Iran To Get Nukes and Ancient Wisdom Addressing That Reality

Efforts to keep nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands are likely to fail, according to New York Times columnist David … Continued

Efforts to keep nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands are likely to fail, according to New York Times columnist David Brooks. Speaking to a large and largely Jewish audience at a New York synagogue, Brooks mirrored my own long-held belief that ultimately, Iran will get nuclear weapons. Short of going to war to keep that from happening, I don’t see how it could be otherwise.

Technology, for better and for worse, spreads. That’s just how it is. Whether it was gun powder in the late Middle Ages or nuclear weapons today, eventually nations get the weaponry they want. And that will likely be the case in Iran. In fact, it is actually a little dangerous to pretend that anything short of a massive military intervention will keep the Iranians from getting the nukes that the mullahs do deeply desire.

Does that mean that we should not do what we can to slow the process? Of course not. We may even succeed in keeping the nukes out of Iranian hands. Should we go to war over their getting nukes? I hope not. I keep hearing arguments in favor of just that solution though, from many in the Jewish community. In fact, those attending Mr. Brooks’ lecture relate to a nuclear Iran as an almost apocalyptic event.

While there is no moral equivalence between the two governments, I do find it ironic that the only nation to have ever use nuclear weapons against other human beings is the most aggressive in keeping others from having them. It’s not that I disagree with the value of a non-nuclear Iran, but a little self-awareness could go a long way in our not seducing ourselves into the wisdom of going to war to keep others from having what we already possess.

So, if we are not going to war and efforts at long-term prevention are likely to fail, what to do? We need to begin laying the groundwork for how to operate in a world in which Iran has nuclear weapons. Like every other unpleasant situation, we would rather pound our chests and make grand proclamations about “what we will never allow to happen” and how “evil must be stopped”. It’s all very emotionally satisfying, but it never really helps. In fact, it’s a kind of moral/political crack which we need more and more of and the more we consume, the worse off we are.

Apocalyptic thinking is rarely good thinking and never a good policy making tool. I know that Jews are especially practiced in the arts of forecasting destruction, particularly our own. But we need to lay off, whether it’s about Iran or a host of other issues.

Vigilance is crucial. Clear-eyed realism about the threats we face even more so. But planning for a future which we may not want will stand us in better stead than making dire predictions about how that reality will spell the end of the world. If history is any guide, the making of such predictions brings their fulfillment as much as anything else.

But figuring out how to live in new realities, even hated ones, actually works. Many great examples of this approach can be plucked from history, but given the holiday season, two from the first century come to mind. First, we might consider the success of early Rabbis who wasted little time mourning the loss of the Temple or its cult and instead got on with the business of living with integrity in the Roman Empire. Then there were the early Christians who figured out that even if Jesus was not returning immanently, they could build communities which embodied his teachings.

Comparing these two responses with the disappearance of both the Jerusalem priesthood and the Essenes who lived at the Dead Sea, sort of proves the point. We can waste time insisting that the world looked as we wished it did and cursing those who keep it from being so, or we can work to make whatever reality we face a little bit better, a little bit safer, and a little bit healthier. We need to decide which approach to take with Iran.

Brad Hirschfield
Written by

  • Garak

    Would Iranian nukes pose that great a threat to Iarael? Evidently not.____________________________________Last update – 00:00 25/10/2007Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said a few months ago in a series of closed discussions that in her opinion that Iranian nuclear weapons do not pose an existential threat to Israel, Haaretz magazine reveals in an article on Livni to be published Friday.Livni also criticized the exaggerated use that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is making of the issue of the Iranian bomb, claiming that he is attempting to rally the public around him by playing on its most basic fears. Last week, former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy said similar things about Iran.

  • CCNL

    Eradicate the flaws and errors of the major religions and the nuclear threat would go away.A synopsis of said flaws and errors is available upon request.

  • Arminius

    CCNL,As usual, you are an idiot. Atheist USSR was a nuclear threat. Atheist North Korea is one now. But of course your selective bigotry ignores this.We don’t want your stupid lists. Or your bigotry.

  • MichaelNJ

    I fail to see the connection between the good rabbi’s two examples of 2000 years ago and the situation with Iran today. But I have a better analogy, dating back only 70 years: When someone declares his genocidal intents against you, day in and day out, take him at his word. As soon as he has the means to do it, he will do it. What does your ancient wisdom say about that, Rabbi?

