From: "Phil Payne" 

> How realistic is the assessment of the Sunburn and its strategic/tactical
> use?

It's an old article.

Something a little more up to date:

http://english.alarabonline.org/display.asp?fname=2006%5C10%5C10-02%5Czopinionz
%5C963.htm&dismode=x&ts=01/10/2006%2011:05:41%20%C3%A3

And note the extreme success that simple digging in the rock has had
recently.  That part of Iran bordering the Gulf is ideal for the kind of
concealment so successful for Bin Laden.

The "Iranian nuke" stuff is probably a distraction.  They've
bought a few hundred long range anti-ship missiles and they're tunneling
like crazy.  Sod the gas centrifuges - anyone looked at imports of mining
machinery? Iran does not need to scratch one sod of US soil to cause
disaster there.

Iran could turn the Gulf into a US no-go area and probably wipe out the
majority of US ships in the area in a heartbeat.  What the US response to
_THAT_ would be is anyone's guess, but a thousand feet of rock needs a big
nuke.  My guess is that any assertive action by the Iranians would be
followed - or even preceded - by an offer of safe passage to rescue the
American wounded.  Could any Administration refuse such an offer?

Why would Iran go to such lengths?  Because they've seen what the USA has
done to Iraq and they want to protect their people.  And as the article you
cite points out - any Israeli attack on Iran needs to pass through
US-controlled airspace.  How would the Iranians react toward the dozens of
US warships within range of their missiles?

By-the-bye - there's an interesting list here that mentions some of these options:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_don_will_061013_gop_should_lose_seat.ht
m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5