The two main threats that an Iranian bomb would present deal with hegonomy. And, regardless of which side would espouse it, a Nixonesque ability to give an opponent pause to pursue a path of conventional warfare or unilateral action, such as if a nation were to bomb the airforce of say, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and so on, as a pre-emptive strike. Of course, no rational nation would do such a thing, But who ever accused Israel of having rational leadership? How bout if an opposing nation had a nuclear option, would that perhaps cause that certain nation to act like a civilized state and a responsible member of the international community? Actions like that, are what a nuclear Iran would take off of the table, for such a nation. THAT, is what Israel fears, and regards as an existential threat. It would be forced to be more, well, civil. Is that really all that bad?? Food for thought...
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Islamic State claims responsibility for suicide attacks in southern Iraq (Reuters)
from the article: Iranian threat to destroy Israel doesn't hold up
Newly unearthed version of Elie Wiesel's seminal work is a scathing indictment of God, Jewish world
In Wiesel’s uncensored Hebrew 'Night' manuscript, unveiled here for the first time, the author expresses desire to take revenge on the Hungarians, lashes out at fellow Jews and describes sexual scenes from the train to Auschwitz.03:47 01.05.16 | 8 comments