• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

UK =Israel?

Is shoot to kill a defensible policy

  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • no

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • in certain circumstances

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • dont know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#1
Now that it is generally accepted and found acceptable that the Met Pol operates a 'shoot to kill' policy do British Liberals still retain the moral highground with regard to the way Israeli Security Forces Police their particular 'War on Terror' or is there a difference?

Discuss
 
#2
I'm not sure the Liberals are against a "shoot to kill" policy in the context of suicide bombers. I think they have more issues with Israel's percieved land grab, illegal settlements, bulldozing houses etc. etc. It would take a really left liberal to complain about an Israeli cop shooting a suicide bomber.
 
#3
I'd suggest that those who are rabidly libertarian will campaign against the British decision and continue to lobby against Israel. Those 'trendies' who were happy to campaign against Israel all the time that they were safe will no doubt seek comfort from the new directive and amongst this group there will be those who wind their necks in and those who, safe in the knowledge that their ranting will be ignored, will continue to criticise the Israeli policy and the new British one. Hypocrites!
 
#4
To be fair - we arent exactly at the point of slotting kids on the streets for throwing stones at the police/SF




although, thinking about it......
 
#5
Gonzo said:
I'm not sure the Liberals are against a "shoot to kill" policy in the context of suicide bombers. I think they have more issues with Israel's percieved land grab, illegal settlements, bulldozing houses etc. etc. It would take a really left liberal to complain about an Israeli cop shooting a suicide bomber.
Agreed, the large majority are critical of the overall policy of Israel toward the Palestinians, however there are as ever the 'extreme' liberals who argue that the suicide bombers in Israel are freedom fighters attempting to reclaim their territory so are supportive of them seeing that the end justifies the means. These liberals have no such argument against the British policy, so I expect to see arguments about language difficulties / freedom of movement / the deaf rolled out.
 
#6
Yes, in context. The police only operate a shoot to kill policy for bombers. And last weeks events are unfortunate, but the bloke did fit all the criteria to be taken out. IE: Living in a flat being monitored, acting suspiciously, failing to stop when challenged by police, running into the tube station, jumping over barriers and diving onto a tube train which had just recently been bombed. If thats not suspicious behaviour, what is.

i've said it before, its unfortunate he died, but when you act like that, what do you expect. He obviously had a guilty consience!

OS
 
#7
I don't think you can compare the situation in UK with that of Israel. The only similarity is the suicide bombers. The aims of the terrorists are different. They have vastly different support networks and indeed support of their own populations. The Israelis haven't exactly been whiter than white but they are also under very different pressures than us and, hence, have employed methods that are questionable to anyone not faced with the daily risks that they face.
 
#8
Being a strong supporter of Israel, I'm currently sitting here wearing an IDF T-Shirt that I bought from my last visit there, I have never had a problem with Israeli policies.

British Liberals have no right to adopt the moral high ground above any person, Liberals are nothing more than idealistic dreamers with no grip on reality. Liberals will always complain about any policy we adopt in order to control and neutralise terrorism, I wonder how liberal they will be when one of their family members has to be scraped up and put in a small plastic bag, one would expect they would soon take a realistic view on the current terrorist situation.
 
#9
Gonzo said:
I don't think you can compare the situation in UK with that of Israel. The only similarity is the suicide bombers. The aims of the terrorists are different. They have vastly different support networks and indeed support of their own populations. The Israelis haven't exactly been whiter than white but they are also under very different pressures than us and, hence, have employed methods that are questionable to anyone not faced with the daily risks that they face.

Your point?

either they operate a shoot to kill or they dont......... we now acknowledge that Met Pol do so; given that Terrorism is Terrorism no matter what, can Liberals still condemn Israel for its policies however questionable while our Police have the tacit agreement of the highest and lowest in using the ultimate sanction?
 
#10
DozyBint said:
Gonzo said:
I'm not sure the Liberals are against a "shoot to kill" policy in the context of suicide bombers. I think they have more issues with Israel's percieved land grab, illegal settlements, bulldozing houses etc. etc. It would take a really left liberal to complain about an Israeli cop shooting a suicide bomber.
Agreed, the large majority are critical of the overall policy of Israel toward the Palestinians, however there are as ever the 'extreme' liberals who argue that the suicide bombers in Israel are freedom fighters attempting to reclaim their territory so are supportive of them seeing that the end justifies the means. These liberals have no such argument against the British policy, so I expect to see arguments about language difficulties / freedom of movement / the deaf rolled out.
Maybe these extreme liberals will justify our home grown suicide bombers on the basis of all the nasty things the West has done to Islam! Luckily, I don't think anyone will pay them any attention. Arguments about language and the deaf are valid but it will just be a problem that the police will have to consider and, if not overcome, then make a judgement on case by case. I would imagine that deaf people will be relatively easy to recognise as they will just carry on walking as if nothing is happening!
 
#11
Gonzo said:
.... The only similarity is the suicide bombers......
Perhaps they should be called murder bombers, suicide suggests something alot less vicous.
The similarity lies in the method of delivering the terror.
There is a difference with these bombers from those in Israel, the London bombers are British nationals, brought up as citizens, etc, etc. These bombers live among the people that they want to target, without crossing borders or security checkpoints.
 
#12
Letterwritingman said:
Gonzo said:
I don't think you can compare the situation in UK with that of Israel. The only similarity is the suicide bombers. The aims of the terrorists are different. They have vastly different support networks and indeed support of their own populations. The Israelis haven't exactly been whiter than white but they are also under very different pressures than us and, hence, have employed methods that are questionable to anyone not faced with the daily risks that they face.