  • sparrow4

    Hi arminius. You know he will never stop. this is fun for him because he thinks his posts are so brilliant that everyone is awestruck by them. And we are- just not by their ….ah….brilliance :-)Good article- finally an intelligent take on a very frightening problem. All the posturing, all the flag-waving and sloganeering doesn’t begin to find a solution. Whether or not Iran gets nuclear weapons, I highly doubt they would be stupid enough to bomb Israel. The impact, the repercussions would be truly catclysmic. For everyone. Once a nuclear attack is launched it’s basically game over- no one wins that one.It’s only when nations understand that even one nuclear bomb is an endgame, will there be a true effort to control the technology. Iran may enjoy the saber rattling. But should it attack Israel what does it think Israel will do? Or the US and allies? Even those countries who hate Israel will understand that a nation willing to use nuclear weapons on another is a nation out of control.

  • spidermean2

    It is possible to stop Iran from acquiring nukes without going into a war. But some nations make it an impossible task because they continue to undermine the trade sanctions. These nations are to be blame if war erupts.The Iran problem is a very simple one but much of the world has become DUMB. WHEN STUPIDITY REIGNS, WAR IS INEVITABLE. DOOMSDAY IS COMING.

  • chkpointe

    The United States has no right to ask other nations to stop nuclear proliferation as they have more such weapons than any other country. They hand out the “right” to such weapons to Pakistan, Israel, European countries yet insist other countries don’t have the same right. They ignore human rights violations and land thefts in Palestine, Brazil, etc. while still claiming to be holier than thou. Let everyone have nuclear weapons and then they can all play chicken. Maybe the loss of human life wouldn’t be such a bad thing if we could restrict it to politicians.

  • globalone

    The danger of a nuclear Iran is not in its desire to eradicate the nation of Israel, for which it knows it too shall perish. (Of course, I’m thinking logically here and if the Middle East has shown us anything, it has proven that the words “reason” and “logic” do not always translate well.)The danger lies in the transfer of weapons and/or materials to terrorist enterprises, who, in turn, would deny any involvement by Iran.

  • Arminius

    Hi, Sparrow!Right you are about Bun-Bun/CCNL. He seems to have the mind of a 12 year old abused kid stuck in an adult body. Takes sadistic glee in his attacks.As to Iran going nuclear. I think that, while it would escalate tensions in the ME into the stratosphere, it would settle eventually int MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). The mullas controlling Iraq may be tyrannical, and certainly promote local terrorism in Lebanon and Palestine. But they are not stupid, and seem to be well acquainted with Realpolitik. They know full well that if they toss a nuke or three on Israel, that their country will receive a similar ‘blessing’, and Iran will cease to exist. They are not the Taliban or Al Qaida, far from it. Yes, they are dangerous, but they ain’t gonna fire nukes with abandon. They just want to be the 800 pound gorilla in the region.

  • spidermean2

    Arminius quipped “but they ain’t gonna fire nukes with abandon.”Yup, just like a very qualified journalist who’s not capable of throwing his shoes to a president of a nation.Stop dreaming. These people are capable of doing anything stupid. The Arab world (and the world as a whole ) is full of crazy people. Not all but too many and just enough to start a big fire. The world became a much more dangerous world when America chose not to deal with Russia or China early on when they were still nuke-free. Now we’re in a very different ball-game. Do you think WW2 ended the same way if Japan has nukes too? I think they would push all the nuke buttons without hesitation than choose to raise the white flag.Doomsday is coming.

  • Arminius

    Spidey continues to revel in his ongoing wet dream about nukes popping all over the landscape. One does wonder about his sexual fantasies during these pleasant-to-him-only interludes. Spidey has no grasp of the reality of a nation such as Iran having a desire to continue to exist. No, not at all, Spidey’s poisonous pseudo-theology demands that everybody that does not meet his perverted standards will self destruct.Pray for Spidey. If you don’t pray, at least pity him for his destructive madness.

