Oxford Research Group on "War Against Iran"
 

document: http://www.iranbodycount.org/

about ORG: http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/

I cannot find the section in the report regarding the consequences of sitting on our backsides and doing nothing. :hmm:

Alternative approaches such as what? It's easy to say that war is bad and should be avoided without considering that it may be the only option short of allowing an Iranian nuclear bomb.

The war is coming anyway, for reasons of "inner logic" and situational self-dynamic. I argued like this here: http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopi...ght=bombs+iran and I take this news http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4707902.stm as another (minor) confimration. they are playing for time. Iran will not stop seeking nuclear weapons. It's just that we must not burst with cheer and hooray to launch an attack as soon as possible. There is still enough time left to see if "alternatives" maybe will do the trick nevertheless, no matter how unlikely they appear at the moment.

It's enough to launch a war in time. We must not launch it months and years ahead.

A frequent political mistake has historically been, more often than not, to act too late.

This does not mean I'd like an actual major war to happen. I simply realize and implicitly stated that one can and should not reasonably deal with madmen, especially when their military capablities are still of a sheer amusingly inferior quality. Would a lion tolerate being bullied by a mouse ?

Hence action against Iran pretty soon will become necessary without further delay, now all else is said and soon quickly done within a not overstretched timeframe. Big question is, do we have the soldiers available at this point and are we prepared to rule Iranian territory as true occupiers (include it in the Co-owned Empirium Europeanus Americanus !)

Peacekeeping sucks in Sixpack's view. That being said, I like to salute the young men and women in the western armed forces who put their asses on the line for us to keep the madmen at a distance :)

You can't be serious. ;) Ground war in Iran? No option.

Your BBC news posting Skybird is worrysome. The "deal" struck by the Russians was the last chance for a "peaceful" solution. Ironically, the USS Ohio was ok'd back into the fleet recently with her SSGN capability.

Take your time, world. :zzz:

I hadnt expected that much patience from you, Lady. Okay, we'll wait until you finished your nap ;)

[oh wait, that's a link]

True enough or so it seems :lol: I merely implied 2 times the current Iraq & Afghanistan crap is too depressing for the West, so it'd be all or nothing this time around. Conquer or just damage. There's no third option.

So back to reality I assume we depend on special forces (for George's sake, when will these guys be unleashed !? :arrgh!: ), tomahawks and brandnew F-22 (YES !). Can the locations be pinpointed accurately or does the Pentagon still very much believe in mobile laboratories ? :smug:

PS. I do understand: a group of gents + 1 female over in DC is worried a special forces person or worse even elite squad will fall in enemy hands and be put on public display on Al Jazeera and CNN, I suspect....... :roll:

If the Americans go in to Iran they will have a hell of a fight on their hands but I suspect they will try bombing them back to the Stone Age and that would all so be a very bad move. :nope:

Steed, why do you only mention the Americans ?

Europe for sure has to show its tiny balls too this time.

Well the Americans go first then Europe.

Now I understand why they call them EUnuchs. :know:

Clever, I bet EU was chosen with that fitting image in mind ! :lol: