It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: USAF Brass Orders UK-Based Troops to Stay Out of London

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 10:35 PM
In what seems to be an order at odds with public statements by the Bush administration, USAF brass in the UK have told all 12,000 on and off duty personnel to stay out of London because it is "unsafe"
The news provoked fury from British MPs who pointed out that the UK had been America's staunchest ally in the wake of September 11.

They said it handed a symbolic victory to the terrorists.

Even as news of the order emerged yesterday, President Bush was promising that America 'will not retreat in the face of terrorists', and voicing his solidarity with Londoners. Shortly after thebombings he declared in his weekly radio address: 'In this dark hour, the people of Great Britain can know that the American people stand with them.'

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I'm absolutely dumbfounded over this report.

What a horrible "slap in the face" of a population that provided exceptional moral support for our nation after the 9/11 attacks.

An amazing turn of events. It will be interesting to see how this story develops, and which way the spin goes.

[edit on 12-7-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 12-7-2005 by John bull 1]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 10:37 PM
This is a slap in the face and I can't believe that they would come out and say this. But PLEASE remember that this is probably a small number of commanders and not the overall ones. Base Commanders have the authority to order things along this line as well. Please don't get upset at ALL our servicemembers, or ALL Americans over the sheer stupidity of one or two local commanders.

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:23 PM
This action isn't a slap in the face of anyone. Commanders have to be concerned with the integrity of their units. With the increased threat of violence, it is not wise to have servicemen on liberty in town where they can be targets of terror, at least until someone can get a threat assessment done. Service members are a huge walking expenditure and getting them killed while boozing it up in town is ill-advised. Such measures are really quite common.

[edit on 2005/7/11 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 12:15 AM
In that case, I want to see this headline next:

UK Brass Orders UK-Based USAF Troops to Stay Out of UK

If you can't stand with us, then you can bugger off.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 12:49 AM
I don't think they meant it as an insult. As an aircraft commander, I would think it would be more along the lines of 'canceled liberty, return to posts for possible combat action'.

As in retaliatory strikes against the perps home bases.

We love you guys. Never doubt it.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 12:55 AM
It has probably been taken out of context.

My son has been confined to camp for the time being. The alert on camp is the highest its been since we went into Iraq.

When they do finally get leave, they have been told not to advertise the fact that they are soldiers. Maybe this what the Americans have been told too. Staying away from major cities is, playing into the game of the terrorists. They will think they have won a major battle by keeping people away from these places.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:52 AM
I assume like many Britons this morning I can't help feeling a little bit disappointed and let down.

What message does this send to the terrorists, the people of London, and foreign tourists especially from the U.S ?

Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commanders from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.
Personnel, most of them from US Air Force units at RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath, in Suffolk, have been told not to go within the M25 motorway.

Family members who are from the US are also being urged to stay away.

The US air force said the order had been made in the interests of the safety of its troops.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:57 AM
I agree it has probably been taken out of context and it's just a standard precaution. In a way though it does send a kind of depressing message to the terrorists and their supporters but I'm sure this is no reflection on continued US support.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:57 AM
Sounds just like a standard military procedure for overseas-based troops. A terror attack on a city changes the security situation, and it probably needs to be reassessed by the military before they can reauthorize travel there.


posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:57 AM
Definately agree its been taken out of context and hopefully this is all we'll hear about it. We don't need politicians making a huge fuss out of this when the public have enough to think about at the moment.

If it was a case of the terrorists only targeting servicemen and women like the IRA "sometimes" did then i could understand it, but as these cowards are'nt fussed who they target then i don't think it makes much difference whether you are in the capital or not other than for operational standby reasons.


posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 02:36 AM
Taken out of context? What context should it be taken in?

In my life, living in London I have not once, knowingly, bumped into any US service-personnel.

Am I to take it, that due to the explosions last Thursday, they are going to start running around London wearing fatigues and stating who they are?

This was a very stupid stance to take and will not be appreciated by the British public, whatever the context.

CX I assume you mean't servicemen and servicewomen as opposed to what you appear to imply, which I found quite amusing.....

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 02:44 AM
first of all; why would 12000 men go on leave at once? oh your really telling me NO ONE was on the base? That literally every man was in london? cmon the USAF is about 200,000 people *give or take a few thousand*

ur telling me my nation was stupid enough to let more than 5% of its entire world force in London of all places to "get drunk"?

im sorry im not buying this lol
it just doesnt seem right to me, being we have our forces split up all over the globe i just dont think the Numbers make sense

ill go ahead and make a conspiracy hypothesis here

ok; lets say the USAF got wind of some CIA/MI5/MI6 plans to do ANOTHER terrorist attack?
and they cant reveal that because it would reveal a conspiracy of inside-jobs

anyways i think it makes more sense in this context; since we have many clues pointing to inside involvement *far more clues than point to arabs*

and seriously ; why would arabs attack London a few days before they pull out? So they can stay longer? Brilliant

alrite its BS....anyone smart enough to coordinate a 4 bomb attack like the London massacre ; is smart enough to know that it isnt in their interest to do such a thing; im sorry they arent that stupid

but , the intel groups certainly have something to gain here

Psycological Operations at its best?
Or terrorists at their stupidest?

