Mumbai Attacks and their impact

[davidbfpo]

A re-run of terrorist training camps and attacks in the West, allegedly for Mumbai-style attacks, but the last paragraph fits in with the last few posts on UK police firearms policy & practice:

In response police have reassessed the way they deal with attacks. Metropolitan Police tactical response teams have been training on a "shoot to kill" basis after briefings that most deaths in such an attack were likely to occur in the first 30 minutes of an attack.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-attacks.html

That still poses a number of problems, such as getting to the scene, a briefing and then engagement. I shall leave aside how many properly armed officers are available and engaged.

[SJPONeill]

It may be that, just has the military have been major chnage in the last decade, so the Police have to do the same, maintaining the perception of the 'bobby on the beat' but backing him/her up with more responsive force options...

[omarali50]

From an Indian magazine, interesting reading (even if not all true....who knows that the truth is in such matters):

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267300

[davidbfpo]

SAS officers warn that Britain is unprepared for a Mumbai-style attack
Two former senior commanders of the SAS have warned that Britain's security forces would be unable to cope with a Mumbai-style terrorist attack in central London.

This would temporarily create a war zone within London and one that cannot effectively be countered by the police alone. The police are good at policing but we doubt they would want to try war fighting.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...le-attack.html

[Bob's World]

David,

Isn't this largely true everywhere? At the end of the day one has to balance the likelihood and potential damage of such an attack against the cost of defending every potential place such an attack could occur.

London is a city famous for being able to shake off far worse attacks on a nightly basis, and to brush itself off and get on with business the following day. While no Londoner would want to return to the dark days of WWII, nor to have a Mumbai-style attack launched against them; I suspect they also would not want prefer a London designed to prevent/quickly squash such an attack either.

[Tukhachevskii]

Can someone explain what this statement means (I'm hoping its a typing error) given that the preceding four points would, ahem, point to the opposite conclusion (IMO)...

"And fifthly, defence spending must be reduced to ensure that the department does not compromise National Economic Security at a time of ongoin financial instability"

p.s. Isn't the idea of National Economic Security somewhat...anti-capitlaist/free market?

[davidbfpo]

Isn't this largely true everywhere? At the end of the day one has to balance the likelihood and potential damage of such an attack against the cost of defending every potential place such an attack could occur.

London is a city famous for being able to shake off far worse attacks on a nightly basis, and to brush itself off and get on with business the following day. While no Londoner would want to return to the dark days of WWII, nor to have a Mumbai-style attack launched against them; I suspect they also would not want prefer a London designed to prevent/quickly squash such an attack either.

Bob,

I agree, although I only visit London. Yes, a Mumbai-style attack would be mayhem for a time, even say if London Heathrow was the target - lots of people, symbolism and lots of armed police. What contemporary Londoners think I know not. I am not convinced the popular London memory stretches back to the WW2 Blitz, let alone the Irish bombings; institutions can be different.

We have an unusual coincidence here: a UK defence review, a Conservative Party conference (in Birmingham), a terror alert and forthcoming cuts to public spending (including the police and other agencies).

[Global Scout]

The German air attacks on London during WWII only increased the UK's resolve, I suspect part of that was because it reinforced a sense of nationalism.

A successful Mumbai attack on the other hand would call into question the legitimacy of the current government (maybe rightfully so). It isn't so much a matter of how the people react as a whole, but the internal political instability that would follow such an attack. I agree the effects would be limited, and in the end do much harm to the Islamists than the West, but then again the Islamists have never been known for thinking rationally.

However I do disagree that the threat of such an attack is low probability, quite the contrary, until it proves to be ineffective the Islamists will attempt to use it repeatedly. I'm surprised they haven't used it since Mumbai, but then again it takes a lot of longer to train competent commando style forces than brain washing a young man to strap on a suicide vest.