Your point?

either they operate a shoot to kill or they dont......... we now acknowledge that Met Pol do so; given that Terrorism is Terrorism no matter what, can Liberals still condemn Israel for its policies however questionable while our Police have the tacit agreement of the highest and lowest in using the ultimate sanction?
My point was that the "shoot to kill policy" is only one of many extreme measures employed by the Israelis. For examle: if the UK find Mr Big we are not allowed to assasinate him unless he is about to carry out an attack. Where as the Israelis are happy to lob a rocket at a house or car containing a terrorist leader and accept any potential collateral damage, because they don't know when they will get the opportunity to kill him again.
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#13
labrat said:
To be fair - we arent exactly at the point of slotting kids on the streets for throwing stones at the police/SF
......nor have we tasked Flash and his mates to take out Abu Hamza from an Apache at 500 feet......

Israel's thirty year policy of extra judicial assassination is a long way from an adrenalised copper putting EIGHT rounds into someone's head from 3 feet away.

( LWM: we've agreed to disagree on this in the past.....CLOMP! )

Le Chevre
 
#14
I doubt most thinking people would have a problem with the police shooting and killing suicide bombers.

Putting eight rounds into an innocent man is an entirely different matter and there has been a cataclysmic error caused by gross incompetence somewhere in the process, and not at the level of the officers who fired the shots.

Shoot-to-kill has a limited shelf life as a countermeasure, because terrorists will develop release-switch triggers that detonate when the grip is released. The poor sod will be the police officer who puts down a bomber only to trigger the bomb.

In the long run, more effective techniques are needed. I hope research is being carried out into methods to neutralise the circutry of electonically triggered devices. Even when that aim is attained, there are many other methods of detonation - mixing chemicals or using some kind of manual incendiary device. In these cases, shoot-to-kill would be appropriate and the cycle of measures and countermeasures would continue merrily onwards.
 
#15
Goatman said:
labrat said:
To be fair - we arent exactly at the point of slotting kids on the streets for throwing stones at the police/SF
......nor have we tasked Flash and his mates to take out Abu Hamza from an Apache at 500 feet......

Israel's thirty year policy of extra judicial assassination is a long way from an adrenalised copper putting EIGHT rounds into someone's head from 3 feet away.

( LWM: we've agreed to disagree on this in the past.....CLOMP! )

Le Chevre
I know I'm being a pedant but...

Given that Apache isn't exactly designed to carry any passengers, that could be a mite difficult.
 
#16
Where as the Israelis are happy to lob a rocket at a house or car containing a terrorist leader
or a wheel chair! :twisted: Still a deserving invalid.

Those who bleat about 'shoot to kill' (what else?) seem to wish the contest between the police and terrorists to be even sided. 'You've got to give the suicide bomber a chance to surrender, how do you know he/she is a bomber etc?' The same whingers pipe up when the police give the soapdodgers a good battering when they kick off at G8 etc. Like the police (and public) are supposed to come off second best? 8O

Get a grip pinkos. Police bashing and apologising for the terrorists will not save you from being torn limb from limb by the next bomb(s). 'Shoot to kill' may.
 
#17
Having been to Israel, i think that we need to get a grip. Isreal is not the UK but having spent a couple of weeks there they are not invinsible (obviously) but you do get used to the security. The UK would never go that far, but lets think about the prospect of weekly suicide devices in our main cities. No can argue with the policy, its the only way to ensure no twitching fingers, lets make sure we dont alienate the police firearms guys, otherwise the time we do need them to take the "hit" they may not be so decisive because of feer of prosicution.
 
#18
Shoot to kill, bearing in mind the suicide bombers aim is to die, shooting to kill just speeds up the process, abeit without the side effect of innocent victims.
As for Israel, just the other day they arressted one young guy 16 or 17 years old, so they don't always shoot, he had 5 kilos in his belt, just wanted to go to Tel Aviv and blow up some Jews, then of to paradise to get laid.
Sure it was unfortunate for Mr Mendez, no one has asked how the police are feeling after this escapade, pretty sh!tty I would imagine, mistakes happen and sure I would be royally p!ssed off it had been me that got shot, but there again, I would have stopped.
 
#20
What exactly are we talking about here? Are we talking about specifcally the procedures used to take down some tw@t with a bomb strapped to himself, or are we talking about extra-judicial execution/assassination in a wider sense? If it is the latter I think the appropriate analogy is more the 1987 Gibratlar case.

Generally I hold to the "big boys' games, big boys' rules" approach and have no problem with how the Hereford Gun Club dealt with those b'stards in Gib. If you call yourself an army and you're up to no good with large amounts of HE, I'm sorry, but you have it coming. Even most IRA volunteers can understand the concept- the chest thumping by Republicans came as a result of the need to rally political and financial support.

On the other hand, I'd be reluctant to establish equivelance between an occasional cluster-fcuk where innocents die (like in last week's case and a few others in NI) and lobbing a 2000lb LGB into an apartment block killing the lunatic, his family and his neighbours. In the end, a Glock on a train platform causes much less collatteral damage then a Hellfire into a car in a marketplace and the mob-handed approach of the Israelis ultimately causes more problems than it solves.

Edit
... On a more pragmatic note I have no problem with any proposal to bulldoze/carpet-bomb Leeds, but this is mainly for reasons unconnected with the terrorist threat.
 

Latest Threads