Ashamed to be British
27 January 2012, 08:34 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ashamed to be British
Think our Government are ashamed to show the British public that they should be pround to be British.
Story that was ran yesterday, but later pulled, and no mention on any of the news chanels.
HMS Daring, that can track 1000 targets at any one time. It can track an object the size of a cricket ball traveling at 3 times the speed of sound. Destroyed 7 missiles that were launched from Iran at an American supertanker.
Do we mention it? No. Why? You'd think that they would advertise that the most advanced ship in the world, that cost £1Billion has done Britain proud.
The Americans would have mentioned it. Why not us?
Story that was ran yesterday, but later pulled, and no mention on any of the news chanels.
HMS Daring, that can track 1000 targets at any one time. It can track an object the size of a cricket ball traveling at 3 times the speed of sound. Destroyed 7 missiles that were launched from Iran at an American supertanker.
Do we mention it? No. Why? You'd think that they would advertise that the most advanced ship in the world, that cost £1Billion has done Britain proud.
The Americans would have mentioned it. Why not us?
27 January 2012, 09:05 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
27 January 2012, 09:10 AM
#4
27 January 2012, 09:24 AM
#5
Also known as daz
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-backlash.html
Seven Qader missiles were fired without warning at an American-owned supertanker, carrying more than 250,000 tons of oil. The Qader was Iran’s most modern rocket. It had a range of 125 miles, and could sink an aircraft carrier. The moment the missiles were fired cheers broke out in the Iranian Defence Ministry.
Iranian leaders cheered as their Defence Ministry as their missiles launched
HMS Daring was only a fraction the size of the tankers it guarded. Yet its Sea Viper anti-missile defence system was capable of tracking 1,000 targets at any one time. It could detect, acquire and destroy an object the size of a cricket ball, travelling at three times the speed of sound. And a cruise missile is much, much bigger than a cricket ball.
The Qaders were picked up within seconds of their launch. They were each targeted by one of Daring’s 48 ship-to-air missiles and obliterated in mid-air, many miles from their target.
The supertanker sailed on through the Strait of Hormuz without ever knowing that it had ever been in danger.
For reasons of national pride, the Iranians kept quiet about their defeat. The British Government, too, described the incident away as an exercise. No one at No 10 wanted to cause international alarm, or provoke the Iranians any further.
But the hardliners in Iran did not need more provocation. They burned with furious humiliation. They wanted to humble the British, as painfully and publicly as possible.
The Iranian revenge attack began with a number of apparently unconnected, trivial incidents.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1keJGZvs7
Iranian leaders cheered as their Defence Ministry as their missiles launched
HMS Daring was only a fraction the size of the tankers it guarded. Yet its Sea Viper anti-missile defence system was capable of tracking 1,000 targets at any one time. It could detect, acquire and destroy an object the size of a cricket ball, travelling at three times the speed of sound. And a cruise missile is much, much bigger than a cricket ball.
The Qaders were picked up within seconds of their launch. They were each targeted by one of Daring’s 48 ship-to-air missiles and obliterated in mid-air, many miles from their target.
The supertanker sailed on through the Strait of Hormuz without ever knowing that it had ever been in danger.
For reasons of national pride, the Iranians kept quiet about their defeat. The British Government, too, described the incident away as an exercise. No one at No 10 wanted to cause international alarm, or provoke the Iranians any further.
But the hardliners in Iran did not need more provocation. They burned with furious humiliation. They wanted to humble the British, as painfully and publicly as possible.
The Iranian revenge attack began with a number of apparently unconnected, trivial incidents.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1keJGZvs7
Last edited by hux309; 27 January 2012 at 09:28 AM.
27 January 2012, 09:28 AM
#6
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Next door to the WiFi connection
Posts: 16,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this all facts?
Im sure lots of things go on that would make us proud of our technology but the fact is, things like this never get shouted at from the roof tops.
Ive always been intrigued as to how they know the destination target. Sure you can guess by the direction but until it starts coming down surely you cant tell?
Im sure lots of things go on that would make us proud of our technology but the fact is, things like this never get shouted at from the roof tops.
Ive always been intrigued as to how they know the destination target. Sure you can guess by the direction but until it starts coming down surely you cant tell?
27 January 2012, 09:28 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hmmm, really? She only left Gibraltar on Tuesday .... http://www.defpro.com/news/details/3...0cff17765bfe52 ....
At 20 mph that'd be about 5 days to get to Port Said (north end of Suez Canal).... 
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory 
Dave
16:29 GMT, January 24, 2012 The Royal Navy Gibraltar Squadron provided force protection for HMS Daring as she left the Rock at the end of her first overseas port of call as she heads east of Suez.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory Dave
Trending Topics
27 January 2012, 09:37 AM
#8
Come on fellas...its all in a thriller writers tiny mind!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-backlash.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-backlash.html
27 January 2012, 09:42 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
Sorry, but I don't buy it. A number of nations are spoling for a reason to attack Iran at the moment and the action you mention above would have given them, or at least the US the green light they need to do so. There are three US carrier groups in the area at the moment, and that is no small amount of hardware. With Iran saying it's going to blockade the Strait of Hormuz due to EU+others sanctions, I'm not sure I'd be booking a holiday in the area anytime soon.