  • Farnaz2

    Globalone:The danger lies in the transfer of weapons and/or materials to terrorist enterprises, who, in turn, would deny any involvement by Iran.Precisely. Of course, the US with its universal oppression, continuing genocide of Native Americans, etc., etc., wanton mass murder of innocent Afghan people, has no right to ask anything of anyone. Unless, this country stops its barbarism, endless disinformation and misinformation immediately, we probably won’t be around to make requests anyway.As for Israel, they’d be much better off if the US would just get its big fat feet off its neck. Ditto the Palestinians. Oh, and Israeli police, how about letting the Israelis stage their anti-US demonstrations? Hello? Some people here already know how much they hate us and why, anyway. I mean, who wouldn’t? Who dosen’t?Let the US do it own dirty work. Let the Palestinians figure it out when Syria demands the Golan Heights back. And, just let the Syrians keep it up with Lebanon, Greater Syria. Doesn’t bother US anyway. Land grabbing, Indian genociding country that it is.

  • spidermean2

    America does not really know who are its enemies.Trouble would not stop unless most of the idiots would be wiped out around the world. That would include the “clueless” in America.It’s a very very sad scenario. Christ came to this world to prevent it but the idiots think they know better. Humanism/atheism, evolution, communism, etc are all a testament to that grave stupidity. The prophecy states that Doomsday is coming and NOBODY can’t stop it anymore. It has become irreversible. Do you think evolutionists would give up evolution? Over their dead bodies and that is exactly what will happen.

  • artistkvip1

    hello, i enjoyed reading your words as i normally do … i don’t always agree with all your assertions but i certainly can see you thought processes and logical premises to base assertions upon when speculating upon things which have not taken place and may or may not take place. these things even if they are put into action in the real world rarely if ever work out the way planners plan them. perhaps God insist we do it his way occasionally therby overwhelming all the best intentions and imperfect human intellect used to justify using violence and distruction to try to bring a more peaceful world. i myself see the absurdity of such a mantra or plan when actually said in its most simple but undeniably true form in words by either a country a terrorist group or an idndividual. with out all the justifications and rationalizations which are needed by semi sane people to actually screw up as bad as humans have a real history of doing the words just look a little silly to me. i wonder what albert eiensten would think about the wisdom of preemteively attacking a much larger country with vastly more resources .. who by the way might just in the real world have been already suppied with nuclear wepons by either russia or pakistan and even i could make a case for china having a secret interest to balence in theiir im[perfect misperceptions which are no worse than the others countries and have secretly given the small high tech warheads with the high yields they actually stole the plans from us if we didn’t actually in real life give them to them to balance out the russian threat thing. back to eiestein.. would he take a chace with his relatives and loveones when the alteranative was iaran getting nuclear weapons in which case both nations would understand if either actually used nuclear weapons they both would and would both be destroyed by the other. this would be the same scenario the reasst of the world has been oerating successfully on for some time. i do realize there are no garentees in life .. thats where faith and god are maybe important if one actually has and utilizes them. here i am talking to all religions of all countrie in the world,. not just the christians the jews and the muslims but i do if i read the bible correctly understand they all think quite highly of the same man abraham. but cannot aggree upon why . i’m just a stupid dylexic occasioallyu foul mouthed artist son of a hillbilly sop for give me if i have forgotten tempararilly… …. what religion or faith was albert eiensten a member of?? i do remember he believed in both god and science and order and truth and a few other things including a love apparently for sex which i find comforting that he had several mistress’s and a happy wife and we did not hear anything about it untl how many years after he died. the man truell was a genius in my book for many different reasons.

  • Garak

    Would Iranian nukes pose that great a threat to Iarael? Evidently not.____________________________________Last update – 00:00 25/10/2007Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said a few months ago in a series of closed discussions that in her opinion that Iranian nuclear weapons do not pose an existential threat to Israel, Haaretz magazine reveals in an article on Livni to be published Friday.Livni also criticized the exaggerated use that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is making of the issue of the Iranian bomb, claiming that he is attempting to rally the public around him by playing on its most basic fears. Last week, former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy said similar things about Iran.

  • CCNL

    Eradicate the flaws and errors of the major religions and the nuclear threat would go away.A synopsis of said flaws and errors is available upon request.

  • Arminius

    CCNL,As usual, you are an idiot. Atheist USSR was a nuclear threat. Atheist North Korea is one now. But of course your selective bigotry ignores this.We don’t want your stupid lists. Or your bigotry.

