I sense some inconsistency with the rationale that Iran will use its nuclear weapons which supposedly it doesn't have because all these non-transmission lined facilities are only for power generation. A few months ago pen Name argued that Iran was fully capable of stopping an invasion of its territory via a forward defense in the Gulf and an inelastic border defense somewhat like the Iran-Iraq War.

Then weeks later it is to be a defense in depth and activation of sympathetic allies, state of non-state in the ME. Then it was to be a guerilla war, also with allies and everybody else should run for the hills. Now the peaceful acquistion of nuclear power is admitted to be for first strike use against conventional forces.

Iran is rapidly running out of tactical solutions and seems to see only strategic solutions. But I don't really think Iran will exercise that option unless, as some in the West claim, that its administration truly does have Messianic dreams. Because the consequences of a retaliatory strike by the West would leave Iran prostrate and unrecognizable. And as pen Name has pointed out those "whoring Arabs" will not lift a finger to help their co-religionists. I still think that eventually the mullah monopolists will simply say, "How much?"

But there are strong possibilites that Israel may act, probably with either the US turning a blind eye or actively supporting the strike. This recent foray into Syria, where the same updated Russian supplied air defenses and "volunteer" Russian technicians that Iran has received, proved staggeringly ineffective. One report, probably fanciful, had one of the IAF jets fly directly over one of the sites and found the radar was never even turned on until after the flight was miles away.

Slightly O/T but here is the link to a fairly recent paper from MIT, admittedly by two graduate students, that talks extensively about Israel's increased ability to repeat a anti-proliferation attack with enhanced bombs and to attack without air assets.

http://web.mit.edu/ssp/Publications/working_papers/wp_06-1.pdf

In fairness to Sen. Kerrey he called several times from the podium to let the student finish his question. However it now appears that the whole thing was a setup to draw attention to that student's website. Where one could see several filmed confrontations with celebrities, average citizens and law enforcement geared to elicit either a verbal or physical reponse. One of which shows the student loudly pleading not to be tasered but trying to grab the taser from the policeman.

There was a recent case at UCLA when a student was tasered after struggling with a few campus police after he had creatd a disturbance in the library and then refusing to produce student ID. That particular case is still grinding its way through the courts.

Owing to the amount of rapes, reported and unreported, and the number of robberies on campus and nearby, UCLA instituted a policy that all campus buildings open at 11:00 PM were closed to non-students or even any student without university ID. In this case all the students in the library were requested to show ID or leave. This particular student, who had previously been escorted off campus, this time refused to cooperate. Are you suggesting that an unidentified young male be allowed to stay in the library with dozens of individual students. Plus should the ex-Marine not tasered him and merely used normal police procedure by pain compliance?

When I was a graduate student at USC the school had the same program in place as the result of the surrounding area having a bad reputation for crime. Plus we also had a large population of homeless, dopers and the mentally challenged that would come on campus, looking for truth like Diogenes as suppose. Escorting non-students off campus seemed and still seems rather benign. But at SC the campus police, also mostly ex-servicemen, used trained German Shepherds, not the kind with flutes and staffs, but the ones with lots of sharp teeth. Not tasers!

By the way, calling you "sweaty" was an insult not an endearment.