympics
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
I hope that wasn't by chance, I hope they had information about these people and went after them. The Security system in the UK need to be lucky every damn time, the others only need to be lucky once. I hope for a nice Olympic Games.

Suddenly I am thinking about the Monty Python and the silly Olympics
Click to expand...

I have just found out that apparently it was a false alarm, "The information received concerned a report of vapor escaping from a bag which on investigation turned out to be a health improvement aid for smokers."

I have no idea as to what information or intel the authorities are receiving or how real the threat of an actual attack is.
 
Last edited:
BritinAfrica said:
I have just found out that apparently it was a false alarm, "The information received concerned a report of vapor escaping from a bag which on investigation turned out to be a health improvement aid for smokers."

I have no idea as to what information or intel the authorities are receiving or how real the threat of an actual attack is.
Click to expand...

That's good, a false alarm. The British are really good to deal with potential threats; the IRA contributed with that for a long time
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
The security beneath the surface will probably have more effect than the security we can see.
Click to expand...
That´s exactly the message you want to send to a potential teorist. When you see this show of force it will make you wonder how many resources are in use that you can´t see.
 
42RM said:
That´s exactly the message you want to send to a potential teorist. When you see this show of force it will make you wonder how many resources are in use that you can´t see.
Click to expand...

I agree... When you talk about security, you want to put across the idea to the people you are protecting that you are more than capable of protecting them, not only that, you CAN deter any potential threat to the ones you are protecting...

As for your adversaries, this will also make them consider 3, 4 or even 10 time over before contemplating any acts of aggression. It like playing with their heads- I used to tell me this simple anology to people when we talk about mind games- when you are newly married, and you go to work smiling, your friends know why. But after 20 years of marrieage, and you go to work smiling, it makes your friend wonder why...

Of course, all this mind games will be further enhanced if your potential adversary knows you are more than capable to counter those threats- and I personally think the UK is more than capable of handling stuff like that... You got the SAS, and if those guys cannot do it, the bad guys still have 42RM's buddies to worry about... :)

On a personal note, I actually do not see any issue about deploying troops for the Olympic security, honestly, what is the big deal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top