  • MichaelNJ

    I fail to see the connection between the good rabbi’s two examples of 2000 years ago and the situation with Iran today. But I have a better analogy, dating back only 70 years: When someone declares his genocidal intents against you, day in and day out, take him at his word. As soon as he has the means to do it, he will do it. What does your ancient wisdom say about that, Rabbi?

  • sparrow4

    Hi arminius. You know he will never stop. this is fun for him because he thinks his posts are so brilliant that everyone is awestruck by them. And we are- just not by their ….ah….brilliance :-)Good article- finally an intelligent take on a very frightening problem. All the posturing, all the flag-waving and sloganeering doesn’t begin to find a solution. Whether or not Iran gets nuclear weapons, I highly doubt they would be stupid enough to bomb Israel. The impact, the repercussions would be truly catclysmic. For everyone. Once a nuclear attack is launched it’s basically game over- no one wins that one.It’s only when nations understand that even one nuclear bomb is an endgame, will there be a true effort to control the technology. Iran may enjoy the saber rattling. But should it attack Israel what does it think Israel will do? Or the US and allies? Even those countries who hate Israel will understand that a nation willing to use nuclear weapons on another is a nation out of control.

  • spidermean2

    It is possible to stop Iran from acquiring nukes without going into a war. But some nations make it an impossible task because they continue to undermine the trade sanctions. These nations are to be blame if war erupts.The Iran problem is a very simple one but much of the world has become DUMB. WHEN STUPIDITY REIGNS, WAR IS INEVITABLE. DOOMSDAY IS COMING.

  • chkpointe

    The United States has no right to ask other nations to stop nuclear proliferation as they have more such weapons than any other country. They hand out the “right” to such weapons to Pakistan, Israel, European countries yet insist other countries don’t have the same right. They ignore human rights violations and land thefts in Palestine, Brazil, etc. while still claiming to be holier than thou. Let everyone have nuclear weapons and then they can all play chicken. Maybe the loss of human life wouldn’t be such a bad thing if we could restrict it to politicians.

  • globalone

    The danger of a nuclear Iran is not in its desire to eradicate the nation of Israel, for which it knows it too shall perish. (Of course, I’m thinking logically here and if the Middle East has shown us anything, it has proven that the words “reason” and “logic” do not always translate well.)The danger lies in the transfer of weapons and/or materials to terrorist enterprises, who, in turn, would deny any involvement by Iran.

  • Arminius

    Hi, Sparrow!Right you are about Bun-Bun/CCNL. He seems to have the mind of a 12 year old abused kid stuck in an adult body. Takes sadistic glee in his attacks.As to Iran going nuclear. I think that, while it would escalate tensions in the ME into the stratosphere, it would settle eventually int MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). The mullas controlling Iraq may be tyrannical, and certainly promote local terrorism in Lebanon and Palestine. But they are not stupid, and seem to be well acquainted with Realpolitik. They know full well that if they toss a nuke or three on Israel, that their country will receive a similar ‘blessing’, and Iran will cease to exist. They are not the Taliban or Al Qaida, far from it. Yes, they are dangerous, but they ain’t gonna fire nukes with abandon. They just want to be the 800 pound gorilla in the region.

  • spidermean2

    Arminius quipped “but they ain’t gonna fire nukes with abandon.”Yup, just like a very qualified journalist who’s not capable of throwing his shoes to a president of a nation.Stop dreaming. These people are capable of doing anything stupid. The Arab world (and the world as a whole ) is full of crazy people. Not all but too many and just enough to start a big fire. The world became a much more dangerous world when America chose not to deal with Russia or China early on when they were still nuke-free. Now we’re in a very different ball-game. Do you think WW2 ended the same way if Japan has nukes too? I think they would push all the nuke buttons without hesitation than choose to raise the white flag.Doomsday is coming.

  • Arminius

    Spidey continues to revel in his ongoing wet dream about nukes popping all over the landscape. One does wonder about his sexual fantasies during these pleasant-to-him-only interludes. Spidey has no grasp of the reality of a nation such as Iran having a desire to continue to exist. No, not at all, Spidey’s poisonous pseudo-theology demands that everybody that does not meet his perverted standards will self destruct.Pray for Spidey. If you don’t pray, at least pity him for his destructive madness.

