The hysterical “the special relationship is over” comments aren’t really helpful here re: Fairford. Let’s…
Terrorism · · US, United States
The hysterical “the special relationship is over” comments aren’t really helpful here re: Fairford. Let’s consider a few things for a moment:
The B-1s have been here for months, and had been due to leave last month.
Their support equipment and ground crews being left behind could be seen in two ways. The first being that the US was so scared of an attack on the base that they removed the bombers but left all the crew and munitions. I think this is unlikely.
The second being that it’s to leave them the option to rapidly re-deploy the bombers after the mid-terms, which I think is more likely.
US bases in the Middle East are under regular missile attack, and they haven’t relocated the air assets stationed there. Are we seriously suggesting the threat to Fairford is SO high, higher than Muwaffaq Salti in Jordan, that they have to scramble to leave? If it were, they’d have evacuated all the ground crews.
Finally, the UK has got a lot of criticism over the dealing of the potential attack. The thing is, we have some of the best and most competent intelligence and counter terrorism in the world.
Again, are we seriously suggesting the police released these men knowing they were terrorists? They have been released because there wasn’t anything to charge them with.
Now, whether there is the actual group of attackers still out there, or the intel given to the US was bad, I don’t know. But it’s clearly not the five blokes nicking fuel.
And I don’t think the UK has become so dangerous that the US evacuate 12 bombers, yet leave over 100 fighter jets and 20 tankers…
@MATA_osint
Source: @Armchair Admiral 🇬🇧
This event is no longer live on the map.