Ill go with psy op; because it makes alot more sense in context to what ive learned

USA and UK have higher security than what they are pretending to have

Anyways a true terrorist would have HIT the G8 conferance
not london civilians
Just think about it for one minute and forget that Media BS your so happy believing

Just think about it; why wouldnt they hit the G8 instead??? SERIOUSLY!

I think u people are too quick to believe in the medias offical line...
Deny the Media

speculate for once , maybe read between the lines
just open ur mind to the possibility that ur govt is liars
and then u will gain more accurate perceptions of "who" they really 'are"

anyhow; im not saying anything is true
all im saying is that it "Could Be" true
and theres clues pointing to it
Deny the Media lol


posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:10 AM
Then again, people could compare it to N. Ireland in that there are a lot of places.......or at least before the ceasefire there were a lot of places across the province which were out of bounds to British troops serving there.

Having worked over there in Crossmaglen for years and looking at it from this angle, it does'nt seem such a big thing. Pretty standard when the threat goes up.

As for never having bumped into any US service personnel in London.....i'm very surprised as they stick out as much as the average British squaddie does!:@@

I see this story is front page of some of the UK papers today, i can feel some unneccessary anti US crap heading our way now.


posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:11 AM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Sounds just like a standard military procedure for overseas-based troops. A terror attack on a city changes the security situation, and it probably needs to be reassessed by the military before they can reauthorize travel there.

Well I've got a member or HM Royal Navy in front of me and he says that it isn't 'standard' procedure, at least not for us Brits.

I did have an American flag up with my British one, but in light of this I think I might take it down.

[edit on 12-7-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:22 AM
I'm in agreement with koka.

All the remarks about it being 'taken out of context' sound like nothing more than apologist B/S.

How DARE 'they' order all US personnel to stay outside the M25!?!?

The mind boggles at this act which is immediately seen, righly or wrongly, as an 'I'm all right jack, up yours' approach of extreme cowardice. Especially seeing the way UK civilians are so determinedly going about their normal day to day business within and into London to show that terrorism will not cow us, then you have highly trained professional military personnel effectively saying, to quote Monty Python, "Run away, run away!"

There can be NO context in which this can be justified to the US's strongest ally on the planet.

I realise it was a local decision though and I hope George Bush, made angry and embarrased after his own comments about standing firm, is even now gertting things sorted.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:31 AM
Let's remember one thing.

This order was made last Friday, the day after the explosion.

I'm sure it'll be rescinded by the end of the day once the U.S wakes up and reads the front page of every UK newspaper.

Personally, I think the initial order was right. On Friday no one knew what was going on and it was only prudent to let it stand over the weekend.

Though it's funny that UK citizens weren't given the same advice instead of being told to be defiant and spend their money.

It's not treacherous or anything like that. It's just very unhelpful because it sends mixed messages.

Maybe the UK press were wrong to highlight it.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:59 AM
I dont remember UK troops being banned from ground zero on 9/11 , shows how much we value our friends and how much they dont seem to value us...

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 04:03 AM

Originally posted by devilwasp
I dont remember UK troops being banned from ground zero on 9/11

Wow, I didn't know the UK had thousands of troops stationed in the U.S.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 04:05 AM
Not exactly the best comparison there. How many British troops are stationed in the US as compared to US troops in the UK? This was a good decision made AT THE TIME that should have been rescinded within 48 hours at the most. It was made by local commanders, and had nothing to do with Bush or the rest of the US military. Base commanders have the right to make decisions such as this for the protection of the troops. This commander made the decision on Friday, then had a massive brain fart and left it for too long. Once it seemed that things were settling down over the weekend, it should have been altered so that troops could go into London with restrictions, such as travel in groups, or no travel in the tubes, etc. This is a case of a good decision being made with the best information at the time, and leaving it for too long.

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 04:13 AM
I served in the Royal engineers, i was based at Mill Hill in north london.
When we went out for a drink the routine was a basic one.
If there was 6 of us, 5 drank and the other only drank soft drinks all the time staying alert for bags etc or people wathching us, it was called "shark watch".
We´d all take it in turns, one week drinking, one week shark watch and life carried on like normal.
Its a knee jerk reaction, or the USAF know something more than their saying and arnt sharing it with us, the Brits? .

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in