The switch in tactics bettween large force face to face combat is a huge problem for the American, and Israeli forces I think.

It's enemies have figured out that small forces with portable launching systems of highly technical weapons, that cost less to manufacture because they do not require multi billion dollar investments to just to transport, are preferable to a face to face conflict.

These small independant bands of fighters are hard to target, and easy to hide.

The problem is one of OFFENCE vs. DEFENCE really, because these fighters don't have to PROJECT power, and can even store and have acsess to these weopons close to home.

This was the case with Hezbollah too, and you can bet it will hurt America should they choose to take on Iran.

In essense you could train and hire a guy to act civilian, and use him from his house to quickly deploy to his weapon, transport it a short distance, fire it, and return for supper.

With the capability of these "fire and forget" missiles that have a LOT of punch, this guy one guy, or small group of guys could be a real threat to an entire fleet of ships.

It is a REAL logistical problem.

The Iranian army has invested in dirtbikes, if you can believe it!

It is their vehicle of choice for the Basij forces, so this tells you the kind of mobility and low cost thay are aiming for.

It is an interesting choice and very inventive form of warfare that they are looking to employ.

While Rumsfeld argues to produce million dollar "striker" light armour units for speed of deployment, Iran is investing in hundred dollar dirtbikes which are 100 times faster and more manuverable, easier to hide, and more independant.

I have to hand it to Iran.

They are AWESOME stratagists, and have used their money FAR more wisely, IMO.