  • Farnaz2

    Globalone:The danger lies in the transfer of weapons and/or materials to terrorist enterprises, who, in turn, would deny any involvement by Iran.Precisely. Of course, the US with its universal oppression, continuing genocide of Native Americans, etc., etc., wanton mass murder of innocent Afghan people, has no right to ask anything of anyone. Unless, this country stops its barbarism, endless disinformation and misinformation immediately, we probably won’t be around to make requests anyway.As for Israel, they’d be much better off if the US would just get its big fat feet off its neck. Ditto the Palestinians. Oh, and Israeli police, how about letting the Israelis stage their anti-US demonstrations? Hello? Some people here already know how much they hate us and why, anyway. I mean, who wouldn’t? Who dosen’t?Let the US do it own dirty work. Let the Palestinians figure it out when Syria demands the Golan Heights back. And, just let the Syrians keep it up with Lebanon, Greater Syria. Doesn’t bother US anyway. Land grabbing, Indian genociding country that it is.

  • spidermean2

    America does not really know who are its enemies.Trouble would not stop unless most of the idiots would be wiped out around the world. That would include the “clueless” in America.It’s a very very sad scenario. Christ came to this world to prevent it but the idiots think they know better. Humanism/atheism, evolution, communism, etc are all a testament to that grave stupidity. The prophecy states that Doomsday is coming and NOBODY can’t stop it anymore. It has become irreversible. Do you think evolutionists would give up evolution? Over their dead bodies and that is exactly what will happen.

  • artistkvip1

    hello, i enjoyed reading your words as i normally do … i don’t always agree with all your assertions but i certainly can see you thought processes and logical premises to base assertions upon when speculating upon things which have not taken place and may or may not take place. these things even if they are put into action in the real world rarely if ever work out the way planners plan them. perhaps God insist we do it his way occasionally therby overwhelming all the best intentions and imperfect human intellect used to justify using violence and distruction to try to bring a more peaceful world. i myself see the absurdity of such a mantra or plan when actually said in its most simple but undeniably true form in words by either a country a terrorist group or an idndividual. with out all the justifications and rationalizations which are needed by semi sane people to actually screw up as bad as humans have a real history of doing the words just look a little silly to me. i wonder what albert eiensten would think about the wisdom of preemteively attacking a much larger country with vastly more resources .. who by the way might just in the real world have been already suppied with nuclear wepons by either russia or pakistan and even i could make a case for china having a secret interest to balence in theiir im[perfect misperceptions which are no worse than the others countries and have secretly given the small high tech warheads with the high yields they actually stole the plans from us if we didn’t actually in real life give them to them to balance out the russian threat thing. back to eiestein.. would he take a chace with his relatives and loveones when the alteranative was iaran getting nuclear weapons in which case both nations would understand if either actually used nuclear weapons they both would and would both be destroyed by the other. this would be the same scenario the reasst of the world has been oerating successfully on for some time. i do realize there are no garentees in life .. thats where faith and god are maybe important if one actually has and utilizes them. here i am talking to all religions of all countrie in the world,. not just the christians the jews and the muslims but i do if i read the bible correctly understand they all think quite highly of the same man abraham. but cannot aggree upon why . i’m just a stupid dylexic occasioallyu foul mouthed artist son of a hillbilly sop for give me if i have forgotten tempararilly… …. what religion or faith was albert eiensten a member of?? i do remember he believed in both god and science and order and truth and a few other things including a love apparently for sex which i find comforting that he had several mistress’s and a happy wife and we did not hear anything about it untl how many years after he died. the man truell was a genius in my book for many different reasons.

  • CCNL

    Delete the flaws and errors of Islam and Iran would fail as the theocracy that currently is trying to “Shiite” and terrorize the globe.Once again for those eyes that have not seen:Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added “angels” and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers. This agenda continues as shown by the massacre in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.Current crises:The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

  • CCNL

    Israel was established in 1948 by a mandate of the UN. The Arabs did not agree with the mandate and tried twice to crush Israel. Israel won both wars. Funding by Iran and Saudi Arabia of Palestinian terrorist groups since then has kept the region a hot bed of atrocities on both sides i.e. “an eye for an eye”. Large scale aggression by the Arabs ceased when Israel got some nukes. Iran’s terror campaign extends way beyond the Israeli issue as it wishes to make Islam the world’s religion and its suicide mentality makes this Axis of Evil a significant danger to global peace and even more so if they are allowed to have nuclear weapons.

