Never mind the rhetoric on both sides, the current conflict with Iran is about a clash of interests, and should be addressed that way. If that wasn't so, Israel would have had the nuclear threat from the more fundementally Islamic Pikistan long time before Iran. Politics are about how to avoid reaching the ultimate limit of a military clash. While the proposed pre-emptive strike is a design to gain and protect vital interests as important as the destruction of the assumed threat of the nuclear project, what if that pre-emptive strike led to another 50 years of conventional war, what exactly is the bargain here? I hope the "another 50 years of conventional war" is not actually one of the main objectives.
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Gunmen attack during prayers at Bangladeshi Shi'ite mosque, one dead (Reuters)
from the article: Let them have nukes
The Theory of General Relativity: a guide for the perplexed
Why did Einstein develop the theory? What is its actual significance? And what does all this have to do with black holes? Profs. Zohar Komargodski and Ofer Aharony explain Einstein’s theory.19:24 26.11.15 | 0 comments