Oxford Research Group on "War Against Iran"

Skybird · 02-13-06, 06:18 AM

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

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

The Avon Lady · 02-13-06, 06:31 AM

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

mog · 02-13-06, 06:43 AM

Quote:

What this analysis does conclude is that a military response to the current crisis in relations with Iran is a particularly dangerous option and should not be considered further â€“ alternative approaches must be sought, however difficult these may be.

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.

Skybird · 02-13-06, 06:55 AM

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.

Sixpack · 02-13-06, 07:11 AM

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

Skybird · 02-13-06, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sixpack

Big question is, do we have the soldiers available at this point and are we prepared to rule Iranian territory as true occupiers

You can't be serious.

Ground war in Iran? No option.

sonar732 · 02-13-06, 08:34 AM

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.

The Avon Lady · 02-13-06, 08:40 AM

Take your time, world.

Sixpack · 02-13-06, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Take your time, world.

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

[oh wait, that's a link]

Sixpack · 02-13-06, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sixpack

Big question is, do we have the soldiers available at this point and are we prepared to rule Iranian territory as true occupiers

You can't be serious.

Ground war in Iran? No option.

True enough or so it seems

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 !?

), tomahawks and brandnew F-22 (YES !). Can the locations be pinpointed accurately or does the Pentagon still very much believe in mobile laboratories ?

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.......

STEED · 02-13-06, 09:01 AM

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.

Sixpack · 02-13-06, 09:10 AM

Steed, why do you only mention the Americans ?

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

STEED · 02-13-06, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sixpack

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.

The Avon Lady · 02-13-06, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sixpack

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

Now I understand why they call them EUnuchs.

Sixpack · 02-13-06, 09:36 AM

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

02-13-06, 06:18 AM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Oxford Research Group on "War Against Iran" document: http://www.iranbodycount.org/ about ORG: http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/ __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

02-13-06, 06:31 AM	#2
The Avon Lady Über Mom Join Date: May 2005 Location: Jerusalem, Israel Posts: 6,147 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I cannot find the section in the report regarding the consequences of sitting on our backsides and doing nothing. :hmm: __________________ "Victory will come to us from the wombs of our women." - Houari Boumedienne, President of Algeria, Speech before the UN, 1974

02-13-06, 06:55 AM	#4
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	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. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

02-13-06, 08:40 AM	#8
The Avon Lady Über Mom Join Date: May 2005 Location: Jerusalem, Israel Posts: 6,147 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Take your time, world. __________________ "Victory will come to us from the wombs of our women." - Houari Boumedienne, President of Algeria, Speech before the UN, 1974

02-13-06, 07:11 AM	#5
Sixpack Samurai Navy Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: below North Sea level (iow Holland) Posts: 592 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	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

02-13-06, 08:34 AM	#7
sonar732 The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Central MO Posts: 1,562 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	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.

02-13-06, 09:01 AM	#11
STEED Lucky Jack Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Down Town UK Posts: 27,695 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 48	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.

02-13-06, 09:10 AM	#12
Sixpack Samurai Navy Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: below North Sea level (iow Holland) Posts: 592 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Steed, why do you only mention the Americans ? Europe for sure has to show its tiny balls too this time.

02-13-06, 09:36 AM	#15
Sixpack Samurai Navy Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: below North Sea level (iow Holland) Posts: 592 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Clever, I bet EU was chosen with that fitting image in mind !