  • sparrow4

    coloradodog- Israel is not the warmongerer. It responds to threats- but war for the sake of war. You need to read up on events.aziz- that was the dumbest argument for the advancement of nuclear weapons I have ver heard. No argument for nuclear proliferation is good, but yours is so stupid I had to laugh. what Arab countries worry that Israel will suddenly drop a nuclear bomb on them- none. Israel fights defense. The Arab countries are simply looking for an opportunity to destroy Israel- Israel is the one that worries. talk about foolish and shortsighted. Do you rally thing Islamic terrorists with nuclear weapons will simply bomb Israel and to home to live peaceful, fruitful lives? considering all the innocent Muslims who have died at the hands of other Muslims, I hardly think they will. My guess is they will use their arsenal- if they get one- to hold all the Arab nations hostage for money and power. that is if they survive. If they intend to bomb Israel they had better make sure they do it completely because an angry Israel has wiped the middle eastern map with your butts several times. A really really angry Israel will wipe you out.Now, what was that about letting Iran have nuclear weapons?

  • coloradodog

    Islamic extremist Pakistan has nukes.Warmongering Israel has nukes.India has nukes.How come no one is worried about these extremist countries having nukes?

  • CCNL

    Unfortunately, nukes play the role of “peace” keepers replacing religions/social systems which should play the “pax” role but do not because of the “my god/prophet/social system is better than your god/prophet/social system” syndrome. Iran’s commitment to Islamic domination of the globe to include suicide bombing and support of terror as weapons to that end is something to be very concerned about and is one of the major reasons the USA is still in Iraq. The irony is that Islam’s commitment to world domination is founded on mythical communications from a mythical “pretty, wingie, talking thingie”.

  • asizk

    The only danger to peace and security in the Middle east is “israel’ and its formidable nuclear arsenal of over two hundred war heads-a fact that is driving the region into a nuclear race.To have regional stability and peace there are only two options: Either disarm israel from its nuclear arsenal which will stop the nuclear arms in the reigon or allow lran to have a nuclear weapon as a deterent to israel’s aggression and occupation-only MAD:mutual assuerd destruction can stop israel aggression and occupation.

  • CCNL

    Delete the flaws and errors of Islam and Iran would fail as the theocracy that currently is trying to “Shiite” and terrorize the globe.Once again for those eyes that have not seen:Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added “angels” and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers. This agenda continues as shown by the massacre in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.Current crises:The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

  • CCNL

    Israel was established in 1948 by a mandate of the UN. The Arabs did not agree with the mandate and tried twice to crush Israel. Israel won both wars. Funding by Iran and Saudi Arabia of Palestinian terrorist groups since then has kept the region a hot bed of atrocities on both sides i.e. “an eye for an eye”. Large scale aggression by the Arabs ceased when Israel got some nukes. Iran’s terror campaign extends way beyond the Israeli issue as it wishes to make Islam the world’s religion and its suicide mentality makes this Axis of Evil a significant danger to global peace and even more so if they are allowed to have nuclear weapons.

  • sparrow4

    coloradodog- Israel is not the warmongerer. It responds to threats- but war for the sake of war. You need to read up on events.aziz- that was the dumbest argument for the advancement of nuclear weapons I have ver heard. No argument for nuclear proliferation is good, but yours is so stupid I had to laugh. what Arab countries worry that Israel will suddenly drop a nuclear bomb on them- none. Israel fights defense. The Arab countries are simply looking for an opportunity to destroy Israel- Israel is the one that worries. talk about foolish and shortsighted. Do you rally thing Islamic terrorists with nuclear weapons will simply bomb Israel and to home to live peaceful, fruitful lives? considering all the innocent Muslims who have died at the hands of other Muslims, I hardly think they will. My guess is they will use their arsenal- if they get one- to hold all the Arab nations hostage for money and power. that is if they survive. If they intend to bomb Israel they had better make sure they do it completely because an angry Israel has wiped the middle eastern map with your butts several times. A really really angry Israel will wipe you out.Now, what was that about letting Iran have nuclear weapons?