27 January 2012, 12:04 PM
#13
The Fail often post fiction up as news 
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
27 January 2012, 12:41 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
The Fail often post fiction up as news
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
Loving that article
27 January 2012, 12:46 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think our Government are ashamed to show the British public that they should be pround to be British.
Story that was ran yesterday, but later pulled, and no mention on any of the news chanels.
HMS Daring, that can track 1000 targets at any one time. It can track an object the size of a cricket ball traveling at 3 times the speed of sound. Destroyed 7 missiles that were launched from Iran at an American supertanker.
Do we mention it? No. Why? You'd think that they would advertise that the most advanced ship in the world, that cost £1Billion has done Britain proud.
The Americans would have mentioned it. Why not us?
Story that was ran yesterday, but later pulled, and no mention on any of the news chanels.
HMS Daring, that can track 1000 targets at any one time. It can track an object the size of a cricket ball traveling at 3 times the speed of sound. Destroyed 7 missiles that were launched from Iran at an American supertanker.
Do we mention it? No. Why? You'd think that they would advertise that the most advanced ship in the world, that cost £1Billion has done Britain proud.
The Americans would have mentioned it. Why not us?
What has any of this got to do with 'being proud'?
btw I believe its air defence system is American, or at least based upon the Aegis system
Last edited by Martin2005; 27 January 2012 at 12:49 PM.
27 January 2012, 01:49 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Modern politicians are terrified of saying anything like that in case it is taken the wrong way by some PC plonker or other and they have not got the guts to defend what they say.
Useless!
Les
Useless!
Les
27 January 2012, 02:03 PM
#18
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: 52 Festive Road
Posts: 28,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27 January 2012, 03:27 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
The Fail often post fiction up as news
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
Here's one they did earlier:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Falklands.html
28 January 2012, 07:42 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: here, there, everywhere
Posts: 3,111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
probably a celeb got a tit job or something to take the front pages lol,
seriosly how the fck is the daily mail still allowed to operate? how can that be?
seriosly how the fck is the daily mail still allowed to operate? how can that be?
28 January 2012, 08:21 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
And if the DM isn't going to "operate", then we must also put into "non-operational" mode the rest of Fleet Street and the BBC.You don't like the paper you don't have to buy it ...
Dave
28 January 2012, 10:54 PM
#24
the page doesn't make it very clear but it is the author 'imagining'
this is how the actual link reads ..........
ww.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091927/Iran-nuclear-threat-Top-thriller-writer-Tom-Cain-imagines-terrifying-terrorist-backlash.html
alan
this is how the actual link reads ..........
ww.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091927/Iran-nuclear-threat-Top-thriller-writer-Tom-Cain-imagines-terrifying-terrorist-backlash.html
alan
Last edited by albob; 29 January 2012 at 12:20 AM.
28 January 2012, 11:21 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: here, there, everywhere
Posts: 3,111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i never ever ever buy the daily mail
but its constantly referred to on this forum, as im sure it is on others
never bought a copy in my life.
its the ridiculous headlines that sell it, but its total bullsh*t a lot of the time, i understand its the wild sensationalist headlines tha sell it, but how are they allowwed to carry on publishing here-say, half truths and sometimes blatant lies without reprecussion??
media corporations need to be, not for profit set ups, earn only whats needed to keep the buisness running, any money raised over and above donated to charities
aslong as there run for total and utter greed, the education of the nation will remain skewed and biased to whoever provides the largest bung or financial incentive.
but its constantly referred to on this forum, as im sure it is on others
never bought a copy in my life.
its the ridiculous headlines that sell it, but its total bullsh*t a lot of the time, i understand its the wild sensationalist headlines tha sell it, but how are they allowwed to carry on publishing here-say, half truths and sometimes blatant lies without reprecussion??
media corporations need to be, not for profit set ups, earn only whats needed to keep the buisness running, any money raised over and above donated to charities
aslong as there run for total and utter greed, the education of the nation will remain skewed and biased to whoever provides the largest bung or financial incentive.
29 January 2012, 12:08 AM
#26
Scooby Regular
i never ever ever buy the daily mail
but its constantly referred to on this forum, as im sure it is on others
never bought a copy in my life.
its the ridiculous headlines that sell it, but its total bullsh*t a lot of the time, i understand its the wild sensationalist headlines tha sell it, but how are they allowwed to carry on publishing here-say, half truths and sometimes blatant lies without reprecussion??
media corporations need to be, not for profit set ups, earn only whats needed to keep the buisness running, any money raised over and above donated to charities
aslong as there run for total and utter greed, the education of the nation will remain skewed and biased to whoever provides the largest bung or financial incentive.
but its constantly referred to on this forum, as im sure it is on others
never bought a copy in my life.
its the ridiculous headlines that sell it, but its total bullsh*t a lot of the time, i understand its the wild sensationalist headlines tha sell it, but how are they allowwed to carry on publishing here-say, half truths and sometimes blatant lies without reprecussion??
media corporations need to be, not for profit set ups, earn only whats needed to keep the buisness running, any money raised over and above donated to charities
aslong as there run for total and utter greed, the education of the nation will remain skewed and biased to whoever provides the largest bung or financial incentive.
Who will be the divine arbiter of objective wisdom?
29 January 2012, 07:53 AM
#29
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Custodientes vigilias illi qui custodes
